montyuno

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

181 posts in this topic

13 hours ago, knucks said:

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.

Just a comment from another real life infantryman. If you call that video 'suppression' then I must conclude you don't know what it is in a real life context. What I see in there is not suppression or how any of my soldiers would react when suppressed. So much depends on context as well, and there are certainly differing degrees of suppression. A great deal of difference from hearing angry hornets over your head or seeing green (bad guy) tracer, and being at ground zero when an 8" HE arrives.

To correct some misconceptions, the bigger the bangs, the longer you tend to be in that condition. Real soldiers know the rate of fire of artillery by caliber line, and it's  easy to tell if you are being engaged by more than one unit. If it's steel rain you stay down...and if it's obvious the MGs you are fighting are top notch...the same. You can tell the difference between good and bad....and whether you have any good options.

I have done live testing with units of various training standards with this, and the differences in reaction to threats is also a function of training level. 

If you want realism in this thats fine...but if you are talking about heavy weapons you will not like what will be imposed on you...or how long it will last. Big difference between those videos and having your buddy get shredded next to you, or hearing a guy after he is hit. If you had sat in a bunker while shelled you would have a bettr idea. 

So do you want a game or simulation when it comes to this?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** Ground players love realism that doesnt apply to them.

That is false.

Vision and hearing are both reduced.  And many of us want the effects of mud, bog, snow, fog, etc. when not on road or in bldg......

Edited by delems
1 person likes this

Share this post


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

Saying the rain doesn't 'penalize' folks on the ground is a matter of perspective I suppose.  For me, on the ground, the rain makes it much more difficult/challenging to hear vehicles, troops running around, etc.   I understand and appreciate the concerns raised by the way weather has been implemented, as it pertains to pilots.  My guess is weather will be upgraded in the days to come, and if that is the reason hundreds of pilots left, then we'll see a bunch return.

put on head phones. by penalize i mean causes players to not play the game and worse, causes them to unsub.

when weather was being discussed, prior to implementation, almost all pilots asked for volumetric clouds - not the quick and dirty hideously ugly overly penalizing hacky crap we have now. nobody wanted this, except ground players.

https://simul.co/truesky/   <--that is what we want/ed. in order to get that, you need subscriptions to pay for the development and or to get some of our volunteers paid. chasing away hundreds of paying customers isn't the way to do that.

again - pull the subscription data. look at it. how many subs were lost in the 12 months following the weather/fishbowl addition. how great would it be to get some of those subs back?

https://steamcharts.com/app/236390  <--warthunder's average population and their 'air war' SUCKS! look at the average population for 'realistic' ww2 shooters. compare them to war thunder.

world of tanks has around 20K average ... stop stepping over dollars to pick up pennies. bring back strong vehicle play and by proxy strong combined arms. get this game back to the glory it once was before we started placating infantry at the expense of the other aspects of the game.

there is a lot more money in vehicle simulation and guess what, a significant majority of vehicle first players will also play infantry.

8 minutes ago, delems said:

*** Ground players love realism that doesnt apply to them.

That is false.

Vision and hearing are both reduced.  And many of us want the effects of mud, bog, snow, fog, etc. when not on road or in bldg......

you're all about realism? so you'll lead the call to get rid of binoculars for all but mission leaders?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** so you'll lead the call to get rid of binoculars for all but mission leaders?

I suppose if no one had them but more experienced troops - then yes, unless you are staff sergeant or higher - you don't get them.

Share this post


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

*** so you'll lead the call to get rid of binoculars for all but mission leaders?

I suppose if no one had them but more experienced troops - then yes, unless you are staff sergeant or higher - you don't get them.

How do you determine that then, cause ‘game rank’ can’t be it to be ‘realistic’ it will have to follow historic TOEs. 

Also, again, you’re all about realism - can i count your vote in turning vegetation into an actual physical object that impedes infantry?

you should also walk into battle, every time. You want realism correct?

when it rains you slip and fall and move significantly slower. Should be a percentage chance for injury when going prone from a sprint. That would all be super fun right? Lets add realism until we’re left with only super hardcore realism players ... i’ll Bet that opens the population flood gates ...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because they're playing a better game with these things.

9 hours ago, Bmbm said:

Exactly.

Hose down the corridors and likely avenues of approach FTW. I recall one mission where I sprayed LMG fire in bursts down a bushline.. saw maybe 2-3 ei bob around there in the distance.. emptied 10 mags downrange in their general direction... scored a lot more kills than I had expected.

Sigh, that's not suppression. You don't understand the difference between pretending there is suppression in the game and actually seeing it for your own eyes. All you think about is getting kills. Oh well.

Edited by knucks

Share this post


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

Because they're playing

Sigh, that's not suppression. You don't understand the difference between pretending there is suppression in the game and actually seeing it for your own eyes. All you think about is getting kills. Oh well.

You do realize whom you are asking this right?

You are not even reading what he is saying
Bmbm was not looking for kills, he got those as a surprise bonus.
He was trying to convince the bad guys that this was not a good approach because nasty little bullets keep coming from that way.
 

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

put on head phones. by penalize i mean causes players to not play the game and worse, causes them to unsub.

when weather was being discussed, prior to implementation, almost all pilots asked for volumetric clouds - not the quick and dirty hideously ugly overly penalizing hacky crap we have now. nobody wanted this, except ground players.

https://simul.co/truesky/   <--that is what we want/ed. in order to get that, you need subscriptions to pay for the development and or to get some of our volunteers paid. chasing away hundreds of paying customers isn't the way to do that.

again - pull the subscription data. look at it. how many subs were lost in the 12 months following the weather/fishbowl addition. how great would it be to get some of those subs back?

https://steamcharts.com/app/236390  <--warthunder's average population and their 'air war' SUCKS! look at the average population for 'realistic' ww2 shooters. compare them to war thunder.

world of tanks has around 20K average ... stop stepping over dollars to pick up pennies. bring back strong vehicle play and by proxy strong combined arms. get this game back to the glory it once was before we started placating infantry at the expense of the other aspects of the game.

there is a lot more money in vehicle simulation and guess what, a significant majority of vehicle first players will also play infantry.

you're all about realism? so you'll lead the call to get rid of binoculars for all but mission leaders?

Relax, Madrebel.  My Sennheiser HD 570s are up to the task.

 

As to the rest of your stuff, I think you might be suffering from the false conclusion that somehow ground players are against air players, and so on.  Back when I had a man-cave I absolutely loved flying-----when I got my first legitimate video card, its debut in-game was to spawn a P40, and fly through a big town on the river (memory fades on which town), with the cherry on the top moment of flying underneath a bridge---inverted.  I can't properly describe the utter joy that moment held.

Additionally, I am not on any list of people who believe improvements in one area require sacrifice(s) in another.  I have a keen  interest in getting people back in-game---the game is more fun when there's more people in-game, and developments go quicker (well, they do now, perhaps they should have been quicker in the old days but the current crew can't be damned for the former crew, imho), when there's more subscriptions.

 

It's not a zero-sum game, and while I fully agree with you that some choices back in the day had horrendous, if unintended, negative effects, the current CRS team is working forward from where we are, with an eye towards making better decisions that make gameplay better for everyone.

 

For the record, I think nixing the binos for lower-ranked players is a good idea.  Not everyone needs to be able to see the entire battle area close up, and it might encourage folks to get out of the building windows and out into the field, where we could have more battles.

 

My wholly unsolicited advice to you would be to ease up on attacking ground players to make your points.  It isn't helpful, to my knowledge isn't even accurate, and it doesn't work towards solving problems as much as you might believe.

 

S!

Share this post


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

Because they're playing a better game with these things.

Sigh, that's not suppression. You don't understand the difference between pretending there is suppression in the game and actually seeing it for your own eyes. All you think about is getting kills. Oh well.

