Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 74

Thread: State of Affairs as of 10/30/17

  1. #51
    Moderator

    CSA Major

    Leifr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    654
    Alpha.
    Captain Jim J. Digby, 8th Virginia Regiment, Company 'H'

  2. #52

    USA General of the Army

    John Cooley's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    202
    Quote Originally Posted by yoyo8346 View Post
    I would just like to say that I play as a Confederate, but have no association to Mr. Cooley's "resistance" movement. I disagree totally with his self-victimization and accusations of developers ignoring the feedback of Confederate players.
    Wow ...
    So much to address in such a short and uninformed sentence.
    - We stopped playing as Yanks 2 weeks ago because the Devs DID listen to our complaints and made a Patch that addressed several unbalanced issues. We have even received feedback from players, who were forced to play as Rebs, that they saw the problems we described.
    - Obviously, you are not "Associated" with me or my Unit or you would be sporting our Corps Tag and not that of A.P. Hill
    it is sad that the Climate makes people feel that they need to Distance themselves from their Confederate Brethren to avoid Unionist ire but that is a valid way to live ... for some.
    - Resistance [ri-zis-tuh ns] noun
    The opposition offered by one thing, force, etc., to another.
    We have not Opposed anything and, in fact, continue to test the game more than any other Unit here. We Support the Game, Devs and the continued effort to create a game that is Historical in Nature but NOT in outcome.
    - You are well within your rights to Disagree and we will defend your Right to do it ... unto death.
    Nothing is gained by Agreeing on everything other than creating an Echo Chamber.
    - "his self-victimization" is a bit harsh imho. The only "victim" (if it can even be called that) is the Game Testing. We are on the Servers for 6 Events from Fri to Mon plus additional days Scouting and doing Individual unit Drills and Tactic session. Does this sound like a Unit that feels like Victims? We merely voiced our Opinion on how slanted the game mechanics had become thus making Testing almost impossible.

    Now, for the hundredth time, let's be clear ... THIS IS ALPHA!
    This is NOT the final state of the game nor is it even close.
    I honestly can't believe we have to say that with almost every Post.
    Game Mechanics are being tested and tweaked and the Purpose is to get feedback from Testers.
    It would be irresponsible of us to remain silent, or join the Echo Chamber voices, and claim all is well when it is not.

    I hope that clears a few things up for those who were confused or not up to date.
    My Great Great Grandfather, Isaac MacDonal Cooley, served as a Pathfinder Cavalry Scout
    in the 1st Arkansas Cavalry Regiment (Dobbin's) Company K
    My Avatar flies his Unit Guidon to Honor his Service.
    My Credo is a simple one ... Unit before Self with Honor above ALL else.

  3. #53
    Moderator

    CSA Major

    Leifr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    654
    Quote Originally Posted by John Cooley View Post
    Wow ...
    - Obviously, you are not "Associated" with me or my Unit or you would be sporting our Corps Tag and not that of A.P. Hill
    it is sad that the Climate makes people feel that they need to Distance themselves from their Confederate Brethren to avoid Unionist ire but that is a valid way to live ... for some.
    Careful John.
    Not every Confederate player desires to play in a larger group (myself included), and not every Union player is against you. Yoyo has been a member of AP Hill's Division since time immemorial, long before there was any of this loud commotion regarding the supposed Yankee-bias. He is not motivated through any desire to distance oneself from 'Unionist ire'. Lack of association to any other group, on either side, should not be perceived as a negative.

    That's not however to say that I disagree with you on the internal balance of someskirmish scenarios, including and up to the mechanics of morale, tickets and formation (de)buffs. Leave external politics out of it, including ad hominem maneuvers.
    Captain Jim J. Digby, 8th Virginia Regiment, Company 'H'

  4. #54

    USA General of the Army

    John Cooley's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    202
    Very True ...
    Differences of Opinion or Choice of Sides should, in no way, ever pit any of us against each other on a Personal level.
    We may banter and poke fun but it is never meant as a Personal Slight nor intended to create a Rift in the Community.

