montyuno

Jumping the gun..... TOEs, armour, shields n such..

181 posts in this topic

Sigh. If you're coming up against a CP bristling with LMGs and more LMGs to left and right flank, do you feel suppressed? Of course you do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Bmbm said:

Sigh. If you're coming up against a CP bristling with LMGs and more LMGs to left and right flank, do you feel suppressed? Of course you do.

Not like in the video, no. There is no true suppression in game (except for HE blasts), it's just how much you pretend there is when you get shot at/near. Pretty underwhelming, not to mention unrealistic. There's much difference between the games, I have a lot more immersion in games that simulate suppression effects.

Edited by knucks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The third or perhaps umpteenth time you die against the same objective you will realize that you have been suppressed, and should perhaps have used a more sensible approach. What you're talking about is eye candy and performance limiting functions that are imposed on players who need more forceful cues to adapt their combat behavior.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot speak for other players, but I do know that when I hear an enemy MG light up nearby, I am immediately 'supressed' in the proper sense of the term.  I, like other players I would assume, don't FEAR dying ingame, but I certainly do my level best to avoid it.  Call it fear replaced by competitiveness, or the wish to not have to spend another 15 minutes sneaking up on that EMFS I'm trying to destroy, or whatever.

 

Coding a Tom Hanks (saving private ryan) 'wobbly period' into the game that happens every time something bad happens nearby is ridiculous, imho.  That feeling you get in the pit of your stomach when your about to rush a bunker?, or right before that last sprint to the EMFS you're trying to blow? or when that tank you've been listening to as it approached for 20 minutes finally stops near enough where you might get either a shot at him or a shot at sapping him? or when you're spawning into an AB crawling with bad guys in the hopes that you're the one who'll break thru and save the bunker?  The game provided that feeling in the pit of your stomach, and didn't need to code something into the game telling you how to feel.  I'm just saying.

 

The effort would, (again my opinion only) be better spent on improving the UI, or the ingame textures, or new equipment, or getting rid of rifle sway and the rambo LMG abomination, or making it so true blitzkrieg can happen without magically spawning insta-armies being the consequence.  In essence, I don't need a game to tell me when I am 'scared'----I can handle that myself, and again, when an MG34 lights up anywhere near ME, I'm not going anywhere until I can figure out:  Where the gunner is, and/or if he's firing at me and/or if he CAN see me/fire at me.  Those on voice coms probably call out MG!!!  While I'm facedown on the ground I try to mark the target, (the chat alternative to  yelling 'mg!!!').  That all happens relatively quick ingame, but it does happen.  Maybe my Infantry training was drilled into my head so well that it can't tell between real world and gameworld, I dunno.  It seems like much ado about nothing, to me.  Get down, locate the direction of fire, then either find cover and/or concealment, or if unable to do so put fire on target in the hopes of supressing the guy who is attempting to do the same to you---someone has to duck first, right?

 

Want to improve gameplay in 1 quick easy step?  Work in pairs.  I move while you cover me.  You move while I cover you.  Until a significant amount of the playerbase is willing to abide by Infantry basics, (there is no simpler infantry fundamental than 'cover me while I move'), then you'll never have proper supression, or proper battles where skill matters more than numbers, and so on.  Cover me while I move...  Once we're working in pairs, then we can start working in fire teams, then squads, then platoons, and so on up the Org chart.  But the playerbase, as a whole, is not up to that yet.  (obviously some folks/squads to this sort of thing, but not enough, to be sure).

 

S!

 

S!

Edited by augetout
1 person likes this

Share this post


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

The third or perhaps umpteenth time you die against the same objective you will realize that you have been suppressed, and should perhaps have used a more sensible approach. What you're talking about is eye candy and performance limiting functions that are imposed on..

Pfft, eye candy. You've never played a game that features suppression effects. It's wayy more than just eye candy,  it makes the game much better and more immersive than it would be without it. All these new games have suppression it's a completely justified addition that does not need explaination, it's proper simulation, without it your battles are much less potent. You're only hurting your own not picking up these good methods, you're not going to draw people if you fear change too much to improve.
I'm telling you, stop looking at it, go play it for yourself, then come back and say that this is not a good universal feature for a FPS aiming for realistically paced firefights.

