des1206
-
Posts
337 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4 -
Donations
0.00 USD
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Documentation
Bug Tracker
Downloads
Posts posted by des1206
-
-
7 hours ago, Pushwall said:
Another possibility is that this beacon could act as more of a general support for field infantry that works well with in conjunction with the medic kit instead of just being a better but stationary medic kit - for example, it could do these things:
- renders all nearby friendly infantry (20 metres?) immune to squishing.
- renders all nearby friendly infantry immune to mundane splash damage (so splash from tank shells, V2s and possibly even AP mines, but not flamethrowers/Yaks/tesla/nukes). The easiest way to script this would most likely involve messing with the infantry's armour type - which means Tanyas would not benefit from this, so if it's made to null AP mines it still can't let Tanyas enter buildings. Both of these buffs ultimately force Soviets to go on foot to deal with a medic squad even when it's outdoors, unless they have the option of employing Hinds, Yaks or Rangers.
- automatically refill the armour of nearby friendly infantry (which, unlike the medic kit, would work on medics too)
- upgrade the medic kit of all nearby Medics to a different version that has increased range (20m instead of 12.5m?) Maybe do the same for mechanics' wrenches too to promote combined arms.
- anything that leaves the radius of the beacon, or enters a vehicle, loses these effects. And the beacon itself vanishes after a minute or so, so people don't just go littering their base and the field with dozens of them to have permanent safe zones everywhere.
So it would be a much bigger help to infantry outdoors on vehicle maps than it would be indoors or on infantry maps, given that there are very few ways to get crushed on those maps (or none on Fissure) and the only infantry weapon with mundane splash that's actually worth using for its splash instead of anything else is Grenadier's grenades. So in those situations all it really does is make the medic kit work over a range, which doesn't matter too much when indoors either. So these beacons wouldn't need to be super-easy to disarm either, and using a supply truck to plant a ton of them in quick succession wouldn't be abusable because they don't provide any stacking effects (for example, you can't become more immune to crushing/splash) - all it does is make them harder to get rid of.
Not a bad idea, if you think about it in terms of vehicles, Allied infantry are most afraid of: V2, Mammoth Tusk, TT. One of the reason medic doesn't get fielded much is that Allied infantry get one/two-shotted by those too much in the field. If you can make infantry very resistant to those (not immune, too not Ralistic, and call it an armor kit or something not medkit, this isn't TF2 where anything goes!), this will really up Allied's game in the field and in defending a base, especially when they lose War Factory. Not sure about AP mine resistance though.
0 -
This will make Tanya/Engin even more viable/fun in the field. With the change in the disarm system, we won't need to worry about throwing the C4 up too high so it can't be disarmed.
0 -
1 minute ago, Pushwall said:
Good luck doing that at all the building doors + ladders on flare maps + other places you can expect Allied infantry to use to their advantage (for example, the bump on Camos Canyon that infantry can use to protect themselves from the Barracks flame tower) with a 60 mine limit.
It will definitely make things harder for Soviets and slow down the mine layer's work. But at the risk of Allied killing my buildings? No thanks I will take my slow down mine layer and still lay double mines at every door (isn't that many on most maps).
0 -
11 hours ago, Pushwall said:
The end result will be that armoured infantry can survive walking on a single mine IF they are almost immediately healed by a medic (who is bound to always be very close by to a team of people trying to break into a building), but if they aren't medic'd and take the whole burn, or they trigger multiple mines at once and take too much instant damage, they end up being exactly as dead as anyone walking on an AP mine normally would be. And Tanyas or anyone else unarmoured will just outright die to AP mines as they used to, as an extra safety measure to cut down on what could happen if the AP mine burn gets overridden by a friendly flamethrower/shocky or something.
Would Soviet players just lay 2 mines at the same place to overcome that? I know I would.
0 -
- I don't suppose overheal for a single unit is an option in the coding? In the field often there is only 1 or 2 units the medic can support at a time since maps are big and infantry don't clump together. It would be great if the medic can over heal a unit (with a long reload).
- Can the medic's radar indicator be changed to help Allied players see him better? Or maybe just give his healing sound a very long range (like APC/ST horn). This will help field infantry to naturally try to group around him.
0 -
2 hours ago, Pushwall said:
It's a bit hard to justify his dinky MP5 being decent against tanks, especially moreso than heavier rifles/machineguns, but that could be an option if we're desperate, it certainly doesn't buff his OP inf map self. It did have good MCT damage in its first inception, but that was quickly deemed overpowered, now it's about on par with the M16. And naturally since he's more likely to get into an MCT room on non-vehicle maps that'd be a bigger boon on those.
What was wrong with his old M16 again?
