Funny Screenshots!

[Raap]

This is why many games opt to hide infantry heads under helmets and other facial implants.

Could probably slap some goggles on most infantry to make them look less, uhm, well, just not what they look like now.

WTB character artist?

Edited May 26, 2017 by Raap

[Pushwall]

"I was only jumping with a machinegun, how did I lose to the guy who was using its laser accurate crouch"

And I guess I forgot to mention to the team on Canyon River that I was already near their WF to try to pull that Starshina attack off due to losing a tank, and not just making a dumb longshot infantry run all the way from our base, but I guess ChopBam understood

[FRAYDO]

All the cool kids do videos. I'm cool!

(Have this sh*tty video while I gather more footage for my WIP :v)

 

[NodGuy]

Man, it feels good when a team can communicate and work together and win a round.

 

[Pushwall]

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. Hence why they're the only ones that are ever seen. What are the Allies supposed to do when Soviets have finally 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 (and they don't have to worry about a tank rush because that can't work with the coil in the position it is now), 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 WF on any other map, except here it's not obvious because the existence of ground vehicles gives the illusion of a chance at success?

It would probably help if both teams only had one ore silo. Two silos makes it not even worth trying to kill the ore truck for anything but points (hence why we never tried). With this it might actually be worthwhile for a team to try to starve the other of money so people aren't encouraged to just have 80% of their team sit in base and engycamp for 30 minutes. There's a reason Seamist Allies have only 1/3 the income of the Soviets. Plus, you know, it'll help play into the whole "central control" theme now that the cannons are mediocre at Raap's behest and the secret is too slideshow-inducing to keep in.

Another thing that might help (maybe or maybe not combined with the 1 silo) is moving the coil outside the wall. Right now the coil position completely prevents any attempts at ground-rushing it, so air-rushing the PP is a requirement when it should be an option. And the cannons are too weak to kill the coil with especially when the enemy can afford all the engys.

8 hours ago, NodGuy said:

This is what happens when the Soviets have two ore trucks (A.I. and player) and put all of their credits and effort into a solid defence of their base,

You seemed pretty adamant before that it had nothing to do with the economy...

[Voe]

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. 

[Pushwall]

1 minute 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. 

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.

[des1206]

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).

Edited May 29, 2017 by des1206

[Pushwall]

26 minutes ago, des1206 said:

Wouldn't a mobile GAP + couple of tanks + demo truck work?

A gap can be seen from miles away so they'd be able to move half their Hinds up front in time. Wild Hind spray would either kill the gap or the demo. Leaving us with even less tanks to try to assault the coil with.

Also they had a second ore truck, that would have just sat in the 5 metre castle wall chokepoint and denied the convoy for long enough for infantry to drop out of the hind/OT and deal with it.

[Raap]

The map was designed to be a vehicle meatgrinder. Not a lot of meat to grind on when teams got no credits to keep throwing shit at the enemy with, which is why the double silo exists. A way around it however is to remove one Ore Silo and convert the ore mines into ore/gem mixed mines. This should create greater importance for Ore Truck defense, without affecting the flow of the map much. The risk however - and the reason why I did not go this route - is that when a team is locked into their base, their income drops to nearly nothing, resulting in very limited means of retaliation and opening the door to farming.

What could be done as an added safety measure is having a player-ore field somewhere near the bases (not on the castle side), this would be a less effective route than the ore mine (especially if it got mixed with gems), but a backup in case of a lockdown on the water crossing.

Edited May 29, 2017 by Raap

[Pushwall]

50 minutes ago, Raap said:

The map was designed to be a vehicle meatgrinder. Not a lot of meat to grind on when teams got no credits to keep throwing shit at the enemy with, which is why the double silo exists.

Not a lot of meat to grind on when both teams are heavily discouraged from using ground vehicles by an impenetrable Soviet ground defense and crazy AT mine chokepoints both blocking off the one ground attack route (though at least one of those things can be dealt with from the ground), and have no reason to attack the ore truck that travels this route because most of the teams' economy is contained within their own bases. Allies' only chance was to go all in on air because going ground is impossible and Soviets knew this so they also went all in on air, just in a more defensive manner.

50 minutes ago, Raap said:

What could be done ass an added safety measure is having a player-ore field somewhere near the bases (not on the castle side), this would be a less effective route than the ore mine (especially if it got mixed with gems), but a backup in case of a lockdown on the water crossing.

So instead of Soviets having to dedicate someone to scouting the rear to shut down the only Allied rushes that have any chance of success, they can dedicate someone to doing that and boosting their income at the same time...

e: Okay, found two somewhat sane places for this. The tall hill behind the Soviet ref (which is surprisingly climbable by OTs and is not an out of bounds area) and the road behind the Allied base. From there the OT can't also shut down all air assaults.

