• Announcements

    • HEAVY265

      New Forum Lead!   11/17/2019

      It's with great pleasure to announce B2K as the new Forum Lead.   I am very confident he will be good for the forums, he has great ideas and direction for the future of the forums.
      Good luck sir and GOD speed.
delems

Infantry spawn building (SP).

167 posts in this topic

On 5/20/2019 at 6:04 PM, Kilemall said:

Or, a defender absolutely camping the living heck out of a spawnable or warp depot.

I had forgotten about warping until I saw an FMS with orders to WARP. That should not be a thing, frankly.

 

On 5/20/2019 at 7:20 PM, xohorvath said:

Why shouldn't a defender have an elevated position to snipe from? I think depot snipers are relatively useless-however, having the high ground defensively is obviously important.  Perhaps the flag should change colors when the attacker looks at the flag. 

As I said in another thread just now, the psychology of depot snipers is easy to understand. It's literally the only place in game where you cannot be shot in the back.

It might be interesting to count what % of inf we see on the map standing in the depots vs capping, guarding (yuck), or otherwise out of the spawns. Yeah, you get killed a lot if you stand in the depots, but at least you know where the shot came from, and will come from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tater, is there any aspect of our game that you like? 

 

I think warping is a result of being able to rtb, I doubt it was a design element to evade the defenders sniping from their depots.

Share this post


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

Tater, is there any aspect of our game that you like? 

I've honestly liked the idea if what it could be more than what it ever has been, frankly. I supported it subscriptively long after I had decided that it was unlikely to change.

What I like is when it feels immersive. The other day I spawned into a battle (AO got pulled shortly after) where the FMS was in a farm compound just outside town. It was just exactly the right situation in game to actually feel right... farm compound looked better than town does, enemy mostly THAT way, with reasonable paths to either flank them or be flanked by them, without feeling like they were teleporting an army behind us. It was fun, and winning/losing the actual town made zero difference to me, I was more interested in local problems (what to do about that really well-placed MG34 that we couldn't really shoot at, etc).

That;s when it's fun, my goal in suggestions is to increase the number of such events in game, nothing more, really. If the game would be better off without my sub, I can play F2P and complain regardless if you like.

 

Quote

I think warping is a result of being able to rtb, I doubt it was a design element to evade the defenders sniping from their depots.

Yeah, it is, and it is required to clear the depot (which could simply MIA anyone left in the depot XX seconds after it is capped, instead).

I don't like warping as an exploit, because it fuels the MSPs on the wrong side of town. Generally (not always) linked depots are on the side that the linked town is on. Reasonably, all attacks come roughly from the direction where the enemy actually is (those enemy held towns). In game, they come from all directions. With warping, every depot can in effect be a spawnable, and the 360 nature of battles is honestly my biggest issue withthe game. I think that fixing that alone would be a huge, positive change (it would make warping not matter at all as a side effect).

Edited by tater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd add that my comment about the depot snipers and WHY they stay there is right. I think that if players had some sense of a front, even within a town, that would help get them outside.

Note that fronts are not a sharp line, and in town, such a front will have a mixed area that's huge. In the tiny towns in this game, the mixed area of friend/enemy is likely a large % of town (it's probably related to weapon effective range, and towns are just a few hundred m across). Actually, I wonder if that is a chunk of the problem...

I've observed that the most fun fights (to me, anyway) are with CPs separated by a few hundred m from the rest of town. In short, just outside typical engagement distances for inf. Maybe the problem is simply that towns are too small for there to even be the possibility of any sense of safety/order even on the "rear" side of town.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

***  because it fuels the MSPs on the wrong side of town

Hence, why a good idea to see if there is a way to make a frontline, and not allow FMS to set in enemy territory.

Then, can keep warping, which is needed btw to restock/oversupply.

 

Share this post


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

Then, can keep warping, which is needed btw to restock/oversupply.

Why is restock/oversupply that requires player effort a thing? (I'm asking the universe more than you, lol)

It seems like exactly the sort of boring, repetitive work that we would want a tool---a computer, say---to do for us ;) 

Presumably it's a way to work around brigade movement speeds at the "map" level, and the fact that every town now has a HUGE garrison? Seems like they could make the map troop units ("brigades," even though they are far smaller than a real brigade, unsure why they even used that word) far smaller, but have more, and more types. Then they could have the movement times changed somewhat, and you overstock/resupply by moving units at the map level.
 

Share this post


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

***  because it fuels the MSPs on the wrong side of town

Hence, why a good idea to see if there is a way to make a frontline, and not allow FMS to set in enemy territory.

Then, can keep warping, which is needed btw to restock/oversupply.

 

You don't need warp to either restock or oversupply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** You don't need warp to either restock or oversupply.

Uhm, please explain then how you would do it?

Considering I know 5 ways to resupply/overstock units, and everyone of them require an RTB... I'd like to learn of a 6th way that doesn't require an RTB.

If you can't RTB at a facility, then you can't resupply or overstock.

And definition of RTB to a facility is warping, unless you happen to be RTB to your original spawn point.

 

Edited by delems

Share this post


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

*** You don't need warp to either restock or oversupply.

Uhm, please explain then how you would do it?

Considering I know 5 ways to resupply/overstock units, and everyone of them require an RTB... I'd like to learn of a 6th way that doesn't require an RTB.

If you can't RTB at a facility, then you can't resupply or overstock.

You need to RTB to overstock/re-supply, you don't need to warp.   There is a difference between the two.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** You need to RTB, you don't need to warp.

No, the definition of warp IS to RTB to a facility different than the facility you originated from

(actually, guess it doesn't even have to be different -- unless you trying to resupply or overstock, then it has to be different)

Ask merlin, he knows.

