Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
delems

Need to fix PPOs.

62 posts in this topic

Ok, love the new PPOs, but completely worthless.

Can't block doors, can't set adjacent to each other, can't set next to walls or other objects to block path.

PPOs need to be able to be set right next to each to be effective, like the barb wire.

If worried about to many, then slow the creation time a bit - but allow them to be more effective.

Edited by delems
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but then they'd do their job...

joking aside, I've never seen them used with effect. lots of ppo spam with no use.

 

their red zones leave huge openings when making a FMS bunker, and tank traps have such a long build time and cooldown they struggle to block a road.

tried barbed wire yesterday and the red zones left openings wide enough for EI to walk through

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** left openings wide enough for EI to walk through

Exactly, double the creation time; but allow PPOs to be adjacent to terrain and each other.

They will be way more effective that way.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, delems said:

*** left openings wide enough for EI to walk through

Exactly, double the creation time; but allow PPOs to be adjacent to terrain and each other.

They will be way more effective that way.

I agree we should be able to set them closer to each other, so they are actually effective and of use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been able to mix and match them to make it more difficult to get around enough to hinder the opposition. From advancing on the position. 

After the holiday I'll bring up in leadership meeting to see if certain types can be interlocked

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

..and why does a barbed wire ppo stop a full speed cru2 when setup on a road?

We cry out for immersive gameplay then this happens. Was funny when a DAC flipped over it, somersaulted  BACKWARDS,  and rolled off. And it wasn't ME  this time. Something wonky about the DAC - the cru2 stopped cold, but the DAC  bounced backwards then flipped over. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes the PPOs need tweaked.

I have said for some time the sand bags should clip into each other etc.. And have posted such thoughts..

Now with barbed wire we have the same situation, we can't build much useful stuff until they clip together a bit more...

Also they are timing out way too soon...

I was building some stuff and had only been at it about 20 min and I saw that some of the wire had already gone, really frustrating also rather feel like its not worth the time..

Lastly the sandbags really really need to take a bit more damage... Ours are nowhere near as durable and stable as actual sandbag emplacements... Again a lot of time for nothing..

I 100% support the new PPOs, these are a great addition but the need a lil fiddling....

Cheers Monty

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, dropbear said:

..and why does a barbed wire ppo stop a full speed cru2 when setup on a road?

We cry out for immersive gameplay then this happens. Was funny when a DAC flipped over it, somersaulted  BACKWARDS,  and rolled off. And it wasn't ME  this time. Something wonky about the DAC - the cru2 stopped cold, but the DAC  bounced backwards then flipped over. 

It's the object think of them as all the same collider with different skins. If you think about a tank would be able to blow thru it, and even a tree which I've flipped a char on.

Yes we want to have realism but there are always technical limitations with in any game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1545638114-sshot60.png

See how sexy it looks when setup right :)

BTW I would personally also love sandbags to be able to stick other objects ONLY IF inf can run over it. 

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BLKHWK8 said:

It's the object think of them as all the same collider with different skins. If you think about a tank would be able to blow thru it, and even a tree which I've flipped a char on.

Yes we want to have realism but there are always technical limitations with in any game

The game engine only uses projectile or HE energy to damage items? Why not include kinetic energy?

Still the barbed wire is awesome for funelling enemy inf into a kill zone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dropbear said:

..and why does a barbed wire ppo stop a full speed cru2 when setup on a road?

We cry out for immersive gameplay then this happens. Was funny when a DAC flipped over it, somersaulted  BACKWARDS,  and rolled off. And it wasn't ME  this time. Something wonky about the DAC - the cru2 stopped cold, but the DAC  bounced backwards then flipped over. 

Would need a method to convert velocity to joules on impact, and transfer the joules to the thing impacted.
It is not something the game presently has, a mechanic for outside of transferring the joules into your self if you manage to hit an object fast enough
(Some hills down south are steep and long enough you can hit the ground at the bottom hard enough to explode)

It would be very cool, i think it would require a lot of code effort.

Mind you, i also think if you slam a building with your truck at 40mph, your truck should probably blow up.


BTW
Silly as it sounds, you may not want to just run over barbedwire emplacements in a WWII tank (maybe not modern either but i dunno)
You dont want all that wire wrapped up in the sprockets and shafts etc, and some tanks have some pressurized lines that go to the suspension
that could be messed up.

Good thing we do not have that in game, that would suck

Edited by Merlin51

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

It's the object think of them as all the same collider with different skins. If you think about a tank would be able to blow thru it, and even a tree which I've flipped a char on.

Yes we want to have realism but there are always technical limitations with in any game

 

Our game engine has always had really dumb rebound-physics.

if you slam a building with your truck at 40mph, your truck should probably blow up.

Trucks have always rebounded from a head-on collision with almost anything.

What they should do is change to a destroyed state on the spot.

In a simplest close-to-realistic implementation, the engine maybe could do a comparison of which of the two colliding objects has less strength and less mass, and change the lower-strength/mass of the two to its destroyed-state model and make any riders/crew dead...unless the two objects are say within 10% of each other's strength and mass, in which case they both change to the destroyed-state model.

