• Announcements

    • CHIMM

      RAT Chat Sunday 12/8 3pm server time!!!!   12/07/2019

      CRS is working overtime preparing and setting up the NEW SERVERS at the Portland colocation. This Sunday, December 8th, at 3:00 pm CST/9:00 pm GMT (Greenwich Mean Time). XOOM and the RATs are hosting a live chat discussing the move, and what services will be temporarily impacted in the process. Live chat link will be provided in discord channels when available. We look forward to chatting with you!
tater

Hey Rats, what changes are _possible_?

47 posts in this topic

It would be nice to hear from volunteers/devs about what is theoretically possible to change/improve in terms of gameplay(sorry if that was posted ages ago and I don't know where to find it).

I see people (newb/vet alike) posting good ideas for improvements, but many are likely completely impossible for the limited time devs have. From a gameplay standpoint, I think certain changes would improve the attractiveness of the game. Eye candy and FPS aspects have long since left this game in the dust, seems like the way to shine is via improved gameplay.

Ideally I'd want to know what is possible in the way of changes in:

Capture mechanics: 1. could be done, but hard to code, and 2. possible with (relatively) minimal effort.

Spawn list variables (ie: can MSPs have fixed lists, the disappear, can spawn lists in such a facility be removed from supply, etc).

Player placed facilities (could a PPO have a capture texture?).

Etc.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should have mentioned that I asked the question above so that people posting kooky suggestions (I'm a fan of kooky suggestions!) don't bother if they know that the suggestion is flat out not on the table in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a good clue as to what is feasible given the resources can be found in the roadmap, and in the in-game polls.

I will say this:  If the current version of CRS had anything resembling the resources the original crew did, this game would improve by leaps and bounds in a quick fashion.  I'm not denigrating the original CRS crew by saying that.  The current CRS has the ability/willingness to learn from the 18 years of development to this game.  All that is currently lacking is the proper amount of resources to get all that CRS wants done, accomplished.

All in all, this is still the best game I've ever played, and the best gaming community I have ever dealt with.  The passion of community members is clearly visible, and most (not all) approach this game as it should be approached:  Warts and all, the best WW2 game ever, still looking to get better.

CRS has never been more responsive to the community, and has never shown the willingness the current bunch has shown to make changes (resources allowing), to improve the in-game experience of all players.

I'll leave specific answers to those far more qualified than I to answer them.

S!

7 people like this

Share this post


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

I think a good clue as to what is feasible given the resources can be found in the roadmap, and in the in-game polls.

I've read the roadmap (a couple, actually), and I can see some of what is possible. Some things like new terrain (city), and speedtree are certainly interesting, but I was thinking along the lines of game design (meaning gameplay).

Terrain can help. If all kinds of city blocks are being changed, does giving them a capture texture on the floor make any sense? Particularly areas fully in the open? (that would be a big change in those limited areas, anyway).

Can speedtree be used to make more forest areas impassable? Not entirely, perhaps laced with dirt roads that vehicles can drive on, but they can't really leave the roads?

The new pop based AOs are interesting, I wonder if that can change CP mechanics...

I have loads of questions, but I worry most are simply impossible. Generally speaking I think people proposing changes in gameplay love the game, they just want it to be better (because being better might make it more popular).

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anything is possible with enough time, effort, and resources.  

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, B2K said:

Anything is possible with enough time, effort, and resources.  

I figured that, lol. I meant given current resources. I was looking at the roadmap, and was trying to think about gameplay changes that would not be incredibly difficult. Obviously changing timers, etc, has to be really easy, but I was thinking about things like player-placed capture objects (as an example).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's actually hard to tell how difficult something will be until you delve really deep into the code.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, B2K said:

Anything is possible with enough time, effort, and resources.  

W00T! Parachuting dogs comes before Christmas. Next after that is Motorcycles by following Easter. B2K said so… Awesome!

Next big question is, when will we have Snipers?

Share this post


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

It's actually hard to tell how difficult something will be until you delve really deep into the code.

Yeah, that's true, I guess. I keep spitballing the same I deas I have for decades, but I honestly don't have the first clue if they are just small changes to what exists, or massively complex rewrites. I was just hoping for a way to reign my suggestions in a little so they'd be closer to realistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep the ideas coming, we do read them.

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

Keep the ideas coming, we do read them.