[Raap]

49 minutes ago, Pushwall said:

Not a lot of meat to grind on when both teams are heavily discouraged from using ground vehicles by an impenetrable Soviet ground defense and crazy AT mine chokepoints both blocking off the one ground attack route (though at least one of those things can be dealt with from the ground), and have no reason to attack the ore truck that travels this route because most of the teams' economy is contained within their own bases. Allies' only chance was to go all in on air because going ground is impossible and Soviets knew this so they also went all in on air, just in a more defensive manner.

So instead of Soviets having to dedicate someone to scouting the rear to shut down the only Allied rushes that have any chance of success, they can dedicate someone to doing that and boosting their income at the same time...

e: Okay, found two somewhat sane places for this. The tall hill behind the Soviet Refinery (which is surprisingly climbable by OTs and is not an out of bounds area) and the road behind the Allied base. From there the OT can't also shut down all air assaults.

If two equally coordinated teams fight each other and one is defending under the cover of the base defenses, it makes perfect sense the defending team wins because that would be the same outcome on any other map as well. It's not fair for you to look at this as a Siege design issue, it is a game design - and not an issue. If you repeatedly hit the same target with the same force and fail every single time, why repeat it? Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again but expecting a different outcome. In this particular video, the attackers could have employed different tactics, such as splitting up to divert attention to two fronts. In normal matches you don't typically need this level of coordination, but this recorded match evidently had teams on communication services, which is not the standard thing in APB.

As for the ore field/economy backup plan, naturally enough place exists. This level went through a ton of re-iteration over the years, leaving plenty of now-unused space to work with.

[Pushwall]

6 minutes ago, Raap said:

If two equally coordinated teams fight each other and one is defending under the cover of the base defenses, it makes perfect sense the defending team wins because that would be the same outcome on any other map as well. It's not fair for you to look at this as a Siege design issue, it is a game design - and not an issue. If you repeatedly hit the same target with the same force and fail every single time, why repeat it? Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again but expecting a different outcome. In this particular video, the attackers could have employed different tactics, such as splitting up to divert attention to two fronts. In normal matches you don't typically need this level of coordination, but this recorded match evidently had teams on communication services, which is not the standard thing in APB.

Here's the thing though, we did try different targets. And you can't just "split" longbows and expect them to still take a building out. In several of our LB rushes we made an attempt to look like we were going for one building and then go for another, and it turned out they seemingly just had an engineer sitting in all the buildings.

The "insanity" argument would make more sense if there were more than 2 things Allied could do on this map. Of course they're going to keep doing the same thing if the map layout forbids them from doing different things.

[Raap]

5 minutes ago, Pushwall said:

Here's the thing though, we did try different targets. And you can't just "split" longbows and expect them to still take a building out.

You could have had two people assigned to breaking and entering via Engineer + Tanya Chinook combo on the opposing side.

Someone could have been using the cannon during the attacks, the added pressure would have caused substantial damage.

You could have set up a blockade near the broken wall with artillery and people defending them while drawing the Soviets out from their cover.

Etc.

I do not know the win ratios of the map since I do not have access to this data, if the Soviets do in fact win 15%+ more often, a sensible balancing change could be the removal of the Tesla Coil and replacing it with a Flametower, and removing the Gap Generator to keep the overal balance.

Edited May 29, 2017 by Raap

[Pushwall]

59 minutes ago, Raap said:

You could have had two people assigned to breaking and entering via Engineer + Tanya Chinook combo on the opposing side.

Someone could have been using the cannon during the attacks, the added pressure would have caused substantial damage.

Chinooks and cannons were already tried and failed. Surely keeping on trying that would be insanity, hence why we switched to longbows.

59 minutes ago, Raap said:

I do not know the win ratios of the map since I do not have access to this data, if the Soviets do in fact win 15%+ more often,

Win ratios are slightly Allied right now but that's a result of the cannons actually being worthwhile in previous patches and Soviets not realising until recently that if they get the point lead early on, they can just keep it by sitting in base for 30 minutes because their base is completely unassailable if they're not attacking, thanks to not needing to care about economy or defending the front. This is probably true for Allies as well to a lesser degree.

59 minutes ago, Raap said:

a sensible balancing change could be the removal of the Tesla Coil and replacing it with a Flametower, and removing the Gap Generator to keep the overal balance.

We probably don't need to go that far. The coil really just needs to be in a place where it can actually be attacked by ground units so that Allies aren't forced into "insanity". After all, the Gap is exposed.

[Raap]

If the general consensus is the map plays poorly, then I've not received that indication when I recently made a thread on the subject. 

