Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 91

Thread: Cold, hard truth: The future of gameplay.

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by A. P. Hill View Post
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by TrustyJam View Post
    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?
    Last edited by Poorlaggedman; 07-30-2017 at 01:57 AM.

  2. #22
    just a turkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8
    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.
    Pvt. Turkey 3rd US Regulars Company B

  3. #23
    WoR-Dev TrustyJam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    5,133
    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

    Hagerstown_Turnpike (3).jpg

    - Trusty

  4. #24

    CSA Major General

    Dether's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by just a turkey View Post
    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%
    All governments, everywhere derived its power by the consent of the people. The government you have is by your own consent. Not by those brave grey dead of one hundred and fifty plus years ago.

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by TrustyJam View Post
    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.

  6. #26
    WoR-Dev TrustyJam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    5,133
    Quote Originally Posted by Poorlaggedman View Post
    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

  7. #27

    CSA Captain

    Bivoj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    171
    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.

  8. #28

    USA Brigadier General

    Maximus Decimus Meridius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,682
    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?
    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.
    Last edited by Maximus Decimus Meridius; 07-30-2017 at 12:11 PM.
    http://www.warofrightsforum.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=522&dateline=14500460  02


  9. #29

    USA General of the Army

    Bravescot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Perthshire, Scotland
    Posts
    2,626
    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.

  10. #30
    David Dire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    America
    Posts
    680
    I didnt even think of company based morale.

    So, I support Maximus' idea, there.

    I suppose it would be easier to make?
    http://i.imgur.com/STUHVb8.png

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •