PDA

View Full Version : Cold, hard truth: The future of gameplay.



Poorlaggedman
07-29-2017, 08:32 AM
In short, you're going to have a lot of individualism. Linear tactics will not be effective. Minute-men style players will wreak havoc on any groups working closely. Any use of player-controlled explosions (artillery) will put the finishing touches on linear tactics. The core players will retreat to closed unit-events, like they always do in realism communities, and try to force the game to work the way they wanted by manipulating player behavior through rules. They will venture out in public gameplay mainly to recruit from the masses of people wandering into the public servers. Some of whom probably came because they saw videos of clean linear warfare from those events. Trolls and derps will reign public servers without sufficient policing and without an autoBAN system in-place at a set TK limit. Without a healthy public server community, the game will suffer population-wise and activity will suffer because of the high dependency on organized events.


I'm worried about this game because I've wanted from my first gaming days a FPS like this but I think a lot of people are making wild assumptions of what gameplay in this game will be like based on early hardcores who're in game now and also based mostly on what they want to see. So I'll go ahead and make my predictions based on about 17 years of being obsessed with realism in shooters and a couple weeks in this game. I think realism is what we're going for on some level here and not a free-for-all like any other shooter.


Players play a multiplayer game for an experience or to compete against live opponents or a combination of the two. Occasionally they will role-play but role-playing is an aside and will not hold most players' interest forever. What most of you are sustaining off of right now is role-playing.



There will be no serious, competitive line battle action because of... math. ... I'm not aware of any competitive line battle fighting in any first person shooter ever made, correct me if I'm wrong or why WoR would be different. I have not even found a meelee-only game where formations hold an advantage over a pure blob. You may have house-rules in closed events where players have to shoulder up but that's where it will end. And it will come apart from there in those events. When you're only incentive to do so is your hope that the enemy does the same so it's a fair fight... you'll have about the same success rate as people claiming cash income on their taxes because 'it's the law.' On any shooter ever-made... a group makes a better target. It's math. If the only advantage of being in a tight group is 'the rules' or 'honor' or 'realism' ... you'll see this getting compromised very quickly in closed matches and almost non-existent in public gameplay.

Add double ranks into this sketch and factor in the smoke and the advantage is even clearer. In meelee combat, there is no advantage to being grouped either as it is.
6886


3D voice chat has a huge impact on gameplay. I love it and believe it should be mandatory in any serious FPS game of any type. I almost refuse to play an FPS without it.


You'll usually have several different officers trying to assert authority on any team at the start and at respawns. Players with friends and followers will get more. As players get more experienced, you'll have more running off alone immediately and wisely working together loosely. In a respawn-based game with objectives ... getting players into the field is more critical than any advantage currently of organizing with random people. This is counter-intuitive to a lot of 'hardcore' types who will prefer to rally and assert authority and move out together. Even if you're operating as an organized body... with a long way to go to get into the action it's more important to move out immediately. You can be a total genius, natural leader but if you aren't moving out in a timely manner you're just keeping men out of action (and therefore worthless) for longer periods of time. IMO, 30 seconds to organize a group of guys in the spawn is 24 seconds too long if you want to win. If you think your average competitive player will see some value in lining up when he was in the thick of it 30 seconds earlier half way across the battlefield, you'd be wrong. He's headed right back there. Once again, it's math. Get people in the fight faster if you want to be respected and listened to.


So thanks to the 3D voice chat, people will often blob together and follow people who sound like they know what they're talking about or have a 'good' voice. These could be serious players who know what they're doing or they will just as often be some of the plethora of trolls who will plague this game on daily basis, derping about in a non-competitive manner. Even shooting friendlies who won't follow their established rules (already saw it happen on one team in WoR) or just shooting friendlies for fun or shooting people trying to lead, even stalking them down. The 3D voice chat is great for teamwork but it is an attraction to these types. In my last game, (Resistance and Liberation), 3D voice was essential to teamwork but also presents an advanced opportunity for derping. You literally had times where you went into servers and people were playing house or having literal parties or social gatherings. Unplanned, spontaneous ones among strangers. A group of friends want to come in and make this happen... half the team will be running to surrender from spawn or otherwise playing games. It happened constantly. The power of 3d voice is amazing but if you don't have solid, and enjoyable gameplay which actually works and achieves the spirit desired by players then players will constantly stray from it and find other ways to entertain themselves and 3D voice leaves plenty else to do.

If this sounds crazy or you don't understand my vernacular, you have a lot to learn about gamers. Effectively you create a social space in 3D when you have 3D voice chat. It amplifies the experience. It stands in stark contrast to most "anti-social" games where there is a team voice chat or a public voice chat where players sit and play silently except for small-talk/smack-talk and you'll actually get a lot of blowback for being a 'try hard' trying to use voice chat constantly. It certainly means literally nothing to say "grenade!" or "to your left" because there is no context to hearing voice chat without a 3D relation.


People trying to lead in Universal voice chat
6887
vs local voice chat
6888

Derps in Universal voice chat
6889
vs local voice chat
6890



Meelee will rule. Twenty second reloads and you have a nice pointy blade conveniently there that you can close in and settle it much faster. I saw a post from a dev that said it isn't a purely meelee game. Don't assume just because you have more populated servers that there won't be constant meelee rushing. Aiming and firing can be frustrating, as it should be a lot of the time with the smoke and the reload time. So you'll have a very strong and immature influence urging the closing to meelee range where combat is more immediately decided. And yet any serious student of the Civil War knows that the bayonet was rarely actually used, even less en-masse by entire formations lunging into each other as every Hollywood representation shows. In real life it was a game of chicken, and that's the truth. And there's no reason that shouldn't be fun as well but that will seldom be the case. Especially if there is no reason to charge cohesively and therefore no reason to not just turn into a mad race. If an enemy charges you from 50 yards away and you immediately turn around and retreat.... if he doesn't stop following you, he will literally still be 50 yards away when you decide to stop running. No reason to stay cohesive, no reason to slow down. No reason to retreat. Personally, I'd prefer firefights and tactics and make the meelee a special occasion thing. There's little tactics in a one-for-one bayonet stabbing spree even when you add a timed blocking.



I'm interested to hear what anybody thinks or what can be done to avoid these predictions from becoming true or if you're okay with getting your experience from closed-server reenactments. My suggestion is a morale system, like I already posted about if you want to comment on that.
http://www.warofrightsforum.com/showthread.php?4397-Morale-and-how-to-harness-it

Profender
07-29-2017, 08:46 AM
Just like to say: Love your drawings especially the cheese shaped house.

What gives me hope in this game are those few companies you see around trying to build themselves into a respectful unit and try to set up events.
This gives me hope for the moment that the next battle phase comes out where we can spawn in with our own companies. I do not see much hope for the open skirmish servers in the future. Methinks and hopes the organised battles will rule the game.

I do see that people indeed are using Meelee to frequent in the game at the moment. With the future implementations of the Cavalry and Artillery I hope that limits unnecessary / to frequent charges.

Overall I do not know what can be done to avoid these predictions. I just know that building a company and keeping that together takes time and effort to do so. I do not believe the Trols and Derps can hold a company together for a long period.

Poorlaggedman
07-29-2017, 09:05 AM
Wait.... you think my giant block of cheese is a house? :p

I know units will do their own thing to make it work. The problem is doing it and having any real competition. I've seen it before in realism unit-types. You want to win, maybe even more because you are representing your unit against another. Or your unit against the public players. You'll clearly see infractions on the other team's part and that gives you license to break the rules yourself or animosity when you don't prevail against them. It's just a mess and makes for great video shots but in the end it ends up being role playing (like reenacting) if competitive talent isn't unleashed. So you have the real world --- in which soldiers strove to dress ranks.... and the game in which players being sloppy only increases your chances. But you're trying to play as if it doesn't. It's a losing proposition to me and one that will always be a frustrating niche hobby for gamers

Profender
07-29-2017, 10:49 AM
Wait.... you think my giant block of cheese is a house? :p

I know units will do their own thing to make it work. The problem is doing it and having any real competition. I've seen it before in realism unit-types. You want to win, maybe even more because you are representing your unit against another. Or your unit against the public players. You'll clearly see infractions on the other team's part and that gives you license to break the rules yourself or animosity when you don't prevail against them. It's just a mess and makes for great video shots but in the end it ends up being role playing (like reenacting) if competitive talent isn't unleashed. So you have the real world --- in which soldiers strove to dress ranks.... and the game in which players being sloppy only increases your chances. But you're trying to play as if it doesn't. It's a losing proposition to me and one that will always be a frustrating niche hobby for gamers

Yeah not sure how you can stop that or manage that maybe it is not even needed. Hard to predict the course of this game and the community. Compared to Call of poopy and those other similar games this screams more so for team play it is harder to make a solid working company here.

I see two types of battles taking place when those company servers pop up. Those planning roleplay events and those who have semi-roleplay events.
Either way I would like to try both. I believe that following a manual strict in this game does not work proper lack of touch / and view. Some things you better adapt the the mechanics of the game.

Bivoj
07-29-2017, 10:58 AM
Sadly, I agree with OP:( I hope the devs will find a way to avoid the bias mentioned somehow... Verdun was succesful in simulating trench warfare by simple ingame restrictions and rules (while in Alpha it was just like any other fps, just with ww1 weapons). I hope for something similar in WoR.

TrustyJam
07-29-2017, 02:08 PM
Thank you for your thoughts guys.

We are actually pleasently surprised in regards to the amount of organized team play in the alpha - even with complete randoms in non events.

At this early point we have still to implement a single gameplay mechanic favouring line or at least very close group formations. We have several ideas about how to "nudge" the players into doing this and look forward to be seeing their effects once implemented.

You will see the first step in this direction in the next (or the one after) alpha update where we do away with tickets and introduce army morale states instead (at first it will be a straight up change in information shown to the players - later it will most likely be tied to line or close group formations).

- Trusty

Legion
07-29-2017, 05:18 PM
Thank you for your thoughts guys.

We are actually pleasently surprised in regards to the amount of organized team play in the alpha - even with complete randoms in non events.

At this early point we have still to implement a single gameplay mechanic favouring line or at least very close group formations. We have several ideas about how to "nudge" the players into doing this and look forward to be seeing their effects once implemented.

You will see the first step in this direction in the next (or the one after) alpha update where we do away with tickets and introduce army morale states instead (at first it will be a straight up change in information shown to the players - later it will most likely be tied to line or close group formations).

- Trusty

Very interested to see how this will work. Can you share any more information?

TrustyJam
07-29-2017, 05:44 PM
Very interested to see how this will work. Can you share any more information?

Four army morale states: Combat ready, engaged, taking losses and breaking will replace the ticket count. They are still based on tickets (how many percent tickets are left). We want to get away from players knowing the exact strength of the enemy.

Even more important though, it opens up the possibility to change the numbers of the ticket cost of, say, a death from 1 ticket to something else...

I'll get more into that at a later date. :)

- Trusty

Bivoj
07-29-2017, 05:51 PM
Sounds great! I am glad to read you are going to adress morale.

A. P. Hill
07-29-2017, 06:03 PM
Not really sure I follow the O.P. but if I think I understand him, I'm going to slightly disagree with him. As I think the community itself can and will regulate new players.

However, to the developers, As a point of suggestion.

To help in the application of "forcing" players into lines, (fighting as your vision of the game has been stated,) perhaps a polling can be done software wise whereby if the team is out of organization (no line formation etc.,) they can take a moral hit as well.

Bivoj
07-29-2017, 06:09 PM
I believe, that not only whole team should be "punished", but also the individual soldier-player should somehow suffer to have the proper motivation to stick with colours.

TrustyJam
07-29-2017, 06:23 PM
Keep your suggestions coming please. We have a pretty well developed idea about where we wish to take this but more inspiration is always good. :)

- Trusty

Dether
07-29-2017, 06:57 PM
I agree with the op on many counts as it is possible that those things happen... the biggest issue I agree with him on is the use of the bayonet and how it is going now.. the real reason not many folks were killed by the sticky pointy things was one... until later in the war it just wasn't kool.. stabbing someone is very personal.... two.. CANNON, they did bayonet charge a lot, but the receivers either ran on stood by their cannon, which killed a lot of folks at once. of course there were exceptions (the mule shoe, and franklin come to mind) but for the most part, the norm holds true.

TrustyJam
07-29-2017, 07:04 PM
Bloody charges will most likely be quite a bit rarer when flag bearer spawning (regimental reinforcements) has been introduced. Alongside its introduction we'll up the general base spawn wave time which will mean people will be less inclined to throw their lives away with an all out charge.

- Trusty

Dether
07-29-2017, 07:12 PM
Bloody charges will most likely be quite a bit rarer when flag bearer spawning (regimental reinforcements) has been introduced. Alongside its introduction we'll up the general base spawn wave time which will mean people will be less inclined to throw their lives away with an all out charge.

- Trusty

that sounds REAL good.

Legion
07-29-2017, 07:29 PM
Bloody charges will most likely be quite a bit rarer when flag bearer spawning (regimental reinforcements) has been introduced. Alongside its introduction we'll up the general base spawn wave time which will mean people will be less inclined to throw their lives away with an all out charge.

- Trusty

Can't wait till flag spawn is added in, imo it's one of the most needed things at the moment besides officer limits. Any eta on when we will see it?

TrustyJam
07-29-2017, 07:36 PM
Can't wait till flag spawn is added in, imo it's one of the most needed things at the moment besides officer limits. Any eta on when we will see it?

Regimental as well as class limits are just about done - expect to see those fairly soon.

After those are in the next thing on the programming list is updating our engine version to 5.4: https://www.cryengine.com/news/cryengine-54-preview-released-today-including-over-620-improvements

Once that's done the flag bearer spawn system is top priority.

- Trusty

Profender
07-29-2017, 07:37 PM
Regimental as well as class limits are just about done - expect to see those fairly soon.

After those are in the next thing on the programming list is updating our engine version to 5.4: https://www.cryengine.com/news/cryengine-54-preview-released-today-including-over-620-improvements

Once that's done the flag bearer spawn system is top priority.

- Trusty

Sounds all great!

Saris
07-29-2017, 08:01 PM
I understand where he is coming from, when we have events during George's Corner or other times, 1-2 randoms will be officers and wreck havoc on our line that is trying to play the event before we know what is going on

A. P. Hill
07-29-2017, 09:50 PM
Yep, I got the email from Cryengine about their update and wondered when the magic was gonna happen here. :)

Poorlaggedman
07-30-2017, 01:08 AM
Not really sure I follow the O.P. but if I think I understand him, I'm going to slightly disagree with him. As I think the community itself can and will regulate new players.
Resistance and Liberation (RnL) was a WWII game that first penned itself as a "Infantry Simulation" and not even a FPS. There were a lot of assumptions made. The one thing I did correctly predict was the rampant TKing. In fact the closed beta testing went fine. But the first weeks of the Alpha were almost purely being TKd in your own spawn and seeing it later on Youtube with lots of laughing commentary. Things were okay only when you had competent admins on. Next patch added a TK limit on by default which banned players for a week on that server. That didn't stop the team wounding though. And some people would just disconnect and reconnect. In fact, there was one guy I still remember. The first thing he'd do is ask if there was an admin on. If some idiot admin responded or some player had clan tags for that server, he'd immediately disconnect. If not he'd kill four people and reconnect. Kill four more and reconnect. And people would revenge TK him and get autobanned themselves. He came back again and again and again for years. There's no telling the amount of damage him and other trolls did. Admins were not there when they needed to be and were not doing a good job. Trolls are going to be a huge problem and anyone who wants to run a server has to be ready for it.

I'm not sure what it is... but realism folks always seem to not police their servers very well. I think it's the retreat into closed servers events and then leaving their public servers mostly abandoned because the regular gameplay will pale in along side events. You'd see 32 guys in a 32 person server with clan tags on and then it'd empty out and there'd be two or four left, none of them admins, after the drill.

A lot of trying to reason with trolls also, but that might have had to do with the size of the community, WoR's will probably be bigger. My server worked out pretty well because I had a 'no warnings' gestapo style admining where you just made bad people disappear before they even knew they were being watched. 1500 bans and about 1700 people in the steam group and it was the most popular servers and everyone who played that game knows me. The trolls drive away players more than anything else.

A definite positive I see in WoR is that team kills are shown in chat. Death messages are very stupid and unneeded but ones for TKs and team wounding should be shown (to admins at least). Another one is that the game costs quite a bit right now. One problem with the Source engine was that it became free and the mod was free and people would come on with a new steamid in 2 minutes if you steamid banned them. There were even tools that would generate a new steamid and allow them to be back seemingly infinite times to mock the admins. I don't know if this engine is entirely 'free' on it's own yet but I'm glad the game is not altogether free and never will be.


Bloody charges will most likely be quite a bit rarer when flag bearer spawning (regimental reinforcements) has been introduced. Alongside its introduction we'll up the general base spawn wave time which will mean people will be less inclined to throw their lives away with an all out charge.
I'm not sure if either of those would deter meelee rushing. The game is the game and people are going to play it. If stabbing is faster and more clean-cut, a lot of people will prefer it entirely. I used to think that was the case with spawn times but I found increasing spawn times only has the main effect of increasing the reward on tactical successes. When you kill a bunch of enemy, you get more time without them on the field. When spawn times are very low you'd see a lot more bloody stalemates as the two sides bleed each other out instead of trading ground. The defender could be getting massacred but unless there was a concerted effort to cede ground they could plug holes in their front as fast or faster than the attackers. It was a pretty consistent effect of lowering spawn times. With longer spawn times eventually the map would progress (to a different objective) but with short spawn times the two sides would bleed each other out at the first objective. The only other things I noticed with longer spawn times was more camping, less role-playing, lots of complaints from players about spawn times, and the best players were extra effective as they spent a lot more time alive and killing than rookies who spent a lot of their time dead and moving up to the line. I don't know if there is an ideal spawn time but a dynamic one that starts at some base will have an effect on how things go for the teams. It's the easiest way to alter the flow of a map is the number of players each side gets and how close to where they are needed.