If people came out and said they now changed their mind, fine, change whatever you feel like changing. The way I look at it, I signed off on it when I handed it over to you - it is yours to do with as you see fit, but note that my intention was not to create a level that plays like more of the same. Unique gameplay was my focus, creating another standard map would not be very exciting.

[Pushwall]

1 minute ago, Raap said:

If the general consensus is the map plays poorly, then I've not received that indication when I recently made a thread on the subject. 

I thought the consensus was that the cannons had to be made weaker, which had the adverse effect of making defense too easy.

[Raap]

3 minutes ago, Pushwall said:

I thought the consensus was that the cannons had to be made weaker, which had the adverse effect of making defense too easy.

That was something I recommended bases off in-game feedback. The thread itself did not highlight any dislike towards the layout and gameplay style and pace.

The Cannons are likely over-nerfed as I mentioned somewhere else. But balancing is an iterative process is it not?

Edit: As I said, do as you please. I'm not touching it myself, especially not with HW having ended up into a state of dysfunction due to as of yet to be discovered reasons, which could risk the same occurring to Siege.

Edited May 29, 2017 by Raap

[Pushwall]

Another thing that didn't play into this match, but I'm sure it will play into some eventually if I don't fix it: the placements of SAM sites vs AA guns. If I recall correctly, the idea behind the defense placement on this map was to allow air to attack the frontal defenses and chinook infantry to attack the rear entrance, both of them not running into any defenses. This works out for chinook infantry, but as for frontal air assaults... not only do SAM sites have more range than AA guns, but the "central" SAMS on this map are much further forward than the "central" AA guns. So if the Soviets take the time to blow up their own frontal walls (an art popularised in Gamma and lost in Delta, since now very few walls on other maps are placed in such a way that they block defenses), those SAMs can cover the whole base including the frontal coil/FT from Longbow assaults (unless the LBs are extremely careful about stopping in the exact right spot where they'll be out of SAM reach against the coil... which then gets them sniped by players). Whereas the Allies' AA guns only cover the rear buildings (which is what I'm sure was intended)... the helipad, WF, ore silos and refill area. Whoops?

[NodGuy]

5 hours ago, Pushwall said:

You seemed pretty adamant before that it had nothing to do with the economy...

It didn't, really, as most of us never lost anything expensive. The only ones who drained their money were the two engineers, but we donated here and there. I just thought the ore trucks were worth mentioning. Our defence was pretty solid, we even had a sniper in a valuable position telling us when to expect rushes, what type of rushes, and where they would most likely be coming from.

Regarding everything else, I'm no base layout/map design expert so I really can't comment. However you could've tried getting a spy into the power plant to disable our power before attacking the coil. That's one thing I told my team to expect but as far as I know was never was attempted. You could've had a Tanya + engineer use a chinook to attack the power plant while the longbows attacked the refinery. Maybe tried having Totd get out of the cannon and into the artillery to bomb the base of the coil to harass engineers and technicians while the tanks attacked the coil? I don't know if any of that would've worked but it would have been something different. The only rushes the Allies attempted were chinook, longbows, or tanks with the cannon shooting our base.

[Pushwall]

20 minutes ago, NodGuy said:

Regarding everything else, I'm no base layout/map design expert so I really can't comment. However you could've tried getting a spy into the power plant to disable our power before attacking the coil. That's one thing I told my team to expect but as far as I know was never was attempted.

So... do a thing that you were specifically watching out for anyway, and unlike the other things, its entire chance of success rides on not being noticed. Sounds like that just would have failed.

20 minutes ago, NodGuy said:

Maybe tried having Totd get out of the cannon and into the artillery to bomb the base of the coil

The base of the coil is behind a wall in a place that's pretty impossible for arties to hit while the wall is up, and by the time we knock said wall down, we'd be even further behind in points and/or a V2 would have appeared and sniped the artillery.

Also seems I was right on the money with regards to the entire strategy you employed, I just reviewed the chatlog and found this 10 minutes into the match.

Quote

May 27 20:13:47 <Volkov>    [Team] NodGuy: if we just defend we win due to points, if we don't die

Not even near the end of the match where it's typically employed due to the difficulty of either team forming an effective rush in time - but 10 minutes in. Like you know there's absolutely nothing the Allies can do to turn the game around in the next 20 minutes...

[NodGuy]

13 minutes ago, Pushwall said:

So... do a thing that you were specifically watching out for anyway, and unlike the other things, its entire chance of success rides on not being noticed. Sounds like that just would have failed. Yes but you didn't know that we were waiting for said spy.

The base of the coil is behind a wall in a place that's pretty impossible for arties to hit while the wall is up, and by the time we knock said wall down, we'd be even further behind in points and/or a V2 would have appeared and sniped the artillery. Destroy the wall in a few arty shots. You had 30 minutes.

Also seems I was right on the money with regards to the entire strategy you employed, I just reviewed the chatlog and found this 10 minutes into the match.

