Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
ian77

Encounter Battles

10 posts in this topic

Probably been suggested before, and bound to be rejected because defenders would have to do something, but..... why does the defense spawn all over town?

Why dont they have to bring some supply from their "FBs"? Maybe a small amount in each depot, and 25% of AB supply,  and the rest comes from "out of town" spawn areas, like an FB but only with that towns supply, numerous enough locations to avoid easy camping. bomb proof, and screened by walls/trees/etc.  AND there would still be the link towns/FBs for supply as well.

 

I am just fed up with the AO grind as it presently stands. If there is no big OP, or a lucky ninja cap or two then there is no progress with an AO. We need to try something else before it is too late.

 

S! Ian 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be a complete disaster... in real life the defenders had prepared defenses already set up. If you had players bring a tank or other heavy equipment from a rear FB it would be way to easy for an attacker to set up and lock down the town. Similarly we have depot spawning because in the first iteration of the game mechanics in 2001/2002 spawning only happened from the AB, so it was easy to camp the town and many tactics revolved around getting as many tanks as possible to rush the AB and pre-camp if before defenders had a chance to respond.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Needs a lot of teamwork to camp the AB, and 4 or 5 farm spawns, and 2 or 3 FBs, plus the all depots in the town. 

I would just like to see the defense have to do something more other than wait for the system to tell them that "the enemy is near X-Town come kill them". It even tells them when the attackers have given up, just in case they cant tell from zero audios or visual contacts. Everything is geared up to spoon feed the defenders, and we are surprised when most players will only defend?

The whole point of Blitzkrieg was to avoid prepared defenses, go around them and cut them off. This game is more WWI than WWII these days with fixed static lines, as the front moves back and forwards over the same few towns day after day. 

Game play is slowly withering, we rely on CQC for capture, and CQC is probably the weakest part of the game. Dropping in a couple of new tanks and planes every six months is not fixing the CQC aspects.

 

S! Ian 

Edited by ian77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maneuver warfare resulted in more casualties per unit time than trench warfare did both in ww1, and ww2. It wasn't that they drove around all obstacles, it's that they smashed through weaker parts of the defensive line, then advanced rapidly past the front. Other defensive units then try to get back to where they can block advance (or are cut off and captured), repeat.

That level of play cannot be replicated by a game with no AI units, and a higher level game.

The paradigm of this game nods to "supply" and larger scale units, but the reality is that they are player serially by a handful of people. It is possible in ww2ol for a small group of people to drive from as far away as is required for them to spawn the stuff they want (assuming an AO is placed at the right time), and capture a town with multiple Brigades supposedly there, with literally zero fight, right? Or are AOs only possible in towns directly adjacent to a Brigade? (never got into the HC stuff).

The map is a meta game right now (winning the campaign), but in reality the point of the larger map should be to set up novel tactical engagements (all that really matters, IMO).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, tater said:

Maneuver warfare resulted in more casualties per unit time than trench warfare did both in ww1, and ww2. It wasn't that they drove around all obstacles, it's that they smashed through weaker parts of the defensive line, then advanced rapidly past the front. Other defensive units then try to get back to where they can block advance (or are cut off and captured), repeat.

That level of play cannot be replicated by a game with no AI units, and a higher level game.

The paradigm of this game nods to "supply" and larger scale units, but the reality is that they are player serially by a handful of people. It is possible in ww2ol for a small group of people to drive from as far away as is required for them to spawn the stuff they want (assuming an AO is placed at the right time), and capture a town with multiple Brigades supposedly there, with literally zero fight, right? Or are AOs only possible in towns directly adjacent to a Brigade? (never got into the HC stuff).

The map is a meta game right now (winning the campaign), but in reality the point of the larger map should be to set up novel tactical engagements (all that really matters, IMO).

My perspective is that the bolded part was exactly what Rats 1.0 were shooting for, a great big continuous shooter scenario generator that required minimal reffing/GMing- set it in motion and let the players create the weird.

ToEs only could really replicate that smash and encircle thing when one side's HC was incompetent or not there, hence TZ3 cutoffs and squawking and here we are with town-based supply.  No, we were never gonna have the 1000s required to literally have it all be tactical maneuver warfare.  So AOs and nolinky-no cappy, to force battles instead of Opelkriegs in areas more sparsely populated then Wyoming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ian77 said:

Needs a lot of teamwork to camp the AB, and 4 or 5 farm spawns, and 2 or 3 FBs, plus the all depots in the town. 

I would just like to see the defense have to do something more other than wait for the system to tell them that "the enemy is near X-Town come kill them". It even tells them when the attackers have given up, just in case they cant tell from zero audios or visual contacts. Everything is geared up to spoon feed the defenders, and we are surprised when most players will only defend?

The whole point of Blitzkrieg was to avoid prepared defenses, go around them and cut them off. This game is more WWI than WWII these days with fixed static lines, as the front moves back and forwards over the same few towns day after day. 

Game play is slowly withering, we rely on CQC for capture, and CQC is probably the weakest part of the game. Dropping in a couple of new tanks and planes every six months is not fixing the CQC aspects.

 

S! Ian 

You're probably gonna hate this, but I largely agree with you.

 

My perspective is that where the game design went wrong was revolving the gameplay around logistical nodal spawn castles.

 

Every battle devolves into an urban fight, where Axis infantry weaponry has superiority and Allied all-purpose infantry assault tanks are well suited whereas Axis tanks are largely about the experten countryside fight to smash rear logistics.  A lot of the squawking about this infantry rule/count and that tank list revolves around these needs to cross territory then close with the nodal facilities to cap.  Different mixes of the rules and lists will favor one side or the other based on equipment and learned preferences.