Edited by knucks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Merlin51 said:

I dont know that i would call it entirely selecting not to be suppressed
You'd suffer all the effects still, so sprinting across the field goes right off the table, hard to zig zag when your legs dont want to run,  you'd have trouble holding a steady aim, hearing, tunnel vision etc.
But yea, it you wanted to stand up and stumble forward into death, guess that's your right.

If you force people to get down, they just aren't going to have it.

The ultimate fear of death in game, would be loss of rank.
Let people death themselves back to rank 1 and have their names turn green again
Now that would be interesting maybe :) 

I foresee even fewer greentags remaining in game and buying an account - they die a lot and will therefore never rank up, 

We shall have  even more "depot snipers" - "Why should I guard a cp? I might be demoted if I die!" we have enough stat Hos refusing to try to clear CPs and Bunkers without giving them a "legitimate" excuse!

Seriously, does nobody think of the consequences of sweeping changes to the game - drastic cuts to one sides auto weapons was always bound to equal more CPs lost, and doing that to the underpop side was bound to be damaging no matter how many uber tanks (in completely ahistorical numbers!) they were given in exchange for their smgs.

EVERY part of the game is interconnected, changing one element has knock on effects which may or may not be foreseeable. Making many profound changes at the same time will most likely result in chaos and with multiple changes we cannot know for sure which change caused a particular fubar (albeit the 50% cut in allied smgs was pretty obvious from day one).

Yes we need to have ideas and discussions for improving our game, and one day we may see some of them implemented, but try and think how other people might react to those changes. Think how they might "game them" to their advantage, which is not for the good of the game. Try and foresee the consequences BEFORE implementing change.

S! Ian

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None of my WWII Online “moments” would have been improved a whole lot if the game modeled suppression in the way some are asking for.

 

In game lexicon, suppression is just synonymous with camping, isn’t it?

 

My point is, I think there are bigger fish to fry than this. If we get to a point where we can afford to code something like this, I don’t think I would mind. 

 

Right now, my biggest coding concern is 1.36. After we get a more stable game to play with, we can start adding layers like this. 

 

Good discussion to have, but realistically something like this is probably at least a year away at best.

Edited by Capco
1 person likes this

Share this post


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

If you're really that unconfident in what is now a standard feature for realistic F2P, you might as well throw in the towel. Lol, you already play on fearless mode. EVERYONE DOES, IT'S A GAME.
Stop to think for a second what suppression actually means as a GAMEPLAY mechanic and not just an inconvience to your rambo runs.
For you who play no other games, here's a video to show you what we mean by suppression effects. Tell me you wouldn't want this in game.

 

Way too much constant repetitive game produced shouting for me.

I understand your point about suppression, but just making the picture go black and white isnt really suppression, those guys did not stay in cover, they just got up anyway and died in black and white instead of colour.

We sort of had it some years back, the concussion bug, it was not popular.

 

S! ian

18 minutes ago, Capco said:

None of my WWII Online “moments” would have been improved a whole lot if the game modeled suppression in the way some are asking for.

 

In game lexicon, suppression is just synonymous with camping, isn’t it?

 

My point is, I think there are bigger fish to fry than this. If we get to a point where we can afford to code something like this, I don’t think I would mind. 

 

Right now, my biggest coding concern is 1.36. After we get a more stable game to play with, we can start adding layers like this. 

 

Good discussion to have, but realistically something like this is probably at least a year away at best.

+1

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, knucks said:

Pfft, eye candy. You've never played a game that features suppression effects.

And you would know this, how? I can assure you I have played several. Sure they're neat and adds to realism and immersion - but they're not entirely necessary IMO and more damningly, fail to impact player behavior.

Share this post


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

fail to impact player behavior.

This is how I know. You really think suppression effects are no more than visual disparement, when it shakes your camera, throws your aim and drains your stamina, as well as reducing your ability to see clearly.

Share this post


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

We sort of had it some years back, the concussion bug, it was not popular.

I was thinking about that exact thing as I was reading this thread.  It would have stayed in as a "feature" if it was popular enough.  

 

@knucksAgain buddy, not saying this is necessarily a bad idea or one that I oppose long-term, but it won't help us fix the core problems with WWII Online.  

 

Just take a step back for a moment and look again.  If CRS spent the coding time to introduce a suppression mechanic (and delay 1.36 even further; they cannot do both), do you think we would get a substantial influx of players and subscribers?  Would those players stay long-term?