Will do, it's hard to get me to shut up, lol.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically just look back of what has been done in the last 4 year and try to see if you can map or see similar points..

Almost everything related to new units can be done by CRS.

The same with supply, new brigades, PPOs..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, pbveteran said:

Almost everything related to new units can be done by CRS.

The same with supply, new brigades, PPOs..

Yeah, and I don't particularly care about new units. I'm interested in new gameplay.

The new brigades present a possibility, as do PPOs.

For new unit types, I might be inclined to let units stack, then break everything down into even smaller groups of troops.  Before MSPs were a thing outside of training, I said to anti-MSP people (many considered them teleporting armies---which they are if MSP are allowed to ever deploy offsides, so they were partially right) that in fact ALL spawning should be from MSPs, but that the spawn list in the MSP should belong to that MSP, and if the spawn is destroyed, the remaining units inside are lost (pulling the MSP would result in the units being unavailable for some period of time while that unit pulls back and is reorganized).

Ideally towns vs units need not be connected as much. A town could be a unit HQ, but the spawns might be elsewhere, nearby.

Allow players (HC?) to place AI, and dump some or all of the town AI (similar units to the AI we have now, but as a persistent PPO that lasts until destroyed, or the unit it belongs to moves). I can think of all kinds of things that might be useful to improve gameplay.

I wonder if it would be possible (without a metric ton of work) to make a capturable PPO?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/11/2019 at 5:20 PM, B2K said:

Anything is possible with enough time, effort, and resources.  

The idea was to get a short list of things that were possible with the minimum of time, effort, and resources.

I was thinking about the idea of a persistent DFMS.

I tested a little (correct me if I am wrong), but if I make a FMS, then leave the mission with no one else in the mission, the FMS goes away, right?

This makes sense as if I make some other mission, elsewhere (or go on one and have ML passed to me) there would be confusion.

One issue I don't understand for sure: say I make an FMS from a depot, and that depot gets capped, my FMS disappears, right?

Is there a way to add dummy players for each side that are always in each town (one per spawn building?)? Someone on defense could then grab a truck, set an FMS, then pass ML to "Dinant1" or "DinantDefense1" and they could leave the mission, and start a new mission, then pass that to DinantDefense2, etc.

These defensive spawn points would have no ML, so could not be pulled as I just suggested them, which is a downside.

When the FMS is blown it's gone, and when the facility is capped, the FMS is gone. If the facility is recapped, then player "_Town_DefenseX_"is once again available to have ML passed to him, making the FMS persistent (until destroyed).

How hard would this be?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/11/2019 at 8:38 PM, Augetout said:

I think a good clue as to what is feasible given the resources can be found in the roadmap, and in the in-game polls.

I will say this:  If the current version of CRS had anything resembling the resources the original crew did, this game would improve by leaps and bounds in a quick fashion.  I'm not denigrating the original CRS crew by saying that.  The current CRS has the ability/willingness to learn from the 18 years of development to this game.  All that is currently lacking is the proper amount of resources to get all that CRS wants done, accomplished.

All in all, this is still the best game I've ever played, and the best gaming community I have ever dealt with.  The passion of community members is clearly visible, and most (not all) approach this game as it should be approached:  Warts and all, the best WW2 game ever, still looking to get better.

CRS has never been more responsive to the community, and has never shown the willingness the current bunch has shown to make changes (resources allowing), to improve the in-game experience of all players.

I'll leave specific answers to those far more qualified than I to answer them.

S!

Well said Sir! S!

 

Share this post


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

The idea was to get a short list of things that were possible with the minimum of time, effort, and resources.

I was thinking about the idea of a persistent DFMS.

I tested a little (correct me if I am wrong), but if I make a FMS, then leave the mission with no one else in the mission, the FMS goes away, right?

This makes sense as if I make some other mission, elsewhere (or go on one and have ML passed to me) there would be confusion.

One issue I don't understand for sure: say I make an FMS from a depot, and that depot gets capped, my FMS disappears, right?

Is there a way to add dummy players for each side that are always in each town (one per spawn building?)? Someone on defense could then grab a truck, set an FMS, then pass ML to "Dinant1" or "DinantDefense1" and they could leave the mission, and start a new mission, then pass that to DinantDefense2, etc.