As it is on some of the maps (like the cornfield) it's a serious delay to get back into the action even after spawning. Spawning on a literal flag somewhere close to the action would eliminate that hardship and might encourage more impulse even if the spawn time is much longer than it is now. I know I'd love to be able to stroll to the fridge after I die rather than taking a virtual stroll. I'm imagining facing a 20 man company in line with a flag bearer and all the sudden their flag bearer poops out 12 more guys. Or better... you're chasing a flag bearer and he poops out a bunch of friends. You'd have to take into consideration that you're making the flag bearer a critical asset (and therefore also subject to severe troling) on top of odd placement of the colors and making him (or it laying on the ground?) a prime target. Progressing zones of control with spawn points might be more sensible than making a human player the focal point of the team's ability to spawn. I've already had a Union flag bearer join our CSA line on Burnside's Bridge.

Anything that can be abused will be, especially if it's easy. I'm assuming you would have a proximity trigger to stop the spawning when the enemy are close. That would only make sense. So the common sense tactician in me says get close! Stop his spawning. That probably means meelee. Hold my own flag bearer back so I can spawn players and charge his to block his spawn. Just like that he runs out of players in the area and I keep getting them. If you have multiple set areas where a team spawns (like in a cornfield) that can also be blocked by proximity of enemy, expect there to be individual team players hiding and blocking those spawns.

As for reinforcement counts, RnL had a server-side option that let you hide them from the opposing team. That did not stop questions of "How many tickets do you guys have left?" And some people answered. Though you're still going to get "How's your team morale doing?" You're also going to have to figure that both teams could bottom out around the same time. So will there be draws or will the decision be immediate? Will teams who run out of morale still be able to defend until the timer goes out even though they are in the process of being killed off or will McClellan give them another few minutes before calling off the whole operation?

just a turkey
07-30-2017, 01:38 AM
Just want to say great discussion! Just the fact that current players are putting this much thought into this conversation, and that the devs are part of the conversation, gets me more excited about the future of this game.

TrustyJam
07-30-2017, 02:28 AM
In regards to grouped charges, you might be right. But longer base spawn wave times as well as a limited option of spawning on the flag bearer will most certainly mean less rambo charges.

The flag bearer is meant to be a prime target as he was in real life.

I'm not prepared to disclose all of the specifics as they are still to be implemented & may still change quite a bit before then but I'd say we have thought out most of your points (we do love to talk game design, Fancy and I!). Some will be addressed with the introduction of future systems and some will hopefully be sooner.

Hooker's Push down through the cornfield is meant to be a long march as it was in real life. It was the opening of the battle and thus is not designed to be a slugfest - the later struggles at Hagerstown Turnpike and Hood's counter attack into the cornfield however.. :P

6894

- Trusty

Dether
07-30-2017, 03:28 AM
Just want to say great discussion! Just the fact that current players are putting this much thought into this conversation, and that the devs are part of the conversation, gets me more excited about the future of this game.

to this I agree 100%

Poorlaggedman
07-30-2017, 04:59 AM
The flag bearer is meant to be a prime target as he was in real life.

I already aim for anyone with a flag first as it is. I imagine it serving a more practical purpose than as a protected respawn point. It would definitely be absent from formations a lot as a tactic if it serves as a respawn. It seems like it has the potential to become very gamey serving that purpose while it could serve a more historical purpose in a more symbolic role.

TrustyJam
07-30-2017, 05:02 AM
I already aim for anyone with a flag first as it is. I imagine it serving a more practical purpose than as a protected respawn point. It would definitely be absent from formations a lot as a tactic if it serves as a respawn. It seems like it has the potential to become very gamey serving that purpose while it could serve a more historical purpose in a more symbolic role.

That is if you believe we won't build any yet to be announced group systems on top of it. :)

- Trusty

Bivoj
07-30-2017, 09:13 AM
So, you asked for suggestions, here are some:

I) Morale of individual soldiers
Morale is realistic; its absence in games make them unreal bloody massacres. When casualties were mounting, soldiers (usually as whole units) were retreating and routing or even surrendered. Battles were not like two line formations staring at each other and steadily firing (as many "hardcore players" want the WOT to be); flanking mattered, retreats due to casualties happened, charges caused enemy to retreat without melee and even skirmishing was the tactic etc.
Battles were won not by killing out every enemy, but by forcing them to retire, retreat or rout. WoR is about Antietam battle, so looking at wikipedia: out of circa 125.000 soldiers engaged only circa 23.000 were casualties of all types (not even 20%!) and out of these only 4000 were really killed (OK, serious wound is KIA in game terms, but what about the 2000 soldiers captured and missing?). The game will not be close to realistic without solid morale system.

1) Morale hitpoints
1.1) I am definitely for "morale hitpoint system", where close gunfire (more significantly when coming from flank or rear), arty shells and proximity of enemy soldiers reduces these morale hitpoints; while being far from enemy (even alone) slowly refills the hitpoints as well as proximity of friendly soldiers somehow protects or slows down the reduction of morale hitpoints.
1.2) Morale should fall especially when friendly soldiers die in close proximity (so, when you charge and casualties are mounting, your morale drops and charge is unsuccessful - you retreat to your lines) AND when mass of soldiers approaches you with bayonets (your small unit is being overwhelmed by mass of enemy approaching = you retreat) - these two features should avoid melee to minimum and make charges what they really were.
1.3) In supporting morale (boosting their morale hitpoints) the NCO and especially officers and flag bearers should serve as the most significant roles. Flag was the rally point, the artefact soldiers were dying for - they should be "morale protectors and morale boosters" - this is their realistic role, not being spawnpoints (=civil war necromancers). Officers were trusted and were the persons other soldiers relied on - they should protect and boost morale. And NCO role was to maintain cohesion of his unit - it should protect morale as well.

2) Morale effects
What about when morale drops to certain point - how to punish player for low morale? That is a tricky one to implement... Visual and sound effects we know from other games are nice, but not sufficient; they are rather indicators of your morale is deteriorating, so you are aware of the fact (as you would in real battlefield), but not really forcing you to retreat.
here are some suggestions (not ideal ones)
2.1) Reducing the speed of reloading, increasing swey to represent stress as reducing eficiency of the soldier under serious threat.
2.2) When it falls to really low, the real soldiers would retreat, so I would take the control of his avatar from the player and the avatar would just turn back and sprint away (regardless of stamina - he is running for life) from enemy close to his spawn point without player's ability to influence this fact. When away from enemy, just crouch and wait a while for morale to replenish and only after that, pass the control of the avatar back to his player. This would force the game avatars to retreat - when casualties mounts and when superior force charges against them. And also lone-wolf rambos would retreat often, preventing players from ramboing.
2.3) When there are enemies during the retreat path (and morale is deteriorating even further during retreat), the avatar just surrenders - in game terms it would be just kind of casualty as KIA is, but with different animation.


II) The flag bearer
I must admit, that I am not fan of making him a spawn point - it reminds me officers in Verdun. In one hand, this feature somehow works, but in the other, it is far from realistic...
But, please, when giving flag bearer a function (and especially such a strong one), give other soldiers the ability to take the flag after the flag bearer falls casualty. As in reality, a brave soldier would take the colors as they fall down (it was precious and honourable artefact for them), make it available ingame. It could be implemented the way, that when someone takes the flag, it automatically switches the role of the flag bearer, passing him the role of the brave guy raising the colours; so the original flag bearer would not spawn as flag bearer then, but as common soldier or NCO instead.

Maximus Decimus Meridius
07-30-2017, 11:52 AM
First I want to say that you have great ideas but in my mind some are hard or unnecessary to implement:

About your moral for individual soldiers:

In my mind it's not needed for a person. It would be better with a company wide moral system. (That the point we would need a connection of company tool and the game or something which make it possible to form several units ingame)

If you have heavy loses, get shot by artillery, get shots from the flank /back, officer or color bearer dies etc. etc. hits the company moral system which hits the army moral. If the company moral drops below a specific value it could have some of your effects like longer reload time (could be shown with problems to charge the cartridge/ramrod), sweating or at a 2nd last point automatic kneeling but not more automatics. The last for me would be that the company is completely shocked and unable to fire and are able to run away without a stamina decrease because like you said they running for their lives.