Share this post


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

Seriously, does nobody think of the consequences of sweeping changes to the game - drastic cuts to one sides auto weapons was always bound to equal more CPs lost, and doing that to the underpop side was bound to be damaging no matter how many uber tanks (in completely ahistorical numbers!) they were given in exchange for their smgs.

I invite you to try and introduce a paradigmatic shift incorporating wildly different aspects of gameplay features that have been asked for and suggested by the playerbase over the course of 17 years without running into a few bumps along the way. If you think you can do a better job, you're very welcome to volunteer your time. If all you're going to do is spread negativity, I suggest you direct your energies elsewhere.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Capco said:

Just take a step back for a moment and look again.  If CRS spent the coding time to introduce a suppression mechanic (and delay 1.36 even further; they cannot do both), do you think we would get a substantial influx of players and subscribers?  Would those players stay long-term?

No that's a problem than can only be solved directly. 1.36 isn't going to bring many player either, unless you do a free tank campaign where all the tanks are free to use, but would only work for as long as you do it for.

Edited by knucks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, knucks said:

This is how I know. You really think suppression effects are no more than visual disparement, when it shakes your camera, throws your aim and drains your stamina, as well as reducing your ability to see clearly.

You don't get it. Yes, it can have a minor or major effect on the individual (and by extension, the team) but the experience is not taken to heart inasmuch the player doesn't apply basic military procedure to the task, a procedure that is designed to minimize own casualties while maximizing those of the enemy. IOW, screenshake and earshrieks and blackout doesn't make you a more efficient soldier because it's not teaching you anything. It's just giving you effects.

Share this post


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

You don't get it. Yes, it can have a minor or major effect on the individual (and by extension, the team) but the experience is not taken to heart inasmuch the player doesn't apply basic military procedure to the task, a procedure that is designed to minimize own casualties while maximizing those of the enemy. IOW, screenshake and earshrieks and blackout doesn't make you a more efficient soldier because it's not teaching you anything. It's just giving you effects.

No offense but I don't think you and I have the same ideas. If I were in your shoes, I would see things much differently but I wouldn't lie about what the game needs,  Sure subscriptions are but a large portion of people in the world today prefer against them, that's not even including the niche audience, but there are plenty of niche games with many thousands of dedicated players, World War Two Online.. this game should be pulling wayy larger numbers than it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, knucks said:

No that's a problem than can only be solved directly. 1.36 isn't going to bring many player either, unless you do a free tank campaign where all the tanks are free to use, but would only work for that campaign.

I can't guarantee that 1.36 will fix the game and take us back to greatness.  In fact, I think pretty much everyone understands how much of a long-shot it is for that to happen.  But it is the biggest, most important, most advertised change to the game since the Americans were introduced.  

 

It's unfortunate that we came to this point, but right now this might be the final hurrah of WWII Online.  I personally know 3-4 guys who will probably resub for at least the first month after 1.36 is introduced (and all of them are very capable vets and former HC).  I have a feeling that a lot of other players right now could say the same thing about the guys they know who no longer play but are still keeping an eye open and looking in our direction.  

 

One thing I think is very important that isn't really being discussed at all:  what were the mistakes made during the Steam release, and how can we learn from those mistakes going forward with the release of 1.36?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Capco said:

It's unfortunate that we came to this point, but right now this might be the final hurrah of WWII Online.  I personally know 3-4 guys who will probably resub for at least the first month after 1.36 is introduced (and all of them are very capable vets and former HC).  I have a feeling that a lot of other players right now could say the same thing about the guys they know who no longer play but are still keeping an eye open and looking in our direction.  

I'm sure 1.36 will bring some of that back, but there's one thing really missing in this game's potential and it's the lack of F2P options. At some point you're going to have to accept the fact that this game alone does not justify everyone paying monthly, most people like 1 time buy things, some will spend very little and some will spend a lot, but that's the whole aspect of building a playerbase, you want everyone you can get, it's a war after all. If warthunder has  over 1000 units you can use for free anytime once unlocked, and few things except cosmetics and some units that require premium,  then this game can too.

Edited by knucks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, knucks said:

I'm sure 1.36 will bring some of that back, but there's one thing really missing in this game's potential and it's the lack of F2P options. At some point you're going to have to accept the fact that this game alone does not justify everyone paying monthly, most people like 1 time buy things, some will spend very little and some will spend a lot, but that's the whole aspect of building a playerbase, you want everyone you can get, it's a war after all. If warthunder has  over 1000 units you can use for free anytime once unlocked, and few things except cosmetics and some units that require premium,  then this game can too.

