Raap

Taking a snow camo on a desert map is well worth the time investment, because it will take the enemy at least the same amount of time to come out of their moment of pondering why someone would pick such a camo--- oh look I just blew up looking at a weird camo choice... Unquestionable logic aside, it would have been nice if all units had their camo alternatives available, and with consistent color patterns (some 'urban' textures look more grey while others more black). It would have be a good improvement if the default camouflage was map-dependent... So on a snow map you'd have the snow camo as the first choice. I know this is possible t set up, but it would require 4 different Level Edit folders, which is more hassle than the end result is worth. The only way to manage this would be via level-placed scripts, but no such thing exists at the moment. Edit: As for infantry camo... A waste of time, since in my opinion, new infantry models should be created first, and that is very unlikely to happen given that redoing the infantry is a mountainous task.

No vehicle bay would be able to build it, so I'd have to arrive from off-map like helicopters, and even then it'd look weird and massive... Bigger than most icebergs on HW. I just don't think a cruiser would work in APB, just like other units like the Helicarrier make no sense to have. Speaking of HW.... You know, the subject this thread was about? Today is the last day I can realistically take feedback under consideration before the planned changes are locked and implemented (and tested). If it's on your mind, post it here now.

It's unfortunate that the match you played ended within 3 minutes due to an infantry rush. I'll be reducing the potential for those early rushes to have a chance at success for the final release. I was apart of that rush, and only got on when I was going to act protection for the engineer that we had to cap the icebergs...needless to say the driver got a major albeit unsaid WTF from me. It's good that it happened, it showed a design flaw. It's just unfortunate that was the only testing to happen all Sunday.

I'll be making changes to the base layouts in such a manner than simply charging the MCT room would be suicide. It will be possible, but you will need to deal with some defenses first which are best taken down via Destroyer/Missile Sub. Being able to simply ignore base defenses will also be impossible with a health/armor nerf, which is something Naval Transports can currently do. The sole purpose of defenses on the map is to prevent the game ending early, and that has clearly been a shortcoming in this version.

It's unfortunate that the match you played ended within 3 minutes due to an infantry rush. I'll be reducing the potential for those early rushes to have a chance at success for the final release.

Server appears to have died while this was set as next map - invalid error, kick by anti cheat. Edit: Intended, it is to help naval units target them from the water.

Gunboats take like two minutes to destroy a Flame Tower on their own, I wouldn't really count that. Remember that balance isn't symmetrical. Nonetheless, the concern of too many defenses has been heard. The final version will have slightly reduced defenses for both bases.

I take the lack of forum overal feedback as a sign that most people are OK with the map? In-game feedback doesn't indicate anything being extremely wrong, and most players tell me they enjoy the unique gameplay. If there is anything else, speak up now or never!

I looked at this in local testing, and I thought it to be an interesting dynamic, so I kept it. See, a helicopter repairing on the Service Depot while taking damage, can be hard to kill. So allowing the Refill Pad SAM site to attack helicopters that hover too high above ground, felt like a good potential way of destroying a camper.

When the test period ends, I'll give people about a day to submit any screenshots they made, and then I'll pick a winner. Exactly when the test period ends is not firm. I'm hoping to push for 1-2 days of extra time.

Good work so far. More people should become aware that this contest is a thing though. Perhaps the map and contest should stay on the server for a day or two more to allow for more submissions and testing. A hotfix *may* make it to the server later today, which will raise the Engineer ammo cost for capturing the buildings, since this is a big issue right now and contributes to creating a severe stalemate in larger population matches.

This is working as intended. The far iceberg is a backdrop containing the (low detail) base that the capturable support structures used to be part of. The reason for the buoys is to highlight the maps playable edge, and is therefore consistent in design to other APB Delta maps that employ the same logic. By having the map funnel players towards the icebergs, it ensures the action happens with consistent regularity and that players cannot so easily (or accidentally) avoid each other. The map is quite large so this is completely necessary. I got good reasons for their names; 1- They are still the Naval Yard and Sub Pen that we know from Red Alert, however due to the maps unique gameplay, I had to go and re-design them (The Naval Yard is created 95% from scratch, the Sub Pen is about 70% new). I applied the word "Advanced" to be consistent with Red Alert universe logic; Buildings that do the same but are better, are "Advanced", such as the Advanced Power Plant. The Sub Pen in particular has a similar visual exterior differentiation to the Power Plant versions. 2- We have no EVA dialog for things such as "Shipyard", and having new EVA messages done is not possible (to my knowledge)... And it didn't seem to make much sense to me when considering what these buildings are (advanced naval buildings), and considering I had the right EVA dialog to work with to create mixes. The staircase pointy shit is actually intended, but I can see why it looks out of place. I'll resolve it either by adding a more clear railing, or flattening it... Likely the latter to make sure infantry don't feel too restricted in their movement. The map name is a server issue, not something I can change. Also, by all means keep posting unit balance feedback. While it is not my area to address unit balance, I could certainly change map elements to work around certain balance issues. For example I noticed that Soviet Shock Troopers got it too easy to lock down both sea and air on the icebergs, so I'm very likely going to remove them from the purchase list. Remember that Hostile Waters is intended to play very differently from other maps, similar to how Domination mode is very different from standard base maps. My objective here is to NOT make this map play like other maps, however, the map must be FUN TO PLAY, and I seem to be getting mixed feedback on this so far (a big point of criticism has been that the capturable objectives are too easy to capture and far too valuable, so for the final version I will make the Refill Pad and Service Depot much more difficult to claim. Thanks for the feedback so far!

Spectating would be cheating I'd say!

Making screenshots without a HUD in live gameplay isn't easy. That's why there is a small reward for the effort. Hopefully some people are up for the challenge!

Press your print screen button, then go to the launcher, select APB, and select the screenshots folder (Or navigate to it: ...\Users\USERNAME\Documents\W3D Hub\games\apb-release\Screenshots).

Unit balance feedback is certainly welcome. I can't do anything about that myself, but I'm sure it'll be of interest to the APB Dev team (unless it is a map-specific issue, in which case it falls to me to solve it).

Thanks for posting this! A quick note; The version used for testing has bugged Naval Yard window frames, so don't bother reporting that - it's a known issue! Looking forward to hearing gameplay feedback!

Currently still swimming, please stand by...

The VIS logic change is quite interesting. Nice work. Edit: The patch added some extended loading time, via a black screen for a few seconds after the regular map loading screen.

To do true, non-helicopter aircraft physics, you should be looking at a different engine at the moment. I think we'd all love to see airplanes (and therefore enabling your wish for spacecraft) in W3D, but I believe I'm not wrong to say it isn't high on the priority list.

Making a new W3D project isn't done in any short period of time (same applies to any game on any engine). You'll have to do this yourself, since I'm quite sure that most people currently working at W3D projects got their hands full already. That said, afaik Nintendo is pretty harsh on using their IP's. You'd be best off basing any game on something new.

I confess to not having tried the latest Rebarn Reborn release. But yes, I can understand some people like one project and not the other. That's the point, is it not? To offer very different gameplay in each project? I also am pretty sure that people play what most people play, and that happens to be the "newest thing".

Oh dear, boats on the horizon, better spam-purchase supply trucks, surely the cutscene LSTs will collide with them eventually... Ordering remote kills via purchase cinematics is currently a valid tactic on Hostile Waters.

And the next thing you know, people start talking about controlling those airplanes again.