These defensive spawn points would have no ML, so could not be pulled as I just suggested them, which is a downside.

When the FMS is blown it's gone, and when the facility is capped, the FMS is gone. If the facility is recapped, then player "_Town_DefenseX_"is once again available to have ML passed to him, making the FMS persistent (until destroyed).

How hard would this be?

 

If you have these sleepers for defenses we would need them for the attack too. Would you want that? Pretty sure the sleeper defense fru(s) would always be to the FB(s).  

Even if the defender turtles got their way, the persistent frus would be attack or defense in the split cities - who wants a permanent mole OP with no need to tie up a single attacker hour after hour, potentially day after day...

Share this post


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

If you have these sleepers for defenses we would need them for the attack too. Would you want that? Pretty sure the sleeper defense fru(s) would always be to the FB(s).  

Yeah, I'm fine with that, except we already have attack FMS.

A few points, they don't have to be the FRU (that's the crates that fits inside of a bush, right?), they can always be FMS so they are visible.

Also, they can have max deployment range from a friendly facility, and no more than 1 per facility (ie: 1 for each AB, and each Depot). If you take the enemy FB, opening your own, then blow any DFMS already near your new FB. For "attack" persistent FMS, you get only the one for the one facility, the FB. So the attacker can set their attack FMS up, and it does stay put. The enemy can blow it, or they can leave the FMS and blow the FB, which then takes out that persistent FMS.

In addition, does an FB count as an enemy facility? Could it (then exclusion zone could apply). Wasting DFMS near FB might make some sense, but taking out a FB will then involve immediately securing the new one---which I actually sort of want.

These are persistent UNTIL DESTROYED, or until facility ownership changes.

Quote

Even if the defender turtles got their way, the persistent frus would be attack or defense in the split cities - who wants a permanent mole OP with no need to tie up a single attacker hour after hour, potentially day after day...

Huh? How? You have to own a town to make a persistent FMS in this scheme. If you own part of a large city outright (say Germans own Antwerp North), they each spawn facility they own in that part can have a persistent FMS. Once the owning facility is capped, that FMS goes away. These can still have exclusion ranges from enemy facilities as FMS do now, between the 2 settings, this should cover your issue. Besides, you simply blow the FMS, and it's not there any more.

 

These are regular FMS, but they are "owned" by an imaginary player to maintain the mission. Each town has imaginary players that own defensive missions for Town_Depot1, Town_Depot2, etc, Town_SAB, Town_NAB, etc.  Maybe a player makes a new mission, sets an FMS, then passes leadership to "Dinant_AB" and then that "player" owns the FMS, and it stays up until the FMS is blown, or the AB changes hands.

Edited by tater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now we have:

Town A ----- FB_A<-B ----------- FB_A->B -----Town B

This persistent DFMS would often result in:

Town A --- DFMS_A --- FB_A<-B ----------- FB_A->B --- DFMS_B --- Town B

You capture Town B, and blow FB_A->B, which opens your attack FB to town A (FB_A<-B). Town A likely has one of their DFMS set to be between Town A and each attacking FB they are worried about, so when you form at attack at FB_A<-B, you likely look for the DFMS as you go. Any you find, you mark, and send troops to take out. If this happens before EWS, this is likely trivial, but it does slow you by a few minutes. Since this would become SOP, people would likely not put those DFMS in exactly close/likely places, instead, you'd want to put them places where you'll want to have defensive force to blunt an attack.

The goal here is to get defensive fighting out of town a little. When your side is on defense in general, or when you are simply doing the work of defense (SOMEONE has to do it, after all), it is crappy gameplay to run to a CP, then guard it. Fun night, staring at a wall. I'd rather spawn where I get to move around, and shoot things, instead of staring at a sliver of space, shooting when someone walks in front of me.

That part still happens, but at least there's some fun before it becomes boring/frustrating work vs warpy ei (we're all warpy).

Share this post


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

Yeah, I'm fine with that, except we already have attack FMS.

 

And we already have defense FMS.....