I can't say that I disagree with you on this point.  The gameplay would be better if the game was cheaper because there would be more bodies in the game.  I mean that's basic economics right?

 

I pay my subscription because it's what I've always done and I have an emotional attachment to this game, not because I think the game is worth the price.  I hate the subscription concept in general and this is literally the only product I have that I pay a subscription for.  

3 people like this

Share this post


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

I have played every aspect of this game, from both sides and from multiple perspectives (CQB assault, squad ops, lonewolfing, recon etc). I don't know about you but I have real life military experience in light infantry and mechanized infantry and 40 years of reading up on WWI-WWII-Korea-Vietnam + the psychology of combat and leadership to back up my own insight and experience in the matter. And of course gaming, not just this title. So I do feel kinda qualified and submit that you don't know jack about what I know or don't know. If you or anyone else feel that you're cut out to have my job, make decisions and affect the game, do please fill in a volunteer form and join the crew.

I think you misread what I wrote because that's not it. I believe I said "get a group together and throw eggs in flight size" or words to that effect. I do prefer BARCAP but I never vulch. I suspect you might not even know what a proper vulch is. Also I'm not "dictating" anything - this is a team effort involving three top managers, Scotsman and myself. That's ten eyeballs on every decision - I just happen to be the one catching the flak. I don't mind that, I'm pretty well armored.

Since November 2017 I've given all my attention to producing content for the game. Before that, and I would suggest that infantry play haven't changed materially since then, my preferred infantry weapon was the LMG, and my preferred use of said weapon was for support and suppressive fire. The trouble here is not the weapon - it works very well for its intended role - but that people who would benefit from support does not understand how to utilize it. They'd rather rush ahead heroically (or otherwise), alone or in ragged gaggles without waiting for a solid base and defilade. I know it's a game and accept that but I think if people were not always in such a hurry to get up there and cap they'd enjoy the fight more, with a bit of patience.

I also don't know about you, but when I see skulls and bodies around me, or see/hear a firefight ahead with or without tanks, I feel pretty suppressed and start acting more circumspectly. If I'm fired upon I go to ground, displace and orient toward the threat. Real suppression, as in screenshake, narrowed vision, ears ringing and inability to move - I don't think it'd be such a smash hit. But we do have suppression in game, albeit you have to immerse yourself in roleplay to get it.

First of all I am not trying to belittle your contribution or any of the other RATs volunteers or paid. Yours is a pretty thankless task, and not one I would wish to do. So I apologise if my frustration that my inability to now play my particular aspect of fun, for some of the time has, with the new spawn lists, been pretty much excised from the game came across as overly personal and abusive o you and other RATs.

Sorry.

My background also includes a military career, in my case the artillery, so not a huge relevance to the game but I did go through infantry school to be an FO, and I must be older than you because my reading is 50+ years :) 

My comment about people not playing a particular role but dictating how others should fulfil that role was aimed more at the "drive a truck from the back town/FB wasn't it better 20 years ago" brigade. I do not think for a moment that individuals at CRS just change things on a personal whim, and can then implement them as they see fit. Of course it is a collective effort, with changes made for the good of the game as a whole, and hence all the more worrying that the consequences of changes like severe reductions in smg numbers cannot be foreseen. Maybe you guys need to play more in this gameworld of now, and not rely on your memories and impressions of what the game was like with higher pop numbers when you all played so much more. AND I really do not mean that at all in a disparaging way. I am sure your response will be I would love to play more but then nobody will be doing the eleventy things that I have to do for CRS, and I completely respect that. It is a harsh reality, RATs have limited time and pretty much unlimited calls upon that time. It is also the case that player numbers are down, and fewer players (on both sides) do the basics.

As I have posted elsewhere if CRS signpost the changes and tell us what they are rather than hide behind gimmicky slogans like "Hardest Campaign Ever" then the playerbase are bound to be less over reactive. If we know beforehand what the spawn numbers should be then we can let you guys know that within the thousands of lines of code a few numbers have been entered in error and the spawnlists are wrong. Then we who use the forums can tell the playerbase in game "Yes CRS know the spawnlists are not quiet right, give them a chance to fix it - they are on with it now", helping to defuse the over reaction in side chat. As it is, or was at the start of the new campaign, everyone was reacting, and we had RATs in game saying "I dont know what the spawnlists are meant to be, but I know they were planning a big shakeup". This does not help calm players down.