Quote

Would need a method to convert velocity to joules on impact, and transfer the joules to the thing impacted.
It is not something the game presently has, a mechanic for outside of transferring the joules into your self if you manage to hit an object fast enough

I don't think you'd want to use a regular damage-energy approach, because it doesn't readily provide a symmetrical energy process, i.e. the moving object is the source of the kinetic energy, but some of that energy is absorbed by the moving object, and some by the stationary object. In a simple model, that's dependent on relative mass and relative strength.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jwilly said:

I don't think you'd want to use a regular damage-energy approach, because it doesn't readily provide a symmetrical energy process, i.e. the moving object is the source of the kinetic energy, but some of that energy is absorbed by the moving object, and some by the stationary object. In a simple model, that's dependent on relative mass and relative strength.

Dont know, i dont do the code solutions.
I think you would want to some how factor in how fast you hit something though, so you aren't breaking everything just by bumping it.
Then need a way to communicate HI OBJECT i just rammed you with XX damage.
Well actually Hello host, i just hit object XXXXX with XX damage, please subtract that from its life.

 

12 minutes ago, jwilly said:

if you slam a building with your truck at 40mph, your truck should probably blow up.

They actually will, but the speed is a lot more than you can normally obtain in most situations.
There are a few places down south where you can come down off a steep enough hill, to get enough speed, that if the change in ground angle does not kill you, hitting
anything else will.

I myself do not offhand know how or where that works, or if it could be made easily vehicle independent.
Nor do i know how badly we might all kill ourselves in the process :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Updating our physics simulation is yet another thing that I'd love to have the time to do.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it be worthwhile spending time on it..the unreal physics engine is quite good and expandable for our specific cases

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jwilly said:

 

 

if you slam a building with your truck at 40mph, your truck should probably blow up.

Trucks have always rebounded from a head-on collision with almost anything.

What they should do is change to a destroyed state on the spot.

 

Over my many years, I feel I've become an expert at blowing up trucks in game: 

  •  its easiest to do on the wooden gates at AB exits;
  • quite easy on lampposts; 
  • do-able, but takes practice, on the various roadsigns and that stupid ruined wagon along some of the roads; 
  • fairly rare but not impossible when crashing into buildings (especially damaged-state buildings) but you have to get the angle just right;
  • but impossible when crashing into trees, berms, logs or stone walls (but all of those will kill the passengers, so we got that going for us)

Image result for blown up opel truck WWII

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct me if I'm wrong but one if the concerns always with PPO clipping and collider was one side making flag buildings inaccessible. Add mobile/depot spawning to the mix and you can have the unintended PPO consequence where the defenders build a nigh impregnable fortress. That part I don't necessarily have a problem with. But in real life you would have to somehow reinforce that position which would be impossible if it was encircled. But in WWIIOL we can spawn in and set up a FMS.

Outdoors it's not an issue since you can bomb/HE it. But don't think that with clip able PPOs players won't immediately get to work trying to figure out how to exploit it and try to block the bunker entrance for example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** how to exploit it and try to block the bunker entrance

Guess all those bolt riflemen and FPA players just got a lot more valuable, didn't they? (is that called team play?)

...  RamboUberSMGTeam: Hey, dang door to bunker is blocked by wire and sandbags, I can't be leet and capture the bunker!

... GruntBoltRifleman: Wow, I'm important, I can breach those fortifications for you.

... SquadCO: good thing our squad has a smg AND rifle team!

Edited by delems
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was more referring to clipping sandbags into the building. I fully support the most intricate of PPOs outside of buildings for the reasons you mentioned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dropbear said:

Would it be worthwhile spending time on it..the unreal physics engine is quite good and expandable for our specific cases

Parts of this game use ODE for the physics, I'd like to use it for more physics simulation but whether that will ever happen I don't know.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, aismov said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but one if the concerns always with PPO clipping and collider was one side making flag buildings inaccessible.

Self Side griefing.

If enemy is placing them, you can shoot enemy and he dies.
If some friendly moron is locking you in spawn etc, you cant shoot him, and then have to go find someone with satchels
to remove what your own idiot placed, and you can't shoot him to stop him from continually placing.
Then you have to start calling for GMs to punt the little bastage who loads up the army of free accounts on proxies
and no one is remotely amused, especially the GM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we can have a little more faith in our playbase than that. As long as the offending player is reported and warned/removed if need be, I don’t expect this to be much of a problem (own side self-grifting) .

Edited by raptor34

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, Monty! I have two accounts both engineers outlining an empty field with barbs and sandbags. Major complaint is they don’t last a long time like the hedgehog and tag bunkers. 

 

FYI only; these perimeter should never be too close to FMS , they will get bombed out too easily. At least be 150-200mm out with couple gaps prior friendlies to get out, BUT guess what will be covering these gaps???

I actually prefer my FMS’ to be in middle of open field with these pereimeter around it. FOURCE, EI to run onto the open field while your LMG hides behind a strongpoint within the perimeter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well  Delems, think RATS don’t want for PPO to be able to totally prevent inf going through via being able to make these touch the building cuz it will probably make it nearly impossible to get into building to cap or destroy FB’s. I thin a better solution is to make them longer so to make ei have to change his course. This will at least take away his straight path which is faster. To his objective. Forcing him to turn prevents him from focusing on his objective. BANG-sniper shot to his head!

 

Sandbags should be longer and placed further out of the defensive area you are defending. I would think real army prefer perimeter to be further out. Got to combine these PPO’s with defense of LMG OR ATG or both!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.