So at this point a officer has to order retreat. But now we need mechanics to increase the company moral. Like not under fire, officer is close, in formation, friendly unit is close, musicians play songs or orders because strong orders give security in terms routine/drill, or to bring the color bearer in and tweak him: If the flag ins in the front rank ( or also the officer) will grand a very high moral bost because its a high risk. You can lose your spawnpoint/ commander a get also a great decrease of moral.
Of course you gain also moral by kill enemies. More moral for shooting them in the flank or back.


In the end its a great Idea with the moral system and gives possibility to tweak the color and gives the officer more tasks ;)


*****Edit*****

Effects could be:
First level: Sweating and heavy breathing
Second level: slightly longer reloads (losing Percussion cap/ charge cartridge is hard)
third level: more longer reloads ( additional to the level before: loosing ramrod/ cant insert)
fourth level: automatic kneeling (of course it's possible to stand up again, or a NCO pulls you up? (http://www.warofrightsforum.com/showthread.php?4335-(N)CO-s-being-able-to-quot-grab-quot-privates) ;)
fifth level: shocked, can't reload/shoot/fight. unlimited or doubled stamina

2-4 level should be random in the lines and should affect with different times the boys so that not all at the same time start to kneel or something like that. In brackets are just ideas what could represent such a effect.

Bravescot
07-30-2017, 01:06 PM
We must consider realism vs game play here Bivoj. Whilst they strive to be realistic the game has still got to playable and enjoyable. Too hardcore can be a destriment.

David Dire
07-30-2017, 01:23 PM
I didnt even think of company based morale.

So, I support Maximus' idea, there.

I suppose it would be easier to make?

Charles Caldwell
07-30-2017, 02:28 PM
Meelee will rule. Twenty second reloads and you have a nice pointy blade conveniently there that you can close in and settle it much faster. I saw a post from a dev that said it isn't a purely meelee game. Don't assume just because you have more populated servers that there won't be constant meelee rushing. Aiming and firing can be frustrating, as it should be a lot of the time with the smoke and the reload time. So you'll have a very strong and immature influence urging the closing to meelee range where combat is more immediately decided. And yet any serious student of the Civil War knows that the bayonet was rarely actually used, even less en-masse by entire formations lunging into each other as every Hollywood representation shows. In real life it was a game of chicken, and that's the truth. And there's no reason that shouldn't be fun as well but that will seldom be the case. Especially if there is no reason to charge cohesively and therefore no reason to not just turn into a mad race. If an enemy charges you from 50 yards away and you immediately turn around and retreat.... if he doesn't stop following you, he will literally still be 50 yards away when you decide to stop running. No reason to stay cohesive, no reason to slow down. No reason to retreat. Personally, I'd prefer firefights and tactics and make the meelee a special occasion thing. There's little tactics in a one-for-one bayonet stabbing spree even when you add a timed blocking.

I have to agree with the OP on this... a quick glimpse at the highly entertaining General Cody proves Melee is a major problem for the Devs to get right.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYqZibkevVc

TheRegulator
07-30-2017, 03:39 PM
We must consider realism vs game play here Bivoj. Whilst they strive to be realistic the game has still got to playable and enjoyable. Too hardcore can be a destriment.

Tottaly agree . . . May i add . . . Player morale is a phycological thing. The morale is what you feel playing irl, not what the game wants you to feel, by using restrictions.
WoR's "Moral" backbone will be the officers/nco's and thier loyal soldiers, they raise the real morale irl behind the screen, a 100%.

I think once the atillery and cavalry comes into game it will all change a lot. Maybe its wise to see how things will influence the battels before implementing a morale system. Things will change at that time, on the way we move and fight.

So i am tempted to say, that we adress things we know littel about, how it will affect morale or work in the puplic game. Only the dev's know where they go, and thats only if its posible.
But as allways like on the battelfield i just go along, and se where the dev's takes it, i am sure they will end up with something, we all will be happy about.

Charles Caldwell
07-30-2017, 04:44 PM
Morale I agree cannot be a programmed feature, it must be felt by the player. For me I think its there already, as there is nothing quite like feeling the isolation of being the leading rifle as the enemy appear en masse!

Takerith
07-30-2017, 06:07 PM
It's impossible to fully recreate a sense of fear in a player in a historical multiplayer game. Many players simply won't care about dying, due to a lack of consequence, and so won't have a problem facing danger. Simply put, the more carefree attitude people will have in this game will really mess with its authenticity. Many of us have seen it in Mount and Blade and other games, we will see it here if there isn't a proper morale system put in place.

Poorlaggedman
07-30-2017, 06:15 PM
I think you're misunderstanding the concept of 'morale.' A game can never come close to simulating the fear of death that forms the basis behind all tactics in warfare. The minor inconvenience of being sent to the respawn can't be compared to living 17-40 years of life and then it all being at risk of coming to an end any moment on the battlefield. Most tactical strategy games have morale nowadays for 'units' on the battlefield. Think of your Civil War RTS games. Those units are simulating a number of soldiers (players) and then giving a morale state for all of them. In reality, you'd have different people being effected differently depending on what they are experiencing. The rout starts somewhere and it ultimately effects the entire unit. Very few are going to stay to the last and wave the flag defiantly. Anyone physically could, but everyone can and everyone will if you don't even simulate the stress of combat and instead rely on a role playing consensus.




In my mind it's not needed for a person. It would be better with a company wide moral system
Yes but there's no incentive to work together just because the morale is as a 'unit' if your morale is the same wherever you are on the battlefield. It'd just be a measure of how you're team is doing and, even if players weren't oblivious to why it was deteriorating, that doesn't mean you'd get any cooperation from them.




Officers were trusted and were the persons other soldiers relied on - they should protect and boost morale. And NCO role was to maintain cohesion of his unit - it should protect morale as well.

This is the only part I don't agree with. I feel like a 'good officer' aught to set you up for success in other ways than just being present. His task aught to be more of making sure the circumstances are there for your morale to steady by ensuring real cohesion of the formation. Arbitrary bonuses for certain ranks being near you I don't agree with. If they are doing their job (as they often may not) then you should benefit indirectly.



2.1) Reducing the speed of reloading...Ideally (ideally), fumbling would be introduced. And I know this would be a real bitch to code and animate various forms of fumbling but it would pay dividends in giving the real experience of loading under duress... which was a huge factor in Civil War combat. I would like to see fumbling in any shooter because it's absolutely a real thing under pressure for any type of combat.



2.3) When there are enemies during the retreat path (and morale is deteriorating even further during retreat), the avatar just surrenders - in game terms it would be just kind of casualty as KIA is, but with different animation.
This is the most radical and sure way to reduce the effectiveness of players who aught to be fleeing but instead will continue to fight to the death.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The thing about suggestions like these is yes, they are radical but it works both ways. It's an even playing field.

It's not "That's not fair, I got autosurrendered." It's "I screwed up and the enemy took advantage of it, next time I won't try to take on four guys by myself just because I knew I'd kill one or two." Next time I'll fall back, I'll work with teammates.

It's not "WTF my screen is going tunnel visioned I can't see right." It's "I was standing alone getting shot at by three guys so I had to fall back or take cover."

It's not "Every time this Yankee charged us solo half the formation went chasing after him." It's "Some dumbass Yankee charged us alone and autosurrendered and didn't try that again."

It's not "All the 1stGA ever does is fire one volley and charge us every time, it get's so old." It's "They charged us again but we broke their morale this time so they stopped and fell back rather than run into our bayonets."


Leave the concept of morale out and you have a game that will be a derivative of every other shooter only with muskets and bayonets. You can put the spawns wherever you want but they'll only effect the pace of gameplay and may introduce gamey tactics. Check out M&B Napoleonic Wars or Battlegrounds for the future of gameplay as it is in WoR and tell me whether you like that. The very mentality that is so prevalent in video games of "keep it playable" is what will make it unplayable, ununique, and frustrating to the normal gamer or to the roll-players. I'm tired of chasing experiences in FPS games. You shouldn't have to chase the right moment, the game should function in the first place. Do you want line battles or do you want non-competitive virtual reenactments? I'd trade long respawn times and artificial restrictions for morale any day of the week. As I said in the original post, fast forward to the future and many of you will choose not to play in public servers but will only venture into them to recruit for your private events from the masses of disappointed people striving for the gameplay they hoped WoR would provide freely.



Reducing the widely-accepted gifts of perfect operation that video games give us is simply trying to transplant you to a situation to make decisions like the real combatants would make rather than being an avatar with hitpoints and a specified armament. WoR combat is always going to be more intense than reality. If an entire server decided to lone wolf it out... you may not notice a whole lot of advantage. But if some are functioning correctly together then they should be more effective.

Bivoj
07-30-2017, 07:41 PM
We must consider realism vs game play here Bivoj. Whilst they strive to be realistic the game has still got to playable and enjoyable. Too hardcore can be a destriment.

