Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
rebel357

Landing craft are badly needed with all the new towns coming

32 posts in this topic

47 minutes ago, madrebel said:

Honestly, the requirement to have players 'in the hold' is in and of itself, totally unrealistic. people aren't 'in' the vehicles while they're being transported. It would be more realistic to have Transports spawn with x,y,z already in the hold and a one shot FMS that had X amount of infantry.

 

FWIW though - I'll echo aismov's desire for AI. The game would benefit a lot from having 'management' AI routines. Why can't a mission leader order trucks to drop of guns here and there and over yonder? This insistence/requirement that players do every job will always prevent us from scaling. Proper AI may smooth out a lot of rough edges. Hell, flags on map likely would have succeeded to a larger extent if HC were merely managing AI that was in turn shuffling around supply from the factories, to the flags, then moving the flags around based on player initiated strategy.

yet we can't have that discussion because AI = the devil. Yet, we also can't remove the terrible AI we have at every single town because ... idk. We must retain AI that literally shoots at us, yet we won't entertain AI that sets up and maintains the bttle field for us.

so stupid.

Madrebel I am not at all against AI routines running ships, supply, whatever it may be that lets players escape drudgery - not sure if non shooting AI bunker sentries warning a town the bunker is under cap isnt a bit too far - my post related to the apparent hypocrisy of not wanting to allow a quick loading of vehicles onto TTs because it broke the immersion of the game, but that ships sailing all over the Nth Sea under AI skippers and calling the player to action stations when something finally happened was somehow a wonderful enhancement for the game. (which it would be!)

I really need to check CRS stats one day just to see how much some of these guys who pontificate in the forums actually play this game today.  Many are names I only recognise from the forums rather than from in game AARs.

 

S! Ian

Edited by ian77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BLKHWK8 said:

We definitely have naval love coming.

I am sure you do, "New" CRS have been doing so much more than we used to see. TY Sir to you and all your team.

 

S! Ian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ian77 said:

Madrebel I am not at all against AI routines running ships, supply, whatever it may be that lets players escape drudgery - not sure if non shooting AI bunker sentries warning a town the bunker is under cap isnt a bit too far - my post related to the apparent hypocrisy of not wanting to allow a quick loading of vehicles onto TTs because it broke the immersion of the game, but that ships sailing all over the Nth Sea under AI skippers and calling the player to action stations when something finally happened was somehow a wonderful enhancement for the game. (which it would be!)

I really need to check CRS stats one day just to see how much some of these guys who pontificate in the forums actually play this game today.  Many are names I only recognise from the forums rather than from in game AARs.

 

S! Ian

i agree with you - especially because the immersion mentioned - lifting into the hold - is followed by "sitting in the hold" which is NOT realistic at all. you don't put live bodies in the hold with stuff that is heavy and may shift during transit. You just don't. Only reason we do is because of technical limiters. Once spawning into a vehicle/poly crew is cracked a lot of things open up for the better.

seriously, a trained crew would not be put at risk while hoisting a many ton tank into a transport. how silly is that suggestion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is why I was saying the solution isn't "FMS everything" it's to make a deeper naval game. If I could wave a magic wand I would have exiting vehicles so that the guy goes onto the ship and then can exit vehicle, and when the ship gets close players can despawn in.... But only to the limit of what was initially loaded. This way you avoid the issue of FMS ship spam, but also make players actually gave to plan and coordinate operations.

Again it's a question of consequences. If you take away those then players have no incentive to do any sort of combined arms. You go from a situation of pre planned ops with DD escorts and aircover to players spawning ship after ship until a lucky one slips buy.

It becomes the continent-wide equivalent of moling Antwerp. Now I agree you dont need to punish players by forcing them to sit in a hold for hours on end, but going the exact opposite where you have single players spawn a TT and out magically pops an army is not the answer either.

And as far as navy AI control it is the only way for capital ships to work in this game. Nobody is going to go on a real-time Uboat patrol (or a DD submarine sweep). But it's again a question of consequences. You don't create the EWS in such a way that is guarantees exact contacts... You need to have players work for it a bit. It a balance that will need to be worked out.

Share this post


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

We definitely have naval love coming.

Too easy, must resist....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about giving the mission leader tools that enable him or her to mark possible positions for assets,  such as atgs, aa, inf support, armor, resupply positions. THEN  allow the playerbase to fill these positions with the assets..all while giving them rank points for fulfilling orders. It gives attacks/defences a plan and coordination. You should be able at a glance see whats needed.

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.