I think you should buy Bmbm a virtual beer (he'll get the 2nd round, no doubt), and have an actual discussion with him.  I think you'll be embarrassed by your treatment of him before knowing who he is and what he is really all about.

 

And I think you should listen a bit more to the people who are talking about actual suppression, as it differs starkly from the black and white wobbly vision deal that you are putting across as being 'suppressed'.  

 

S!

Share this post


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

Relax, Madrebel.  My Sennheiser HD 570s are up to the task.

 

As to the rest of your stuff, I think you might be suffering from the false conclusion that somehow ground players are against air players, and so on.  Back when I had a man-cave I absolutely loved flying-----when I got my first legitimate video card, its debut in-game was to spawn a P40, and fly through a big town on the river (memory fades on which town), with the cherry on the top moment of flying underneath a bridge---inverted.  I can't properly describe the utter joy that moment held.

Additionally, I am not on any list of people who believe improvements in one area require sacrifice(s) in another.  I have a keen  interest in getting people back in-game---the game is more fun when there's more people in-game, and developments go quicker (well, they do now, perhaps they should have been quicker in the old days but the current crew can't be damned for the former crew, imho), when there's more subscriptions.

 

It's not a zero-sum game, and while I fully agree with you that some choices back in the day had horrendous, if unintended, negative effects, the current CRS team is working forward from where we are, with an eye towards making better decisions that make gameplay better for everyone.

 

For the record, I think nixing the binos for lower-ranked players is a good idea.  Not everyone needs to be able to see the entire battle area close up, and it might encourage folks to get out of the building windows and out into the field, where we could have more battles.

 

My wholly unsolicited advice to you would be to ease up on attacking ground players to make your points.  It isn't helpful, to my knowledge isn't even accurate, and it doesn't work towards solving problems as much as you might believe.

 

S!

TOEs and absolute reliance on HC is being removed - because the old team put it in and it damn near killed the game.

Weather was put in by the old team - it largely killed the airwar. Roll it back, then move forward with more players. Keeping it in is all vets need to know to remain unsubbed.

ground players lead the calls for weather to end air quake. I’ll keep reminding them of that as they simultaneously whine about population problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, madrebel said:

TOEs and absolute reliance on HC is being removed - because the old team put it in and it damn near killed the game.

Weather was put in by the old team - it largely killed the airwar. Roll it back, then move forward with more players. Keeping it in is all vets need to know to remain unsubbed.

ground players lead the calls for weather to end air quake. I’ll keep reminding them of that as they simultaneously whine about population problems.

I don't think TOEs are being removed via 1.36, but certainly will be augmented by garrisons.  It pays to note that even in this area, things are not being 'rolled back', but moved forward, aiming to take the best of what has worked while hopefully eliminating stuff that turned out not to work (one should ask if the population suffered because of reliance on the HCs, or if because the population went downward, it became impractical to rely wholly on the HCs, but that is a different topic for a different day).

 

I believe weather was brought in during my real-world break from the game, so I won't argue your point regarding weather, other than to point out that others are claiming the pilots left due to the luftwaffe being 'nerfed', and other reasons that may or may not have credibility.

 

I can't speak to who lead the calls for weather, but I will remind you that CRS, even in the old days, didn't run their game by sticking a finger in the air to see which way the wind was blowing---especially by relying on what is being said in the forums.  That isn't to suggest that folks aren't paying attention to the forums, or that the Rats aren't taking what is said in the forums into account, but there's other data involved.  You might take into account that most ground players, even in your scenario where some in that area led the charge for weather, didn't have a damned thing to do with it, and that by lumping them in with whoever actually was leading this charge, isn't helping.