Actually, as mentioned by Poorlaggedman - without radical (and bold!) implementation of morale (and I do not say, that my suggestions are the best made; it could be done other way), the game will result in another regular semi-realistic FPS, just with rifled muskets. And it will be about melee a lot - because it is very easy to charge against long-time reloads and inaccurate fire of the muzzle-loaders we have in game. Austrian Stosstaktik (of this era) will be pretty efficient (contrary to reality)...
To be honest, such result is still good - I will do the ramboing and lone-wolf bayonet charges on public servers, while having a good time. But it could be better:)

Just like they made radical and bold solutions in game called Verdun, forcing defenders to stay in trenches and attackers to attack, motivating players even on public servers to behave like in ww1. In alpha days, Verdun was just like any other FPS, just with ww1 weapons. I hope WoR will be the same in this - bold and innovative features forcing players even on public servers to behave like in Civil War. And that is why I threw my 2p here to provide some inspiration to devs.

And to be really honest, when you fear the playability and ejoyability - long respawn times will make this game far less enjoyable than implementation of reasonable morale restrictions. I recall some maps in RedOrchestra, where the authors experienced with long respawn times and long marches from respawn to the actual battle, but it did not bring the desired effect. Players behaved just like on the other maps, it was just more boring to play these maps due to 'more waiting = less fun'. Better to have short respawn times and good morale system to have more fun.


Morale I agree cannot be a programmed feature, it must be felt by the player.
The only game I felt fear while playing was Amnesia (and a little bit in playing its successor Soma), but that is a different story:) I have never experienced in any game visual and sound effects, which can bring you even close to the state why units broke, retreated or routed. So, I do not believe it is doable. I have never experienced in computer games anything even close to the paintball game, where you fear the pain of being hit (while paintball is very very far from real warfare).

As mentioned by Poorlaggedman - it is common to have morale in RTS games, even not-so-realistic-ones for wide audience of players like Total War series and it does not destroy their playability. Any good wargame (computer, miniature or board) has morale system implemented, why not FPS? When it is transparent and players know, that morale is another "health bar" to care about, adjusting their behaviour accordingly - it should work and can be fun. Like in the mentioned RTS games.

@Poorlaggedman - I almost fully agree with you. We just have a different view on the role of officers and NCOs. I fully agree, that officers' task is not "just being present", BUT I am certain (and reading historical books convincing even more), that soldiers were more motivated by just seeing the presence of their officer; on the other hand seeing him fall casualty or even wounded could cause retreat or rout of his unit.
But that is just a minor stuff.

Bravescot
07-30-2017, 09:25 PM
It's still game play vs over realism. Game play needs to come first.

Bivoj
07-30-2017, 09:36 PM
Proven many many times: realism in computer games can be fun.

Takerith
07-30-2017, 09:50 PM
Also, many of Poorlaggedman's suggestions were actually focused on gameplay, rather than pure realism. In these cases realism is supplementing gameplay, rather than forced realism for it's own sake.

A good implementation of realism might be an autosurrender, because it has very palpable effects on the metagame. It'll discourage ramboing, while having some form of realism.

A bad implementation of realism would be having a musket misfire at complete random (if anyone has played The Deluge mod for M&B, you'll know what I mean). There's no way to circumvent it, and it won't really discourage people from firing muskets. It'll just make the game more frustrating.

Poorlaggedman
07-31-2017, 12:19 PM
I think gameplay and realism can go hand-in-hand. Especially when realism is basically doubling as immersion. Is it ruining gameplay if it's harder to steady a shot because you are winded? Seems like a perfectly reasonable penalty to me. Gameplay needs more science applied to it and more asking of 'what are we trying to accomplish?' There's no way of knowing what the developers have in mind to encourage teamwork but it's just a hard business getting human beings to behave in a video game and needs a lot of thought put into it.

6912


Actually... when it comes to suppression or morale or whatever you want to call it.. I notice there is already an effect of people firing near you and possibly even an effect of incoming bullets. It's isn't cumulative, in that it's only a 'flinch' as is the wild and annoying artillery effects (that I disagree with, as I said on the morale thread in the other Ideas and suggestions forum). Really what we're talking about when it comes to morale is that the player who runs off alone especially experiences negative effects if he is shot at, or if he closes with the enemy alone or in pairs against a larger enemy force. I do not consider lone wolves critical to 'gameplay.' It's more of the opposite. Of course there should be varying degrees of feeling it that accomplish the discouraging of constant charges against superior forces and encourage the close proximity of friendlies--the more, the better. I'll explain my vision in pictures later on the other thread :p



With meelee. It's too easy to get the drop on someone reloading. You're essentially helpless while reloading since you'll be unable to really look around which i totally disagree with. The first warning you've been flanked by another rambo with a bayonet is the sound of the bayoneting. They'd usually get two or three guys and the smart ones would get your officer first. The use of meelee escalates and what it basically becomes <75 yards is a series of trading meelee kills. If you don't have your bayonet on or you need to react to meelee you are screwed if the enemy is close since it's not a smooth transition to meelee mode. Most people don't have the patience to sit there and practice their marksmanship more than a couple times. You can't fire your weapon except when aiming down the sights to protect yourself in an emergency either and you should be able to. I hope there is a plan to let you discharge your weapon from the 'hip.'

There's a lot of factors favoring meelee heavily <75 yards since you can easily close that distance during an enemy reload and the reloading player is disoriented because of the animation that bobbles his perspective around (which is fancy to watch the first few times but gets old -- since one can certainly do it without taking his eyes off his front). The transition into meelee mode is too rough. Your line fires a volley and one guy charges you and the whole line has to react by not reloading and going into meelee mode.

Hinkel
07-31-2017, 12:25 PM
It's too easy to get the drop on someone reloading. You're essentially helpless while reloading since you'll be unable to really look around which i totally disagree with. .

You are able to press ALT to look around while reloading. But if you don't look at your rifle, your reload is slower.
If you see an enemy, you can press R for a quick reload stop.

Charles Caldwell
07-31-2017, 12:51 PM
You are able to press ALT to look around while reloading. But if you don't look at your rifle, your reload is slower.
If you see an enemy, you can press R for a quick reload stop.

I'm sure I tried this and found the head and look angle strange. I think its based on the head position of the loader looking down.

Leifr
07-31-2017, 01:53 PM
You are able to press ALT to look around while reloading. But if you don't look at your rifle, your reload is slower.
If you see an enemy, you can press R for a quick reload stop.

Is this an actual thing Hinkel?

TrustyJam
07-31-2017, 04:40 PM
Is this an actual thing Hinkel?

No.

- Trusty

FakeMessiah27
07-31-2017, 05:49 PM
No.

- Trusty

Ah :(

TrustyJam
07-31-2017, 05:52 PM
Ah :(

We experimented with it for a while. Must be why Hinkel got it mixed up as being a released thing. :)

- Trusty

F. L. Villarreal
07-31-2017, 05:53 PM
We experimented with it for a while. Must be why Hinkel got it mixed up as being a released thing. :)

- Trusty

It's a great idea, I do hope its implemented. IRL we would be able to look around while reloading. That's just my thoughts, not that they hold much weight lol

Bivoj
07-31-2017, 07:18 PM
No.

- Trusty

???
Honestly, I do not understand the answer. I have just tried it ingame and it is possible to look around while reloading and holding ALT as well as interrupting reload by pressing R. And this feature is available for a long time, definitely before the introduction of skirmish phase. I am using free-look while holding ALT almost every time I am reloading in game (I must admit, thjat the need for holding ALT is annoying). I was just not aware of slowing the reload time, while doing so...

But back to topic:
the reloading stuff is a nice example of where realism means more playability/enjoyability or what is called "quality of life" in games.

In real combat:
when enemy with bayonet is approaching at you, you immediately look at him when he reaches at least peripheral sight without even thinking about it (he is serious threat for your life!) - it is automatic
In current WoR:
You have to intentionally press and hold a button (ALT key) and intentionally move the mouse. You have to do something clumsy and you have to do it intentionally - complete opposite to real combat.
Possible solutions (=more realism):
1. Allow free mouse-look while reloading without the necessity to pres and hold ALT
2. Better: Autofocus on the nearest enemy soldier, when he is in close proximity to player - that would be much more like IRL

In real combat:
When someone is attacking you in melee, you automatically, without thinking about it, cancel anything and try to avoid the strike, defend yourself and counterattack.
In current WoR:
You reload your weapon regardless of enemy (enemies) approaching you and attacking you. You easily let them kill you, while continuing the reloading process OR you have to clumsily press several buttons (press R to cancel reload, press V to enter melee, press LMB to counterattack)
Possible solution (=more realism):
Get rid of the whole "melee mode" stuff and make melee a special attack button (as in other games), ideally mapped to middle mouse button OR somewhere close to wasd. When pressing melee attack, the avatar automatically cancels anything (reloading included) and strikes melee attack (or melee defend, when this feature is introduced)
Whole "melee mode" belongs to parade ground or drill camp; in combat, there is nothing like "melee mode" and defensless non-melee mode, there is immediate reaction to situation.