13 minutes ago, Pushwall said:Perhaps a partial solution is to have V2s be less overkill against infantry - no point trying to medic your teammates against V2s if they can just one-shot people from full health without even directly hitting them. I'm considering reverting the radius change and just making arty-class splash damage penetrate armour slightly less so a V2 cannot kill any armoured infantry from full health in one splash blast, which would also extend to the Allied Artillery (direct hits would be overkill-death as usual though).
How about we let V2 still do one shot kill, but with burn damage which can be stop by the medic.
0 -
Give him a bit more anti-vehicle + MCT damage (equal to or above M16), keep the short range and nerf anti-infantry dmg?
0 -
2 hours ago, Pushwall said:
So it's not a problem that the Soviet base layout and ridiculous map economy makes it completely impossible for Allies to win if the Soviets decide to just do nothing but defend here? The combination of the two mean the only Allied strategies that have any chance of success are longbow rush and chinook rush. What are the Allies supposed to do when Soviets have wised up to this questionable map design and left a skeleton crew of 1 engy/hind to defend the front because that's all that's needed against an LB coil rush, put everything else at the rear or engycamping inside buildings, and nothing to attack at all? Hell, what do Allies do if their Helipad dies? Just give up because their chances of success at that point are even worse than if you lose a War Factory on any other map, except here it's not obvious because the existence of ground vehicles gives the illusion of a chance at success?
Wouldn't a mobile GAP + couple of tanks + demo truck work?
9 minutes ago, Pushwall said:I'm likely going to get rid of the external SDs and their associated defenses as they tend to just die before they can be used for anything (especially the Soviet one). That opens up a wide attack route for Soviets.
12 minutes ago, Voe said:Meh. I think the worst map atm is Ridge War as allies. If allies camp the hill for whole 30 minutes then soviets lose on points every time. There are only 3 base entrances, all protected by turrets/pillboxes on top of hills with little to no blindspots, with allied artillery bombarding the approach freely from up above. Even the AA placements are perfect, making soviets unable to even get close with hinds. I think that's the map which needs to be addressed.
There are other ways to crack the Allied base guys. Unlike the Soviet base, the Allied one has two locations that are vulnerable to Engineer rushes. The SD side AA gun you can just run up to with an engin under turret fire and C4, and get out safely. The Bar side AA gun too you can reach with anything that is a under half health supply truck and C4. Both instances open up the sides to Hind attacks - 1 Hind can destroy one base defense in one go. The bar/radar/silo actually become very vulnerable to multiple Hind rushes.
Let's fully explore the strategic possibilities before we decide something is OP and want to make changes (again, RIP Grenadier).
0 -
Garrison bonus, in my APB? I think you are in the wrong forum buddy, get your butt to Apoc Rising!
- I don't hate the idea, but I don't think they can do new scripts at this stage of APB.
0 -
7 hours ago, Pushwall said:
The 150 health + Engy's splash resistance means she will be somewhat more viable as field support for rapidly taking down troublesome Soviet anti-tank infantry to help Allied tanks move in, while not being bothered much by either their weapons or those of Soviet tanks. In the next iteration of the overhaul this is also coupled by a slight range boost for the Colt (70m as opposed to the other pistols' 60). So shock troopers will have a hard time since their ability to ignore armour means nothing to the infantry that lacks armour (and has more health to compensate), and if a Volkov can't close the distance to use the shotgun which shreds her, he's left with the Kovnades or cannon potshots both of which also do poorly to her because of their reliance on armour piercing. Plus the TTs/Mammoths floating around have a harder time bringing her down.
So in the field she's generally tougher than before (unless snipers make an appearance), but in exchange, she's a little more fragile against anti-infantry infantry (particularly rifles/shotties/snipers) which makes her a little riskier in infiltration, but since she can kill rifles/flamers/engys in one headshot, if you can pull that off, it's less noticeable. Plus, with techies/engies needing to keep their feet on the ground (thus dying easily) if they want to disarm quickly, ignoring the Tanya's existence and bumrushing the C4 is less of an option - so it's only fair that she's a little less invincible in this scenario.
Her old "CQC survival master" title has been passed onto the Medic who has the same 100/100 defenses that she used to have plus a burpier MP5, in exchange for being expensive enough that you can't just buy him right away and rush on a small map like Pacific Threat and instantly win like you could before, plus the BS potential of a multi-Medic group has been hampered by Medics healing other Medics more slowly.
I'm okay with that trade. I always thought Tanya could use more use in the field. Does that resistance to PKM translate into Yak/Hind bullets as well?
For Volkov's changes, is he any different strategically?
0 -
5 hours ago, Pushwall said:
From the games last night I don't think this overhaul hurts infantry survivability that much (except obviously Tanya who is more of a glass cannon during her infiltration role) due to heads being more difficult to hit in general. It'll need some more testing but we may end up going ahead with it, but with some of the more unusual features that aren't really related to headshot play and some of the heavy attempts at "counterbalances" getting dialed back since they may not be needed..