Basically you want the ability for a single player to be able to riddle any and every possible future AO with a myriad of DFMS's across the entire map - setting an unmanned persistent (until hunted down and destroyed by a real player/team of players) DFMS from every single depot and AB in every single town.  How the hell will any new guy know which of the 10,000 missions he should spawn on? It is just madness, all we will be doing is hunting and setting unmanned FMSs

Share this post


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

 

The goal here is to get defensive fighting out of town a little. When your side is on defense in general, or when you are simply doing the work of defense (SOMEONE has to do it, after all), it is crappy gameplay to run to a CP, then guard it. Fun night, staring at a wall. I'd rather spawn where I get to move around, and shoot things, instead of staring at a sliver of space, shooting when someone walks in front of me.

 

So dont sit on defense all night, take turns guarding, or better yet get on the AO - way too many turtles in game these days, just ask Matamor! :) 

 

S!

Share this post


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

And we already have defense FMS.....

No, we don't. EWS goes off. Some players have to notice this, despawn where they are to get eyes on the town, and often times, even the first person spawning in gets shot at by ei already in town. Maybe you then grab a truck and drive out for DFMS setup, but the enemy is already around.

Quote

Basically you want the ability for a single player to be able to riddle any and every possible future AO with a myriad of DFMS's across the entire map - setting an unmanned persistent (until hunted down and destroyed by a real player/team of players) DFMS from every single depot and AB in every single town.  How the hell will any new guy know which of the 10,000 missions he should spawn on? It is just madness, all we will be doing is hunting and setting unmanned FMSs

I want to attack people away from towns, since fights in town SUCK most of the time. Anything inside 50m (*100?) is warpy garbage.

The UI is supposedly changing anyway, BTW. I would suggest having the "active missions" show the AO/DOs with total activity, then once you select one, it shows the missions. The persistent DFMS are in effect auto generated missions, which should exist anyway for every depot, since the handful of defenders need to run all over town checking CPs from the second they spawn in, because troops magically infiltrate every town (towns are not attacked 99% of the time in this game, they are infiltrated).

36 minutes ago, ian77 said:

So dont sit on defense all night, take turns guarding, or better yet get on the AO - way too many turtles in game these days, just ask Matamor! :)

I do. I cap... then I guard what I cap. It's functionally identical play to defense as the game is now.

People who play tanks a lot might have a different POV, since they, you know, stay out of town for at least part of the fight. The infantry game is rush in, cap something. If everyone runs out as soon as the CP falls, then you end up having to recap it. If you stay, you guard, and possibly die, and have to then effectively recap it. Once you're in town attack/defense are IDENTICAL, except the defender of a spawnable can get to the CP faster (more likely for the town defender as a function of linked towns).

I'd add that your attitude is like many people years ago. People are expected to sit around in empty towns guarding if they want to not be softcapped, I guess. Fun, really fun.

Otherwise, every single defense is pretty much reactive. Enemy starts taking town, defense gets people to zerg in and throws it back, or they don't. Note that this means every single attack is the same as well.

Boring. A good persistent, DFMS setup could be something that requires an attacker to deal with in a way that's actually, you know, an ATTACK.

 

Edited by tater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Visual dmg for ATG and AAA , that really can't be to complicated . 

A simple secondary explosion like we get when we blow AI would be a good start to just show the other side both commander and gunner have been eliminated.  

And then go from there as time permits.

My biggest pet peeve and probably the one thing that had me at near rage quitting the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, dre21 said:

Visual dmg for ATG and AAA , that really can't be to complicated . 

A simple secondary explosion like we get when we blow AI would be a good start to just show the other side both commander and gunner have been eliminated.  

And then go from there as time permits.

I'm torn by this, frankly. I'd like that to be the case, but then again, the gun crew should also not be limited to only doing one job or the other. You could not load and aim at the same time, but with one 1 gunner you could load, then aim, then fire, right?

If they spend any work on the AAA/ATGs, I'd make it so that infantry can join a gun if the crew is dead, if the gun was still functional. A gun that gets sprayed with MG fire might no longer have a crew, but the GUN is just fine, and any nearby infantry could simply man it as required.

The same goes for tank crews, BTW, if 1 guy is killed, was it possible for someone to swap places at all? If yes, then that should be a thing as well.

I'd use that opportunity to let players take over the AI as well...

Also, gun crews should be able to seek cover (during which time they can't shoot the gun, obviously).

They need the small arms they all carried, as well.

Just now, dre21 said:

My biggest pet peeve and probably the one thing that had me at near rage quitting the game.

I would call it an abstraction that represents the fact that guns are too easy to take out, and cannot be remanned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.