 

If I were in charge of speccing WWIIOL 2.0, one primary design goal would be to orient the game more towards destroying enemy forces rather then node capture.  The roads and rails and harbors and AFs and rail stations and factories would still count, in fact I would have them be more meaningful then just node cap or node link definition, but they would serve to deliver resupply tickets to the forces, not towns or town-locked brigades.

 

To the last man town fights would still occur, but only if the defender is willing to risk force annihilation from tactical encirclement.

 

I also suggested a style of ToEs for exactly this purpose with a simple rule (at least conceptually)- no brigade can be on the front line.  The default would be a meeting battle, with defender FBs going up the instant the AO went on.  Of course, that ship has sailed.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ian77 said:

why does the defense spawn all over town?

Because, in an attack on an established position, the defender was already in place.
It would be hard to say "You are not here, you have to spawn someplace else" when you were garrisoned in the town to begin with?

Now in a counter attack, the opposite is true
Defenders are only trickling supply in and have to defend with the remains of the attacking force, or what they can speed in from the rear town

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anathema to many (least in the past), but a persistent world, trying to replicate even the most coarse ww2-like warfare requires more, not less AI. Not the awful AI in ww2ol, but actual units doing what they do (at least defensively). That will be some future game, and it will be awesome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, tater said:

Anathema to many (least in the past), but a persistent world, trying to replicate even the most coarse ww2-like warfare requires more, not less AI. Not the awful AI in ww2ol, but actual units doing what they do (at least defensively). That will be some future game, and it will be awesome.

I doubt more combat AI would be well received.
Logistic AI in the form of visible and interdictable supply deliveries in the form of trucks, ships, maybe even planes and garrison movements between towns, sure.

AI tanks and infantrymen though, that move through the battlefield and come after you?
Probably not, unless it was totally ineffective, there would always be the perception that the AI was too good, never missed etc.
And there is also the problem of things like the AI deciding to bonzai charge bringing sudden notice to your otherwise stealthy location and such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/19/2019 at 2:28 PM, Merlin51 said:

I doubt more combat AI would be well received.

Yeah, always is, but I think it's needed, frankly.

To start I'd dump all the current AI, and make player placed versions, just extant inf avatars, in one of their 3 poses, and easy to kill as a player, but the non-deployed versions can shoot nearly (or actually) 360 (albeit at not a long range). They would have a FOV (where they can detect targets), a field of fire (FoF), and a max range they'll shoot. I'd set the FOV to be whatever it is for a player, plus left/right glance, and the FoF would be 270 degrees for standing, 240 for crouched, and maybe 90 degrees for prone.

There would be more than we have now (usually 12-16+ per town including AAA right now, right?), but they would die easier, but also be more useful. Persistent, as well, so HC can have peopel set up defenses well in advance, and not just in the usual places. Perhaps if a side is underpop, it gets to deploy extras (those would not be persistent).

On 5/19/2019 at 2:28 PM, Merlin51 said:

Logistic AI in the form of visible and interdictable supply deliveries in the form of trucks, ships, maybe even planes and garrison movements between towns, sure.

This was always suggested, and is a great idea. AI trucks, etc. They should also go to the MSPs, honestly, back and forth. Ie: player drives truck, sets up MSP, and in doing so he despawns, and a new AI truck appears and drives to the FB (beelines for a road, then takes road, BTW). If that truck gets killed, the MSP throttles to a fixed spawn list (about a truck full of inf, call it a squad), then when the last inf is spawned, the MSP disappears. Could be balanced via the number of AI trucks per MSP, perhaps (more than one, and all must be killed to stop MSP, and the number might vary with server pop).

This would make behind the lines MSPs basically impossible, since the truck would go to the nearest road, then follow the road right through town. If a bridge is required, and the bridge is blown, the truck drives off the bridge, and is destroyed. Bridges now sometimes matter for MSPs.

On 5/19/2019 at 2:28 PM, Merlin51 said:

AI tanks and infantrymen though, that move through the battlefield and come after you?
Probably not, unless it was totally ineffective, there would always be the perception that the AI was too good, never missed etc.

Ideally at least AI infantry would be a thing, but I don't see that as likely, except perhpas in a game engine that already includes that. People's perceptions about this are usually wrong, however. In my experience with games that have players and AI mixed, the presence of even a single real human in a group of AI changes everything about the interaction. In flight sims like IL-2, for example, you get pretty good at beating the AI in campaign mode. Online is what online dogfighting always is, and online scenarios with a mix... is really cool. You cannot take the AI for granted, because it might be a person. It makes scenario style play much, much better, with only a few actual players required.

My idea of moving AI troops would be something closer to the way Ghost Recon was. A player has a fire team, and he is basically able to control all of them. They are very limited in what they can be told to do, and mostly serve as cover fire for the unit the player is actively controlling. Every inf in ww2ol actually being 4 guys would be a massive game changer. One player acting alone is a coordinated fire team, just 3 people cooperating is a squad. Imagine holding ground you have taken because you can concentrate on what to assault next, and you have units tasked with simply keeping ei from walking up behind you and killing you. I can dream, anyway...

On 5/19/2019 at 2:28 PM, Merlin51 said:


And there is also the problem of things like the AI deciding to bonzai charge bringing sudden notice to your otherwise stealthy location and such.

Yeah, hence I'd opt for player controlled AI, that is very strictly limited in the way it can ever act. It advances only where you tell it to. It fires defensively automatically unless ordered to be silent (ei in FoV), and it can shoot where the player aims it (and a range around that slightly) in an offensive way (a base of fire, for covering fire, for example). For the AI units the player controls... full friendly fire (since he'd only be killing himself). No having a LMG spray the door, or a mortar drop HE near the door and running through that same door.

 

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.