 

In the meantime, I hope weather effects are on the list (I believe they are) of things to improve, along with the 'fishbowl effect' I see a lot of pilots being angry about.  I think, in the end, more weather/actual seasons would be the way to go, complete with clouds that are there some days, or parts of some days--that can be flown through, hidden in, and don't kill paratroopers who fall through them. ;)

 

S!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 109 was castrated years before weather came and the cannons have sucked since the clip bug was rightfully fixed. scotsman’s munitions audit followed by the damage model audits likely resolve the cannons not working and the 109 while still not ‘right’ (needs to be more tail heavy, likely needs a control forces at speed pass too) it’s significantly better than it was.

The 109 castration did chase some out of the game but we had significant numbers still on both sides. Weather absolutely gutted the number of pilots.

i hear often “i like weather, it breaks things up”. Those break ups you like happen to coincide at times with squad nights - shafting a group of players at the same time. That leads to heard mentality with a negative frame of reference. You don’t design that stuff into a game and then wonder why people leave.

the reason weather needs to be removed is there is no ability to move forward until such time as we get a significant overhaul with the client renderer. The ‘clouds’ we have aren’t clouds its just a thick layer of crap. What we need is a proper volumetric cloud system, like the one I linked, AND - proper lighting so we also have a sun that blinds when looked at and is also the primary source of lighting for the entire world. This sun then needs to properly diffuse through the new volumetric clouds.

we can’t just work towards that like we can with hybrid supply which utilizes some of the old with some of the new. 

Weather + fishbowl need to be rolled back. Get players back in game, paying and playing, then use the financial resources after 1.36/64bit to update our client and integrate truSKY. Do that along with the texture work that is look very positive in the ESRGAN thread and you’ll grow the game’s population a lot more than you will bickering about which super realistic suppression or some other hokey fake realism effect will be the next cool thing for infantry. 

bring back the pilot and tanker numbers and infantry numbers increase with them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TOE is just another word for spawnlist. It's not going away, nor are tiers (cycles). 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, madrebel said:

The 109 was castrated years before weather came and the cannons have sucked since the clip bug was rightfully fixed. scotsman’s munitions audit followed by the damage model audits likely resolve the cannons not working and the 109 while still not ‘right’ (needs to be more tail heavy, likely needs a control forces at speed pass too) it’s significantly better than it was.

The 109 castration did chase some out of the game but we had significant numbers still on both sides. Weather absolutely gutted the number of pilots.

i hear often “i like weather, it breaks things up”. Those break ups you like happen to coincide at times with squad nights - shafting a group of players at the same time. That leads to heard mentality with a negative frame of reference. You don’t design that stuff into a game and then wonder why people leave.

the reason weather needs to be removed is there is no ability to move forward until such time as we get a significant overhaul with the client renderer. The ‘clouds’ we have aren’t clouds its just a thick layer of crap. What we need is a proper volumetric cloud system, like the one I linked, AND - proper lighting so we also have a sun that blinds when looked at and is also the primary source of lighting for the entire world. This sun then needs to properly diffuse through the new volumetric clouds.

we can’t just work towards that like we can with hybrid supply which utilizes some of the old with some of the new. 

Weather + fishbowl need to be rolled back. Get players back in game, paying and playing, then use the financial resources after 1.36/64bit to update our client and integrate truSKY. Do that along with the texture work that is look very positive in the ESRGAN thread and you’ll grow the game’s population a lot more than you will bickering about which super realistic suppression or some other hokey fake realism effect will be the next cool thing for infantry. 

bring back the pilot and tanker numbers and infantry numbers increase with them. 

I am not qualified to disagree (or agree) with the 109 stuff.  If fixing the weather brings back pilots, then I'm all for it, and will join your lobbying efforts to that end.

 

The only thing I'll gripe about in your last post is your nasty habit of not capitalizing Infantry, which, like God, (unless being taken in vain), should always be capitalized.  ;)

 

S!

Edited by augetout

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can somebody explain the fish-bowl effect for pilots? Honest question, just have no clue how to relate it to the flying I do. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

go to 7k+ (in meters) and locate the ground ie the "Earth"..what do you see?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** the reason weather needs to be removed

Eh, no way.  Real life has weather.