Another Tanya nerf? Is she really OP?
0 -
Only problem is that infantry armor logic doesn't work like vehicle armor/health logic. 50HP/170AP would still leave Volkov very weak since armor only reduces damage to health.
Maybe Volkov can revert back to old infantry days where armor needs to be depleted first? Then we can make him behave more like a mammoth tank - armor is very resistant to small arms but vulnerable to AT weapons and tank splash, then health vulnerable to bullets.
0 -
Interesting changes. Let's see how it plays out. However I will just say that:
1. You would think the flamethrower's armor is what makes him flameproof, not health. Maybe swap it for realism's sake? Suicide on low health should also be a valid tactic for him, makes things more interesting in this game.
2. Tanya/Volkov change - I'm still not sure about the lack of armor, but is this an overall buff or nerf? Also, you just reminded me that all three Tanyas in Ra never wore anything other than a tight tank-top (how did she have so much health in Ra3?!!!!). I guess you are trying to really go Ralistic here. Volkov though I don't get, he's a robot and should have a lot of armor. Didn't he have tank armor plating in Ra lore?
It would actually be interesting if you made Kov more vulnerable to AT weapons and tank weapons, and Tanya more to small-arms.
1 -
No mid game balance. Game-start balance however I agree with.
1 -
1 hour ago, Pushwall said:
On Guard Duty/Canyon River/River Raid?
I guess you missed the entire thread on how it's OP and the most feasible ways to fix it either involve new models for a grenade launcher (which we don't have) or things that just make the unit make even less sense (on top of the already ludicrous states of the old gren being a troop trained exclusively in the use of hand grenades and nothing else in the 1950's, and being able to throw them accurately at 150 metres.)
We should do a poll, maybe it was just those who thought it was OP were extra vocal. Ridiculous unit? Yes. OP? maybe a little. Strategic and fun to use? YES!
0 -
1 hour ago, Raap said:
The root problem is actually two problems, from where I'm standing. The first problem is the most obvious; Games need to end faster when key production buildings are lost. I've beaten this horse to death but people still resist the idea, despite "farming" a team that cannot fight back properly being a recurring problem.
I actually support that. What if a 5 minute timer gets activated after all the main production buildings get destroyed that will end the game automatically? However, the losing team should have a way to veto this if they want.
1 hour ago, Raap said:Edit: As for punishing a rage quit, what, are you serious? A ragequit is never truly voluntary, it is a breaking point in frustration, why punish a frustrated player... Do you want him or her to quit the game permanently? Madness.
I think there are two types of RQers. There is the UncleGrandma type of players who ALWAYS RQ as soon as it becomes apparent their side is likely going to lose, but when they are on the winning side, they take their time to enjoy beating you down as they win the match.
The other type is the occasional RQ players who just don't want to waste the next 15 minutes being kill-whored by the winning team. I get that.
0 -
Unless, the mechanic can steal a Yak.
0 -
This one is for the future. But with all your battlefield experiences, what global voice commands have you often wanted press/say but it's just not there? Remember all voice commands now identify the speaker unit/vehicle. The commands should be time-sensitive warnings where either 1. you are too busy to type out the details, or 2. it's an urgent message that needs to be heard over a flood of text. Remember also urgency can be achieved by spamming a VC multiple times instead of needing a new line.
For me, we should have these new ones:
Incoming attack force - people can be alerted and then read the specific enemy type (tank/air/naval/infantry/demo) and direction in chat, for more urgent rushes just spam the message multiple times.
I need support! - This can replace "I need repairs", nearby mech/medic will understand. Furthermore, it can also be used for when your glass-cannon unit/ore truck/MAD tank is getting attacked and you need your teammate's help, or when you are trying to organize an infantry infiltration and need your teammate to cover you,
I need a distraction - When you are hiding/behind enemy lines with a high damage/low health unit like engin/v2/phase/LT/TT waiting for good time to strike. You can follow up with a attack the building command to be more specific.
Beware sniper - A global warning because snipers can often cover half the map and get the first drop on a lot of unware infantry.
Infiltrator alert! - For when you spot those pesky spy/thief/tanya/engineer/enemy infantry rush incoming or already in-base.
I am on route - Good to let your teammates which reinforcement is incoming.Here is I think what we can get rid of:
Beware enemy mines - I think it's a given on maps with minelayers Soviets will always mine their base, Allies know that. When Allies lay AT mines it's not usually an urgent matter (people following the victim tank can see the damage, other Soviet tanks travel slowly so there is plenty time to warn over text.
Bolster our defenses - please bring back "defend the base" instead. The latter is more urgent.