Hinkel
07-31-2017, 07:25 PM
???
Honestly, I do not understand the answer. I have just tried it ingame and it is possible to look around while reloading and holding ALT as well as interrupting reload by pressing R. And this feature is available for a long time, definitely before the introduction of skirmish phase. I am using free-look while holding ALT almost every time I am reloading in game (I must admit, thjat the need for holding ALT is annoying). I was just not aware of slowing the reload time, while doing so....

You are able to look around and you can stop reloading by pressing R. But the slower reload is not activated right now.

Poorlaggedman
08-02-2017, 08:08 PM
I don't think an entire line should have to cancel and start reloads over again just because of one guy in meelee mode coming at them and nobody knows where he's going to sprint into.

The key to making things work is by thinking as a competitor. Why am I going to have my line stand 40 feet away and fire volleys when I can send a few guys at a time into a distracting meelee while the rest my guys reload for another shot? You have to make good behavior be competitive and not require pure role-playing to get that.

Ideally (ideally) you'd be able to resume reloading where you left off, more smoothly transition to meelee mode (thus degrading the power of constantly running around in it). Instead of doing the same fancy reload head swiveling, I'd rather the head just looked straight. Right now loading in any sort of close proximity to the enemy makes it almost a sure thing to get stabbed by that barbaric weapon. The head could at least provide a better perspective, maybe just blurring the background and focusing on the firearm. This is a real problem. You're not going to have close range fights as it is, especially if players are essentially blind to threats in their front when reloading.

The problem with making meelee a 'minor' thing is that the system is rudimentary so that the player with the best advantage is just running around in circles in 'charge' mode. It aught to be easy to whack at someone to your front or immediate sides. You don't want to force everyone to run around in charge mode to stand a chance in meelee mode. It makes me wander how many times people were really run through with a bayonet at a full sprint like that. It seems counter-intuitive to survival instinct. I'm going to post some craziness about my vision of morale in the other thread later or tomorrow.

Dether
08-02-2017, 09:43 PM
what if we could stab back while kneeling (just a random thought) I'm sure these guys will figure it out,, its still very early in the development.

FakeMessiah27
08-03-2017, 09:25 AM
Perhaps the eventual implementation of the stamina system will reduce the amount of people charging around all over the place. If you can't charge everywhere anymore and have to resort to double quick (or even walking) you will be an easier target to be gunned down.

TrustyJam
08-03-2017, 10:26 AM
Perhaps the eventual implementation of the stamina system will reduce the amount of people charging around all over the place. If you can't charge everywhere anymore and have to resort to double quick (or even walking) you will be an easier target to be gunned down.

The stamina system has been in there for a very long time already. :)

- Trusty

Charles Caldwell
08-03-2017, 10:53 AM
The stamina system has been in there for a very long time already. :)

- Trusty

Yep its a good system, I like it.... perhaps though you could make it more difficult to charge around all game?

TrustyJam
08-03-2017, 11:17 AM
Yep its a good system, I like it.... perhaps though you could make it more difficult to charge around all game?

Skirmish areas are relatively small and naturally the stamina system resets when you die. We don't want players to be able to run for five yards only to stop for a minute to catch their breath sort of situation.

That being said, all systems could quite possibly change as they are tweaked during alpha/beta.

- Trusty

Poorlaggedman
08-03-2017, 11:56 AM
what if we could stab back while kneeling (just a random thought) I'm sure these guys will figure it out,, its still very early in the development.

I think movement should be more fluid in some ways. There's a really fine line that might be walked for best results. Yesterday I was kneeling with three other guys firing into the sunken lane from the high ground. I was the leftmost guy and every once and a while I checked left. So I load and I check left and there's two rebs charging at us about 30 yards away. I warn the others then turn to shoot the closest. Only I can't... He's just out of my range of motion while kneeling and it took too long to stand. I don't know about you guys but I can personally certainly move around while crouched. No i don't swivel on the earth like in every other game but I can readjust. As I said, the transition to meelee is too slow so the advantage remains with your Banzai charger.

David Dire
08-03-2017, 01:07 PM
I have a suggedtion which could help with charging > shooting.

Allow "mutual deaths," so if someone takes a lethal blow from a bayonet, they have a small bit of time to stab back, and kill the two of them. This will make melee massively more unrewarding.

DomDowg
08-04-2017, 12:44 AM
I mean the is if you look at the union side on the company tool. There are alot of sharpshooter companies with a lot of people. If the servers maybe hold 500-1000 people and 200 of that are sharpshooters then a good quarter of the server pop are fighting in loose formations putting the lines at a disadvantage. When the company tool gets better updated something will needed to couter balance this. The 1stUSSS and 2nd USSS historically only recruited the best. They didnt have 1000 men or 100 a company. That is the issue. Too many sharpshooters in this game.

Gator
08-04-2017, 01:01 AM
I think as soon as the game opens up to the public it will open the floodgates and every casual with play just to fart around and have fun and no they will not coordinate with the team or set up lines. They will most likely hide in bushes and snipe people and melee non stop. A simple fix to this would be to have the option of having private servers so the large companies and associations that take it seriously and roleplay can do so without being invaded by randoms.

TrustyJam
08-04-2017, 01:09 AM
I think as soon as the game opens up to the public it will open the floodgates and every casual with play just to fart around and have fun and no they will not coordinate with the team or set up lines. They will most likely hide in bushes and snipe people and melee non stop. A simple fix to this would be to have the option of having private servers so the large companies and associations that take it seriously and roleplay can do so without being invaded by randoms.

Private servers will be a thing.

It is not needed at the moment though as we'd rather have as many of you as possible gathered to test stuff out. :)

- Trusty

FakeMessiah27
08-04-2017, 09:54 AM
I mean the is if you look at the union side on the company tool. There are alot of sharpshooter companies with a lot of people. If the servers maybe hold 500-1000 people and 200 of that are sharpshooters then a good quarter of the server pop are fighting in loose formations putting the lines at a disadvantage. When the company tool gets better updated something will needed to couter balance this. The 1stUSSS and 2nd USSS historically only recruited the best. They didnt have 1000 men or 100 a company. That is the issue. Too many sharpshooters in this game.

Perhaps there will be limits on the amount of sharps, cav, or arty that can be picked in a round when they all get implemented. I know the devs are already working on an officer limit for example; I don't remember exactly if they ever announced a limit on different branches specifically, but it should help balance things out.

In private events, the event organisers could also do the balancing themselves of course.

David Dire
08-04-2017, 02:20 PM
A 10 sharpshooter limit per team seems pretty fair honestly.

Legion
08-04-2017, 04:54 PM
A 10 sharpshooter limit per team seems pretty fair honestly.

What defines a sharpshooter in your opinion? Is it the way they fight, the weapons they use, etc?

Many sharpshooters during the war used standard weapons of the day like the Springfield or Enfield. Also, many sharphooters weren't part of official sharpshooter units, they were just men who had good shooting skills and would act as sharpshooters when needed.

Point is you can't really limit sharpshooters because anyone can decide to act as a sharpshooter, the unit and weapon don't matter.

Profender
08-04-2017, 05:32 PM
A 10 sharpshooter limit per team seems pretty fair honestly.


What defines a sharpshooter in your opinion? Is it the way they fight, the weapons they use, etc?

Many sharpshooters during the war used standard weapons of the day like the Springfield or Enfield. Also, many sharphooters weren't part of official sharpshooter units, they were just men who had good shooting skills and would act as sharpshooters when needed.

Point is you can't really limit sharpshooters because anyone can decide to act as a sharpshooter, the unit and weapon don't matter.

I would suggest reading this little book:
https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2010/9/7/book-review-sharpshooting-in-the-civil-war/

Gives a lot of information. Indeed in most cases sharpshooters where the best of their regiment and where called out when needed. Either as sharpshooters or as a small team of scouts in curtain terrain. Almost never went a sharpshooter on his own.

Other great source:
http://www.cfspress.com/sharpshooters/

David Dire
08-04-2017, 07:20 PM
By sharpshooter I obviously mean designated units.

Profender
08-04-2017, 07:36 PM
By sharpshooter I obviously mean designated units.

Well not only designated units held sharpshooters. It was adopted within regular units to have sharpshooters in their group. Like Legion also mentioned

David Dire
08-04-2017, 08:47 PM
By sharpshooters I obviously mean only designated units.

Legion
08-04-2017, 09:45 PM
By sharpshooters I obviously mean only designated units.

It still wont make a difference. I could assign my unit to act as sharpshooters. Limiting a specific unit won't make any difference, the enfields and springfields used by my unit are just as capable as the rifles used by sharpshooters (besides the whitworth).

I don't understand what limiting sharpshooter units will do in-game.