    This is a Game based on a controversial and divided Historical period and, as such, much that is said should be taken with a grain of salt ... about the size of a Texas salt lick. heh

    We reiterate our commitment to the Game, Devs, Mods, Players, Testing and the Fun that this is all intended to be.
    We encourage everyone to Play, as they wish, and invite anyone interested in grouping in larger like-minded units (be it Second Corps or another) to do so and have fun together.
    It won't be much of a game if every unit has its own server and we never interact because we can't get along.
    Just have some fun ... we are at II Corps.
    My Great Great Grandfather, Isaac MacDonal Cooley, served as a Pathfinder Cavalry Scout
    in the 1st Arkansas Cavalry Regiment (Dobbin's) Company K
    My Avatar flies his Unit Guidon to Honor his Service.
    My Credo is a simple one ... Unit before Self with Honor above ALL else.

  5. #55

    CSA Captain


    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    56
    You people all realize these fixes are at most temporary and may very well mean the opposite in the long run? Balancing a game around 10 versus 20 is not the same as balancing it around a 1000 versus 2000. So what works now is entirely to satiate the desires of alpha testers who are really not alpha testers at all; but instead acting as consumers and not testers.

  6. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnDewitt View Post
    You people all realize these fixes are at most temporary and may very well mean the opposite in the long run? Balancing a game around 10 versus 20 is not the same as balancing it around a 1000 versus 2000. So what works now is entirely to satiate the desires of alpha testers who are really not alpha testers at all; but instead acting as consumers and not testers.
    I don't know where you pulled those numbers from but I'm sure the devs would rather hear feedback and please the testers than do nothing at all. It's most likely easier to balance the game now rather than worry about it in a later stage of development. The game will need to be re-balanced anyway with the addition of larger servers and things such as cavalry and artillery. If testers were to stop testing because their feedback was pointless, how would the devs know what to fix?

  7. #57

    USA Major


    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    225
    Quite a big proportion of the feedback is not feedback but biased, subjective wish-thinking. Take the Springfield 42 for example: yap it is inaccurate and certainly not very efficient when you have smallscale, skirmishlike sharpshooting going on. If you had a line of 500 men shooting at a line of another 500 things certainly would look A LOT differently. I really don't get why people see skirmishes not as what they are (small scale scouting clashes and not massive lines of infantry trading volleys) but as the end of the line when it comes to scale (I really cross my fingers and hope that this isn't the case). Yes, the balancing isn't there yet, but that was to be expected. I think players should adapt to the skirmishes and alter and play around with the tactics used and forget about winning or loosing for now. Could't care less about that myself
    http://i.imgur.com/zwOS2GN.png

  8. #58

    CSA Captain

    jwhal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    42
    The obvious logical tactic for the map in question is to fall back to avoid a slaughter of your men. Which means just letting the union have the point. (Which was used previously during events because no one liked the map) So we sit at spawn let Union take point move on. Now it's the smart tactic but my guess is it don't help testing for that map.

  9. #59
    It seems to me that most of the complaints on both side are things that were historically accurate, Confederate-inferior rifles, lower numbers... Union- hardly ever defending, poor ground to attack the position (Bloody Lane is a good example). Of course this all changes and there are other complaints depending on the engagement. What the community needs to agree on is do we want a game that is completely balanced like I have heard some people say (same number of units, exact same rifles, Confederates or Union attacking when they historically defended or vise versa), or do we want a historically accurate game where Union or the Confederates were outnumbered and poorly supplied and we JUST DEAL WITH IT. Remember this is not Call of Duty, this is closer to a SIMULATION and sometimes the side you pick is superior or inferior. I for one do not get upset when I loose, I just enjoy the game for what it is. I do believe a lot of the "they have more tickets or better ground or better weapons" will be solved when and if a moral system (flag bearer, successful charge or defense of one , gaining ground) is implemented. Historically inferior units have beaten back superior units due to boost in moral. Just my thoughts.

    -Monkey

  10. #60

    USA General of the Army

    A. P. Hill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    In Maryland State Near to both Antietam and Gettysburg, Harper's Ferry et al.
    Posts
    2,465
    Quote Originally Posted by DrumThumpinMonkey View Post
    .... I for one do not get upset when I loose, I just enjoy the game for what it is. I do believe a lot of the "they have more tickets or better ground or better weapons" will be solved when and if a moral system (flag bearer, successful charge or defense of one , gaining ground) is implemented. Historically inferior units have beaten back superior units due to boost in moral. Just my thoughts.
    ^^^ This.

Posting Permissions

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