That's real / That's decoy - usually the multiple "defend the base" message spam gets the same job done, plus if it's a decoy it's not urgent enough to warrant a global message anyway.
Enemy forces to the north/south/east/west - Usually the direction is more complicated and people just often type it. Four separate messages is a waste of space.
Retreat - I don't see this one used often. We don't retreat in APB
. If people see you running backwards with low heath spamming "move out" /"negative" I think they will get you message.
I need repairs - See "I need support" above.
0 -
What if we just got rid of/reduced its mammoth armor penalty so it does med-tank DPS to mammoth tanks/ore truck? It won't change most game-plays, and helps the LT to be relevant late game too in flanking. I wouldn't worry too much about early ore truck rushes, if they can get enough LTs to go after your ore truck, ususally they would come after your buildings first. Plus Soviets can defend with RPGs.
0 -
Look, no one likes to be on a losing team I get it, especially a bad team that you know will not win the game, yet not so bad as to lose within the next 5-10 minutes. However, I noticed some players consistently dropping out at the first few signs of a losing match (I'm looking at you UncleGrandma). Sometimes, it is just good sportsmanship to stick it out and fight the good fight. I mean, if you fought hard on the winning side (or if you are not a quitter on the losing side), do you want to see players on the other side quickly drop off?
I hope you guys agree with me here. That being said, is there anyway we can discourage RQ? Reporting and penalty for people who do it often? reccomendations for people who stick it out? Any ideas guys?
0 -
11 minutes ago, TK-421 said:
I object to the change of the grenadier (FIND SOME OTHER WAY to balance him) and FYI the full name of the RPG means hand-held anti tank grenade launcher.
Plus the grenadier had the unique role of being the only infantry that can prevent tech/engineers from camping a base defense. Soviets forming an attacking team? Bring a nader to prevent Allied tech/engin from hiding behind the turret/pillbox to repair (it was especially meaningful when engineer were 4 hit kills instead of the now 8 hit). I don't mind nerfing his damage vs. defenses, just don't nerf his range and splash radius.
Two more suggestions:
1. Nice horn for the APC, can the ranger get one too? It could help him get passengers.
2. It's nice that the thief is finally back on seamist, but the CY side coil is positioned too close / silo too to the front for the thief to get access at all from the rear. Can you fix this? On a low resource map (for Allies anyway), spending $1,700 (thief + LB) to risk a highly visible steal on map with Soviet minelayer should totally be allowed.
Btw for all the comments aside, this was overall a good patch. I can see a lot of work has gone into it, thank you for putting everything together.
0 -
21 minutes ago, ChopBam said:
Oh oh, haha no he's fine. The joke was that he's always been in space and is just constantly moving further away from earth. Remember he started on the moon, then was on Mars, last year on Pluto. Now moving beyond. That's all I meant. His heart is still pumping and in fact I'm sure he'll be visiting the forums sometime soon because I messaged him.
I heard he sailed across the sun, and made it to the Milky Way to see the lights all faded;
And that heaven is overrated
1 -
7 hours ago, Pushwall said:
Tanya
- Jumping accuracy penalty down from 1.5 to 1.
Very Ralistic, I approve. You can clearly see she head-shoting the Soviets in the end there.
Firing animation could be improved though to match more of what's in the video.
0 -
Nice patch, though I can't say I like the following two changes because I believe they make the game less fun:
Grenadier: Despite what some forum members were complaining, he was a great artillery unit with a good amount of tactical depth - not in terms of throwing the nades, but in terms of figuring out where to hide and launch your nades. On many maps I spent a lot of time to figure out all the positions with cover from where I can launch my grenades against Allied base defenses. There were a lot of "trick shots" you could make once you experiment with the maps, but not so many that it's hard to find the nader. I still think people complaining about the nader should just play him more and figure out where his spots are. I'm really sad to see a fun to use unit with tactical depth getting axed.
APC: See my latest reply to APC thread. The change basically prevents APCs from being a "MBT with machine gun" (since Soviets have a lot of AT units in high-tech maps) and limits it to a base rush unit. As a MBT there was more strategic depth to this unit in helping Allies counter Volkov/Shocks/RPG that pops out of destroyed Soviet tanks, and in ferrying/protecting Allied infantry in the battlefield. I'm afraid now the only time APC will be used is for rushing buildings, as opposed to be the main part of an attack force.
Radar Dome airlift: Maybe 30 seconds recharge is too short.
Flametower/turret ROF increase - need to test but we should make sure they can still be C4ed by engineer, and in FT's case using a vehicle as cover (jump out to C4). It was a valid strategy for higher-skilled players.
0
Increase C4 throwing range a little?
in W3D Hub Discussion
Posted · Edited by des1206
But isn't disarm range doubled now?
EDIT: I just realized doubled range is still not much, nevermind.