A. P. Hill
08-04-2017, 09:57 PM
A 10 sharpshooter limit per team seems pretty fair honestly.

Gee.
That would piss off the whole 13th PA Reserve. (A.K.A. 42nd PA) The whole regiment considered themselves sharpshooters. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. There are at least 10 companies that call themselves sharpshooters as well, and most of these units have more than 10 members. How do you sort that?

DomDowg
08-04-2017, 10:48 PM
Gee.
That would piss off the whole 13th PA Reserve. (A.K.A. 42nd PA) The whole regiment considered themselves sharpshooters. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. There are at least 10 companies that call themselves sharpshooters as well, and most of these units have more than 10 members. How do you sort that?

That is exactly what I mean. So many sharpshooters in this game. We might just make Sniper Elite 5 and in the end mission you assassinate Jefferson Davis, Abraham Lincoln and Adolf Hitler.

David Dire
08-05-2017, 12:18 AM
Soldiers not in sharpshooter regiments will not recieve any buffs for being in line however.

And defending the army being made up 35% of sharp shooters? What happened to historical accuracy and 15 man gun crews?

Legion
08-05-2017, 02:18 AM
That is exactly what I mean. So many sharpshooters in this game. We might just make Sniper Elite 5 and in the end mission you assassinate Jefferson Davis, Abraham Lincoln and Adolf Hitler.

Sharpshooters are no different from regular line infantry in-game. Simply having the name sharpshooter doesn't make them superior. Many of the weapons used by line infantry are also used by sharpshooters.

Soldiers not in sharpshooter regiments will not recieve any buffs for being in line however.

And defending the army being made up 35% of sharp shooters? What happened to historical accuracy and 15 man gun crews?

There are no buffs in-game so I don't see your point. Sharpshooters are really just in name only, unless the players are good shots then they really aren't sharpshooters.

Their weapons wont be superior to the line infantry unless they have something like the Whitworth with its superior accuracy or the sharps with it's fire rate. but even those weapons have drawbacks, the whitworth gets harder to load as it gets fouled and the sharps accuracy isn't really superior to any of the line infantry weapons.

Dether
08-05-2017, 02:56 AM
Sharpshooters are no different from regular line infantry in-game. Simply having the name sharpshooter doesn't make them superior. Many of the weapons used by line infantry are also used by sharpshooters.


There are no buffs in-game so I don't see your point. Sharpshooters are really just in name only, unless the players are good shots then they really aren't sharpshooters.

Their weapons wont be superior to the line infantry unless they have something like the Whitworth with its superior accuracy or the sharps with it's fire rate. but even those weapons have drawbacks, the whitworth gets harder to load as it gets fouled and the sharps accuracy isn't really superior to any of the line infantry weapons.

excellent points all around, I agree.

DomDowg
08-05-2017, 04:17 AM
What I am trying to say is sharpshooters fight in loose formations. I mean sharpshooters not crack pot shot in a line infantry unit. Union Sharpshooters especially. Confed not so much. For Union sharps the get the Sharps rifle. So a line of idk 30 men marching. Can get attacked by the 2ndUSSS with maybe 30 men (not accurate numbers of course). And get decimated because the sharpshooters are allowed to spread out, while the lines must stay shoulder to shoulder. That is what I mean.

Then for the Union having near 200-300 sharpshooters. That is alot of sharpshooters. So all I say is that we need to set a limit. Cav is no problem because there is not alot of it. And neither is the artillery because again not a lot of it.

Legion
08-05-2017, 04:37 AM
What I am trying to say is sharpshooters fight in loose formations. I mean sharpshooters not crack pot shot in a line infantry unit. Union Sharpshooters especially. Confed not so much. For Union sharps the get the Sharps rifle. So a line of idk 30 men marching. Can get attacked by the 2ndUSSS with maybe 30 men (not accurate numbers of course). And get decimated because the sharpshooters are allowed to spread out, while the lines must stay shoulder to shoulder. That is what I mean.

Then for the Union having near 200-300 sharpshooters. That is alot of sharpshooters. So all I say is that we need to set a limit. Cav is no problem because there is not alot of it. And neither is the artillery because again not a lot of it.

no one is forcing sharphooters or line infantry to fight in certain formations.

David Dire
08-05-2017, 04:49 AM
So what youre saying is youre completely fine with 50% of both armies being made up of either whitworths or breechloaders?

I'm glad you're not balancing the game.

Legion
08-05-2017, 05:01 AM
So what youre saying is youre completely fine with 50% of both armies being made up of either whitworths or breechloaders?

I'm glad you're not balancing the game.

Whitworths will be limited, not sure about sharps though. I honestly don't care though, I haven't seen it make any significant difference to the gameplay so far.

From my experience playing the smoke builds up and forces people to get closer which negates any advantage that the whitworth or any long range rifle really has.

Hitsme Indaface
08-05-2017, 07:42 AM
no one is forcing sharpshooters or line infantry to fight in certain formations.

My concern lies not with the tactics, there will be dev implemented tools to encourage people to fight together. My concern comes when it finally gets to the maps where the CSA must take the point from the union. If you show up facing a line of defending sharpshooters or 42nd PA all carrying sharps rifles.

In game currently, the sharps rifle can complete a standing reload in 9 seconds, and 10 if kneeling. ALL CSA weapons currently require 20 seconds standing and 21 seconds kneeling to reload. Therefore, our options will be limited, because for every shot we can fire, they will fire 2.

To be fair, the attacking force will always and should always be at a disadvantage, but if facing an enemy that can shoot as well as you, but can shoot twice as many shots in the same time, you will come out on bottom consistently.

Because of this, I do think that there should be a limit on how many can carry that weapon for the purpose of balance. I understand that superior tactics and organization can overcome most obstacles, but ultimately, it is a game designed to be fun and ultimately (hopefully) balanced.

TrustyJam
08-05-2017, 07:52 AM
Our limiting system is built quite well in terms of tweaks and changes. We'll be able to limit number of regiments per skirmish area, classes available in each regiment, weapons available in each regiment so expect to see ongoing balancing once it's been released.

- Trusty

Profender
08-05-2017, 08:13 AM
Our limiting system is built quite well in terms of tweaks and changes. We'll be able to limit number of regiments per skirmish area, classes available in each regiment, weapons available in each regiment so expect to see ongoing balancing once it's been released.

- Trusty

A ratio per active people from each company? for a line infantry company 1 scoped rifle for active in-game 25 members perhaps. If you read about the limited amount of scoped rifles handed out that would make sense. And then a larger ratio for the actual sharpshooting companies.

Quote:
"In addition to his regular routine of drill and inspection, his interest in sharpshooting when his Division allocated five whitworth rifles imported from England"

TrustyJam
08-05-2017, 08:20 AM
A ratio per active people from each company? for a line infantry company 1 scoped rifle for active in-game 25 members perhaps. If you read about the limited amount of scoped rifles handed out that would make sense. And then a larger ratio for the actual sharpshooting companies.

Quote:
"In addition to his regular routine of drill and inspection, his interest in sharpshooting when his Division allocated five whitworth rifles imported from England"

Once weapon limiting is in (won't make it in the initial limitation implementation) we'll be able to limit each weapon available in a certain regiment based on percentages.

- Trusty

Profender
08-05-2017, 08:25 AM
Once weapon limiting is in (won't make it in the initial limitation implementation) we'll be able to limit each weapon available in a certain regiment based on percentages.

- Trusty

very happy to hear that thank you

Poorlaggedman
08-05-2017, 02:00 PM
I'm going to create a rant of questions on server hosting at some point. In short, I hope many things will be customizable for the sake of hosting different events and scenarios. From base spawn times to 'classes' allowed on every map, even the official maps. It's always a shame to have a certain map in a game where you can't do something that would be awesome, even on occasion. And you've got different opinions on what is realistic and it'd be a good experiment besides to see how the weapons or classes perform in different scenarios or with different base spawn times or different team sizes or just making an ultra-realism one-life event by merely disabling spawning or making the spawn time 9999. In my opinion there should be suggested default options and but they should definitely be modifiable whether easy or not without requiring a new version of a map to be downloaded by the player.


If the servers maybe hold 500-1000 people...I think 500-1000 players in a server is a crackpipe fantasy. I'd name my first kid "War of Rights" if they could pull that off. I'd be happy if they could double the current max for now.


I think as soon as the game opens up to the public it will open the floodgates and every casual with play just to fart around and have fun and no they will not coordinate with the team or set up lines. They will most likely hide in bushes and snipe people and melee non stop. A simple fix to this would be to have the option of having private servers so the large companies and associations that take it seriously and roleplay can do so without being invaded by randoms.That's what I'm trying to avoid personally. Because when you have to do that it means it's not competitive any longer and that's standard conditions in realism communities. You have the unwashed masses playing a messy game then you have the realism unit people hold up in their servers secretly hating each other for always pushing the rules. Once I fix up some videos I'll finish my morale thread.

David Dire
08-05-2017, 02:07 PM
The max server size will never exceed 400, and even that is pretty wishful.