Are you seriously saying the weather should be clear and sunny every day?

If so, all the credit I given you for some of your previous posts has just gone down the drain... the toilet one.....

Weather is a real life factor... deal with it... sheesh.

Edited by delems
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The game badly needs zoned or banded weather.

Per algorithm, always clear blue skies in one or more game-relevant zones. Varied weather otherwise. And, the weather would move across the map...often west to east, but not always.

So, highly weather-bothered air players always could play; and, players that like complicated weather would get it.

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

*** the reason weather needs to be removed

Eh, no way.  Real life has weather.

Are you seriously saying the weather should be clear and sunny every day?

If so, all the credit I given you for some of your previous posts has just gone down the drain... the toilet one.....

Weather is a real life factor... deal with it... sheesh.

What we have isnt a close approximation. What we need i already linked. Pilots WANT what i linked, not this hack we have. It’s AWFUL in both looks and in its effects on subscriptions. 

We cant get from here to truesky using stuff we already have. Until we can afford to buy and integrate or create from scratch a proper volumetric cloud/weather/wind system - yes - for the health of the game rip it out!

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

The 109 castration did chase some out of the game but we had significant numbers still on both sides. 

What you lost was all the CAS pilots that no longer had fighter support on the deck with the LW forced to the stratosphere.

Share this post


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

Can somebody explain the fish-bowl effect for pilots? Honest question, just have no clue how to relate it to the flying I do. 

 

Shroud of vision is like a ball with you in the center of the ball
things inline with you, you see out to a decent distance
Now if the thing you are seeing remains at same distance but dives down 100m, it vanishes as it goes outside the curve of the ball.
If ball is touching ground slightly and you look down, you see a little circle of ground, and a bunch of nothing around it.

Ball was a bad shape for an air combat simulation, it's ok for ground.

Before that was changed (we do not know why) your view placed you in a giant cylinder.
If something was close enough, it did not matter if it went up or down, you still saw it.
If you were way up high, you still saw the full cylinder circumference of ground, very low rez at high alt, but still you could see the ground.

Cylinder seemed large enough that something was simply too small to see anymore before it left it.

Some flying, you may not notice, if you are doing a lot of low alt ground attack, you wont notice it, at least not at first.
If you are flying at higher altitudes, trying to intercept RDP, which will be flying above large caliber AA range, you will see it.
Being a few 100m too high or too low can cause you to not see the bombers that you would have before the fishbowl,

And the beyond the fishbowl effect is kind of blah, grey void, you used to see kind of a horizon and then it faded.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, madrebel said:

tell me - whats the average population for red orchestra 2?

https://steamcharts.com/app/35450

oh - right - barely anyone plays. following their design choices sounds like a great idea ...

Please don't bring up player count https://steamcharts.com/app/251950
BTW that's not even Tripwire's most recent title https://steamcharts.com/app/418460
You're just mad because I'm right.

Edited by knucks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol their most recent isnt a ww2 game, and its barely double RO2. Still niche. Meaning, barely any market aka nobody likes ultra fake realism.

Vehicle simulation on the other hand has significant upside, as evidenced by warthunders numbers.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fishbowl is pretty awful. Not impossible to fly but pretty close it it. Eliminating it would do wonders. Weather is actually not that bad TBH, it just needs to be done better with volumetric clouds.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, madrebel said:

Lol their most recent isnt a ww2 game, and its barely double RO2. Still niche. Meaning, barely any market aka nobody likes ultra fake realism.

Vehicle simulation on the other hand has significant upside, as evidenced by warthunders numbers.

To be fair the all time peak on steam for WWIIOL was 448. The best averages were in the 140s at the beginning of the Steam launch and we all thought it was magical. RO2 after all this time still averages in the 440s. If WWIIOL had that “niche” population average from Steam none of us would be complaining about player numbers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.