If CRS really feel massive changes are needed now prior to 1.36, then please try and bring the playerbase with you. We on the forums are only a small fraction of the active playerbase (and many on the forums do not play very much!) but some of us are in game a lot, and we can try and help smooth the way, but we cant help if we don't know what is happening.

Thank you RATs for your continued efforts for game.

And thank you Bmbm for your personal contribution, and for being pretty well armoured!

S! Ian

 

 

 

Oh and PS - the rest of your quote;

Speaking personally, MY idea of FUN is .... lobbing a flight-ful of eggs into a target or suppressing an airfield or three for an hour.

 

Share this post


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

excised

Kinda drastic eh. 

 

9 minutes ago, ian77 said:

Maybe you guys need to play more in this gameworld of now, and not rely on your memories

I played semi-actively up to December 2017 and still try to get a few sorties in every now and then, so my memories aren't THAT old thank you verra much. Other Rats are more active. 

 

12 minutes ago, ian77 said:

As I have posted elsewhere if CRS signpost the changes and tell us what they are rather than hide behind gimmicky slogans like

As I have stated elsewhere, the spawnlists were prepared under severe time pressure and there was no way to signpost anything until it had been OK'd by senior mgmt in the very last bleeding minute. Grok?

 

15 minutes ago, ian77 said:

or suppressing an airfield or three for an hour.

Thanks - that doesn't imply vulching however. Take Bertrix as an example: I usually hover outside flak range and only slug people as they reach the Wellin crossroads - Bouillon area. Plenty of time to allow them to get airborne, get their bearings, tool out enroute and then whammo. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We all love the game, which is why it creates such passionate debate. Personally I like driving a panzer some of the time, but I spend more time as an inf than anything else.

I (well my allied alt WeeJocky) was top TOM last map, and top trucker, and had about 800 caps, so I play the game (oops I used to play) as I think it is meant to be, setting up FMSs, blowing FBs, and guarding, lots of guarding.

I just don't see the need for paradigm shifts in game play on the eve of 1.36

Not having the time to inform the playerbase suggests a rushed piece of work to fit a deadline

I personally do not like many of the changes, but others do, fair enough. The main paradigm shift with smg numbers has of course been done away with.

But, as requested I shall take my negativity elsewhere

Good luck for the future of our game.

S! Ian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too want suppression, not artificially coded in the game but from my fellow players! It's frustrating trying to cap with friendly tanks there to suppress, but not firing unless they see a target. That's not suppression. Suppression is constant fire on the spawn (in this case) until the cap is achieved or till (most probably) you run out of ammo in the process. That's why in those situations I usually make the comment "tanks are worthless", although it's not the tanks fault, it would be more accurate to say 'tankers are worthless'. Also, remember the dreaded camping that everyone hates is in fact suppression (kudos allies ;)).

I reject any ideas of inserting artificial suppression (I hate AI), morale, or fear. When we're winning morale is high. When we're losing morale is low. I fear death in game because I don't want to spend the time getting back into the battle.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, gavalink said:

I too want suppression, not artificially coded in the game

Then just say you don't want suppression. Your definitions don't fly when games have already made it a type of standard to have suppression effects in order to create immersion and a realistic feel in firefights. 
You already say people don't suppress, only shoot at targets, well gee I wonder why. Could it be the suppression you're talking about is in your head, and not an actual feature of the game?

Edited by knucks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Capco said:

I pay my subscription because it's what I've always done and I have an emotional attachment to this game, not because I think the game is worth the price.  I hate the subscription concept in general and this is literally the only product I have that I pay a subscription for.  

Right, it's not the value aspect, it's the support aspect. That's how it's changed, you aren't going to win that battle trying to convince people your monthly subscription is worth it, people who want to support will buy it but not people who want content, those people buy with a more consumer mindset, they expect to own what they purchase, value wise you'd be a bit ridiculous to ask 120 dollars a year for any game. I think that's why F2P managed to break though, it acknowledges this well and made made all options possible.

Edited by knucks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We had the concussion effects once - it totally sucked and drove me to log off - suppression in its worst form.  Others did the same do the rats got rid of most of it.  The remaining effects are pretty annoying still, to me.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.