Edited by delems

Share this post


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

*** You need to RTB, you don't need to warp.

No, the definition of warp IS to RTB to a facility different than the facility you originated from.

 

No - 'Warp' = You 'RTB' at the maximum distance allowed,  then spawn said unit from that RTB location, without running it into town...... the unit 'warps' to the spawn point from the RTB point.  

If  you are re-supplying/overstocking - you don't need to Respawn - thus you are not warping.  

We can eliminate 'warp' by setting the RTB radius to something ridiculously small (like 1-5m).  We cannot eliminate RTB, because without it the game breaks.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, semantics; set warp distance to 2m to remove it--- but you still have to warp in the end to resupply or overstock.

Though you kinda right, you generally don't spawn right back in  - so in a sense it isn't warping, but very subtle.

 

Edited by delems

Share this post


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

Ok, semantics; set warp distance to 2m to remove it--- but you still have to warp in the end to resupply or overstock.

 

It's not semantics - it's a key and crucial difference between the two.  You RTB to resupply - not warp (because you are not using that particular unit anymore).  Please don't conflate the terms, it's not as complicated as you make it out to be.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is, the act of RTBing in of itself IS the warp.

 

If one chooses to spawn back in or not is immaterial, the warp has already happened.

Warping does not imply you have to spawn back in.

In fact, there are many times I do warp and do not spawn back in.

RTB = WARP, it is the same thing.

 

So, restocking and resupply must have warp since that is the definition of RTBing to a facility.

 

Edited by delems

Share this post


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

My point is, the act of RTBing in of itself IS the warp.

 

If one chooses to spawn back in or not is immaterial, the warp has already happened.

Warping does not imply you have to spawn back in.

In fact, there are many times I do warp and do not spawn back in.

RTB = WARP, it is the same thing.

 

So, restocking and resupply must have warp since that is the definition of RTBing to a facility.

 

and I'm telling you it's not.   The Act of RTB is just that RTB.  It is not the same thing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, we'll agree to disagree :)

There is no functional difference, maybe a usage difference, but not in function.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@B2K I agree with @delems here. If you like, we can simply not call it "warping," but in future we can call it teleporting.

I still don't like it.

If you RTB to a facility in town from an FMS on the WRONG side of town (areas that should be our rear), that's something hinky, regardless of what you call it.

Say an AO last for many hours. We control all the towns N, S, and W, the the Germans control the town E. They have an FMS West, which we never blow for argument), and they warp (whatever) to the W CP, then fight from there. That makes no sense, where did those troops come from? At the E CP, they came from the areas to the German rear---which they obviously control. We desperately need on-sides rules for MSP, that alone fixes so very much, IMO.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, tater said:

Why is restock/oversupply that requires player effort a thing? (I'm asking the universe more than you, lol)

It seems like exactly the sort of boring, repetitive work that we would want a tool---a computer, say---to do for us ;) 

Presumably it's a way to work around brigade movement speeds at the "map" level, and the fact that every town now has a HUGE garrison? Seems like they could make the map troop units ("brigades," even though they are far smaller than a real brigade, unsure why they even used that word) far smaller, but have more, and more types. Then they could have the movement times changed somewhat, and you overstock/resupply by moving units at the map level.
 

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!

 

Sorry, not laughing at you.  Just that I've had to endure 130+ months of 'oh its so unrealistic to move brigades in', blah blah blah blah blah, JWBS (Jesus Warping Brigade System), never mind the same fast action fanatics couldn't live without whatever version of the FMS for spawning, they whine it changed, and here you are back and pointing out the obvious.

 

This is what happens when you unsub and aren't around to fight for stuff.

 

It would be disingenuous to argue the JWBS critics were the only or primary reason 1.36 was done, but it was a factor.

Edited by Kilemall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** of 'oh its so unrealistic to move brigades in'

Well, it was.

Fixing fallbacks and reversing the move timers may have helped save TOE, but think the hybrid better for now.

Until such time as sufficient players to maybe twiddle with the supply numbers between garrison units and TOE flags and number of TOE divisions.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the problem with an abstraction layer on top of a first person layer.

The obvious solution is likely a nightmare---have the units move on the map as trucks. Trucks that can be destroyed (hopefully easier than the Opel I put at least 15 rounds into (mostly cab, head on) and didn't die ;) ).

If there were "on sides" rules, OTOH, what happens behind the lines might as well be abstracted.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** If there were "on sides" rules

Need this for placing MS, so that way can't place all around town.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

played for 90min, just getting them up is still a problem

only 2 up and they were camped

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, major0noob said:

played for 90min, just getting them up is still a problem

only 2 up and they were camped

That idea about serially adding MSPs farther and farther from origin, and as they are blow, or pulled, the system turns the previous one on would solve a lot of this.

Share this post


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

That idea about serially adding MSPs farther and farther from origin, and as they are blow, or pulled, the system turns the previous one on would solve a lot of this.

it took a year just to go to truck-fru from inf-fru, and 3 to get town supply.

normal ideas and fixes were famously beyond their capabilities, now they can develop but they need years to work. so any idea needs to take this into account: complexity is exponentially time consuming

the games current state is not attracting the subs and income to speed up the dev process. it's out of limbo, but the possibility of a sequel or significant overhauls is not here.

 

in the meantime basic stuff can attract a crowd, and its within their capabilities. just have to identify them...

like going back to the inf-fru, all the work is done for it, and there is a need to improve the battles both; petering out, as well as getting started

 

low hanging fruit... there are easy opportunities for improvements, easy enough to be reversible experiments like the constant ToE changes.

the fb 3x health patch was the exact same issue: easy work, lots of controversy, and easily reversible if it failed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.