Not even near the end of the match where it's typically employed due to the difficulty of either team forming an effective rush in time - but 10 minutes in. Like you know there's absolutely nothing the Allies can do to turn the game around in the next 20 minutes... Yes, I said that because the Allied team was filled with more active and veteran players compared to the Soviets. I knew we'd never take the Allied base, thus I planned with them to defend. This could happen on any map and it worked for us here. If the same happened on KotG or Ridge War would there be any complaints?

 

[Pushwall]

8 minutes ago, NodGuy said:

 

Well, it would certainly be a lot harder to pull off on KOTG/RW due to the wider range of attack routes. The issue here is that it's too easy to do on Siege.

[NodGuy]

With Ridge War I usually get a Hind hovering above the Soviet base to see incoming rushes before they start attacking and it has worked well so far. On KOTG, if you're standing by near the construction yard service depot you can listen to the sound of the coil charging to anticipate where they are. The only issues I have with that map is when arties get on the hill behind the CY and start bombing the coil/radar dome. If you don't have a team working together then it always feels like you're the one that has to leave the base to deal with them, while there's no one else in the base.

[OrangeP47]

The coil position might be the key, along with the air defenses.  That said, the RNG has actually never placed me on allies on Siege.  I agree with those sentiments in this thread, though I disagree that Ridge War is 'that bad' so to speak as well as others have said. I'm not sure how I'd feel about the side depots being removed but it might 'help' a bit IMO.

(Also I find it funny how often these convos happen in the 'screenshots' thread, heh)

[Pushwall]

Ok, did some testing and with 1 silo and an exposed coil, Allies could feasibly start a light rush and bring it to the coil before Soviets even get a dump, for an almost certain stomp. Granted engineers can stave that off, but it's going to be difficult especially since I'm integrating the "no bunnyhop" wrench. So I definitely can't do both of those or the pendulum just swings the other way.

So I could either leave out the economy overhaul, or place the coil back behind the wall to make it harder to rush initially before the walls get taken down, or add a second flame tower to cover the front to make an instant LT rush harder, which can easily be taken out by LBs later so it won't be a thorn in the Allies' side for long. Or maybe a combination of the latter two.

For now, to avoid delaying the next patch further and to avoid changing too much on a whim, I'll just leave it at a cannon power buff, the coil being moved outside, and fixing AA positions so SAMs can't potentially cover wayyyy more than AA guns can - no eco changes.

[Raap]

54 minutes ago, Pushwall said:

Ok, did some testing and with 1 silo and an exposed coil, Allies could feasibly start a light rush and bring it to the coil before Soviets even get a dump, for an almost certain stomp. Granted engineers can stave that off, but it's going to be difficult especially since I'm integrating the "no bunnyhop" wrench. So I definitely can't do both of those or the pendulum just swings the other way.

So I could either leave out the economy overhaul, or place the coil back behind the wall to make it harder to rush initially before the walls get taken down, or add a second flame tower to cover the front to make an instant LT rush harder, which can easily be taken out by LBs later so it won't be a thorn in the Allies' side for long. Or maybe a combination of the latter two.

For now, to avoid delaying the next patch further and to avoid changing too much on a whim, I'll just leave it at a cannon power buff, the coil being moved outside, and fixing AA positions so SAMs can't potentially cover wayyyy more than AA guns can - no eco changes.

Smaller steps is often the right way to go. Let's see how it goes with your changes and go from there.

Comment on SAM Site range: AFAIK when I originally placed them their range was only very slightly longer than AA Guns. It's been a while though, I might remember incorrectly.

[NodGuy]

 

I'm still new when it comes to this sort of thing so any editing or pacing or whatever feedback is welcome.

[ChopBam]

Watching the sniper headshots is so satisfying. Maybe refine the parts where you're just sitting and waiting. Or even the mediocre parts where you're missing. Skip to the good stuff! Maybe when you speed up clips you could speed them up even further as people will get the point. These tips will make for a shorter and more concise video that focuses on the great parts. Still, good stuff and I love forg too.

[NodGuy]

40 minutes ago, ChopBam said:

Watching the sniper headshots is so satisfying. Maybe refine the parts where you're just sitting and waiting. Or even the mediocre parts where you're missing. Skip to the good stuff! Maybe when you speed up clips you could speed them up even further as people will get the point. These tips will make for a shorter and more concise video that focuses on the great parts. Still, good stuff and I love forg too.

I kept some of the longer sniper clips due to his in chat reaction and then falling down later on, but I guess I can speed those up slightly. I don't speed more than 4x because then sound is lost. I'd either have to put something in or cut the journey, i.e, when in the nook.

Edited May 30, 2017 by NodGuy
Grammar.