Andee
08-05-2017, 10:08 PM
I'm going to create a rant of questions on server hosting at some point. In short, I hope many things will be customizable for the sake of hosting different events and scenarios. From base spawn times to 'classes' allowed on every map, even the official maps. It's always a shame to have a certain map in a game where you can't do something that would be awesome, even on occasion. And you've got different opinions on what is realistic and it'd be a good experiment besides to see how the weapons or classes perform in different scenarios or with different base spawn times or different team sizes or just making an ultra-realism one-life event by merely disabling spawning or making the spawn time 9999. In my opinion there should be suggested default options and but they should definitely be modifiable whether easy or not without requiring a new version of a map to be downloaded by the player.

I think 500-1000 players in a server is a crackpipe fantasy. I'd name my first kid "War of Rights" if they could pull that off. I'd be happy if they could double the current max for now.

That's what I'm trying to avoid personally. Because when you have to do that it means it's not competitive any longer and that's standard conditions in realism communities. You have the unwashed masses playing a messy game then you have the realism unit people hold up in their servers secretly hating each other for always pushing the rules. Once I fix up some videos I'll finish my morale thread.

I agree whole-heartedly. Spreading out the player base is not beneficial in anyway.

TheRegulator
08-06-2017, 02:33 AM
The max server size will never exceed 400, and even that is pretty wishful.

Well all kinda modern Things are being invented, look at the amazing telegraf . . . Progress is certain. Recently i heard about this guy called Gatling. He is suposed to have invented a mecanical device that can fire 60 shoots a min, just operated by one man, turning a handel rapidly. 60 shoots ! No one might have belived that, just a few years ago . . . I am sure this weapon will end all wars :rolleyes:

Poorlaggedman
08-09-2017, 04:58 AM
Meelee combat is going to be a big part of the game and I hope the devs are ready to deal with that. Making the transition to meelee slow and cumbersome is only putting the advantage to the lunatic running around in meelee mode all the time. I get the coolness of having the various stances of holding your musket... yet it makes little-to-no sense to move in anything but meelee mode with your bayonet on if you're even going to be remotely close to the enemy. It's as fast or a faster transition to aim your musket than the fancier marching stances. The very act of "oh meelee isn't going to be a big part of the game" is what is going to make it a big part of the game if the devs don't give reasons not to just close in all the time. Rest assured that more players on a server is going to do diddly squat to change the fact that the bayonet is a much faster way to kill than the musket if you know how to use it.

Standing in line of battle shrouded in your own side's smoke, unable to effectively hit targets (if you can even see them) is going to make closing in with the bayonet much more enticing. It's always going to happen more than reality in a video game but it doesn't have to be nonstop bayoneting parties.

I'll explain later why I think the best thing for this problem and the game in general is a morale system in the thread I started on morale. http://www.warofrightsforum.com/showthread.php?4397-Morale-and-how-to-harness-it

Additionally after you thrust a bayonet into someone you should have a longer moment of vulnerability to recover. There also needs to be slashing or whacking with your rifle which is more of an area attack and less of a point and hit. Too many shooters have the kind of point and aim meelee attacks that allow people to slide right by them and it becomes a messy blob. Current meelee can often be a bizarre sort of aerial dog fighting where people are charging around in meelee mode all over the place. Standing still is what gets you killed real fast. You're already seeing zig-zagging widely used. Some people don't even fire their muskets before charging. It doesn't help that every fence seems to be a wall that can't be penetrated, yet also doesn't steady your musket if you're against it.

Disorganized impulse is rewarded and as I said before.... one guy charging and selecting his target reloading on a line can stop the whole line from reloading or to break ranks (not that ranks serve any purpose presently). You aren't able to effectively react fast enough. The idea of beginning a reload sequence so close to an enemy is very dangerous, especially when it is as disorienting as it is. You also can't do it when you're moving. I think it's crucial to have various reloading animations and times... including while moving. Also (with morale) fumbling.

The problem for me is that, not only is it unhistorical, but tactics go out the window in close combat in any game. There are no tactics when its just a series of 1v1 meelee matchups with some occasional backstabbing. There is far more tactical purpose and maneuvering at longer ranges. It's a normal impulse for immature and mature players alike to want to close in on the enemy, it's far worse and results in meelee way more often with single-shot weapons.


I was using a breechloader for almost all of this footage below. It shows every death on one whole map after the first clip. The last clip kind of sums it up. I've been trying different stuff to counter meelee (other than meelee), including falling back and being more cautious moving forward. Everything is leading me to the conclusion that I need to get good at either meelee or running away.

https://youtu.be/osjq5XTcYWA





This is basically what WoR will be like 50% of the time and 100% of the time in a map like West Woods. Not just to pick on this game... it's a problem in all other linear combat games as well. This is also continuing the stereotype of the savage hand-to-hand fighting in the Civil War that is ever-present sullying the memory of ordinary, underappreciated bloodshed. Bayonets may get old to some and many may consider it lame to use but a constant stream of new people needed to sustain a game will make its use unrelenting. Every honest WoR AAR will have the phrase "...including vicious hand-to-hand combat" because there's nothing to prevent any random person from closing in.
NSFW probably:

https://youtu.be/Gwb2D3coiBc

Legion
08-10-2017, 12:06 AM
They should add an animation for when you stab with the bayonet instead of just having the enemy soldier drop instantly. They should also add a delay to simulate the bayonet getting lodged into the abdomen of the enemy soldier.

Bivoj
08-10-2017, 07:47 AM
When talking about melee - I wish there will be a game, where you injure others by your "idle" pointing bayonet. It is ridiculous, that you harmlessly bounce when you hit someone, while running at him with your bayonet aiming at him (in a "charge"). It is even more funny, when someone hit you at your bayonet ready (when you are in "melee stance") and nothing happens.

It is really strange, that single "click" of LMB magicaly transfers harmless (rubber?) bayonet into deadly steel weapon, but just for a fraction of secong and then, the bayonet becomes blunt harmless object again...

It would be wonderful if some kind of "impact demage" based on actual speed in the moment of colision is implemented and the magic LMB only increases the demage. Friendly or fou should be harmed by just hitting your "idle" bayonet in melee stance (or even "at the ready" and crouch stances) - this would make "march" stance practicaly useful as it was IRL. Soldiers were not running with bayonets pointing straight because they wanted to avoid friendly injuries.

A. P. Hill
08-10-2017, 01:15 PM
The max server size will never exceed 400, and even that is pretty wishful.

You may want to rethink this.

According to this (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_massively_multiplayer_online_role-playing_games) bit of information, there are apparent server architectures with massive populations exceeding by magnitudes your count.

My hope is that the developers look to those sites for direction on building the future server architecture of WoR.

TheRegulator
08-10-2017, 03:14 PM
Mele shut be a firce and exstrem dangerous for booth parts. Look at BF1 the bajonet animations, and counter messaures are perfect. (I do not compare the games !) But the only the script and animations.
Make the animation going from kneel to mele rapid, make the intire movement and reaction animations real time and realistic ! Hip fire at close range and stabbing from kneeling ...Then any Rambo will figure out its a very bad idea to charge alone ! Dev's use the words realismen, sure the uniforms and suroundings are realistic, but that about it, at present time in the charge/mele content.

Rambo's is only gonna be a problem, if your not able to defend yourself proper, then they will rage in the rows of kneeling and reloading soldiers.
But i still claim this . . . Officers who shoot privates for not following orders, or run's of, is the best cure, now and in the future for players morale.
And once the new recruits stand there alone, watching the Companies doing thier "fellowship" Then they will feel outside and seek the "safe" habour inside the Company, just wait and see !


I can see from the tread that some people even think that a charge, shut play a minor part of the game . . . Juding from the "Eager" to fix the bayonet animations, i recon its the same attitude inside the dev's team.
Now some will say that it was not used historical that much, maybe ! But this is a game and an experince in that kind of warfare, its not a 100% recreation where people march to a point according to history, or even do what was done that day on the battelfield. Its a game, where the battel will shift over the fields. Otherwise we just become "Bot's" renacting historical events.

Charge is a major part of the game. The charge offers a lot of morale "Glory" and binds the Companies together in a sort of "Fellowship" behind the screens, even if its still a disorganized crowd moving forward. and not a straight line with 1ste line having thier bayonets lowered, doing a real by the handbook charge. I love to see that at anytime. (Happen once in my play time, going on 100 Hours now. Compliments to Major stone 42 Pa)

I still think once the atillery and cavalry comes into game it will all change a lot. Any inf charge can be flanked by cav. Including stray of rambo's who will be an easy target for cav on the flanks. Canister shoots from the 12 Pound cannon will be able, to rip any charge apart. It will defently change the way we fight. Actually i think the Cav will be the rambo's biggest nightmare in game . . . Let's c if i am right.

In all i think the Rambo problem, is not that a big issue and it wont be ither that much at release . . . Because its a very, very strong and decitated community.