Page 96 of 189 FirstFirst ... 46869495969798106146 ... LastLast
Results 951 to 960 of 1889

Thread: War of Rights - Patch Notes

  1. #951

    USA General of the Army

    Bravescot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Perthshire, Scotland
    Posts
    2,626
    Quote Originally Posted by TrustyJam View Post
    In this alternate scenario

    - Tweaked the formation system so if you kneel while having the In Formation buff, you will then get the Skirmishing buff instead. This is done to provide an alternative to kneeling. Without this change - a bit of a slower reload while kneeling is in works as well, there is little incentive to stand up and fight when you can half your hitbox size by kneeling without much of a tradeoff in doing so.
    These two part right here put a smile on my face. The top one in particular! Here is what WoR should be! The ability for us players to no only recreat history, but also to see how we can reimagine it! These Skirmish areas nautrally narrow the possibilities for now, but when we can open more and more of the map up it will be very interesting.

    The kneeling change I think is much needed. Kneeling was a skirmish tactic and not a line infantry tactic.

  2. #952
    WoR-Dev TrustyJam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    5,133
    Quote Originally Posted by Bravescot View Post
    These two part right here put a smile on my face. The top one in particular! Here is what WoR should be! The ability for us players to no only recreat history, but also to see how we can reimagine it! These Skirmish areas nautrally narrow the possibilities for now, but when we can open more and more of the map up it will be very interesting.

    The kneeling change I think is much needed. Kneeling was a skirmish tactic and not a line infantry tactic.
    Glad you're happy with it.

    A word of caution balance wise: Expect balance to possibly be quite offset by the kneeling change. Without having any solid numbers I would imagine the defenders being more likely to be kneeling in general as they have an easier time being relatively static in a match. We will naturally monitor how things play out and make changes accordingly.

    - Trusty

  3. #953

    USA Captain

    SwingKid148's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Syracuse, NY
    Posts
    527
    Glad to see the kneeling nerf is in! Another step closer to historical accuracy.

  4. #954
    I'm just glad we can finally walk in 'At the Ready' stance

  5. #955
    Quote Originally Posted by McMuffin View Post
    I'm just glad we can finally walk in 'At the Ready' stance
    +1


    New map looks good, hopefully get to try it out tonight.

  6. #956

    CSA Captain

    Bivoj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    171
    I hope you will find better solution for the kneeling issue. Otherwise a great patch!

  7. #957
    WoR-Dev TrustyJam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    5,133
    Quote Originally Posted by Bivoj View Post
    I hope you will find better solution for the kneeling issue. Otherwise a great patch!
    We’re all ears in the suggestion section of the forum.

    It was basically either this or limit kneeling to certain skirmishing-centric regiments (which we found too strict).

    - Trusty

  8. #958

    CSA Major General

    Redleader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Kingdom of Belgium
    Posts
    456
    Quote Originally Posted by TrustyJam View Post
    It was basically either this or limit kneeling to certain skirmishing-centric regiments (which we found too strict).
    - Trusty
    I'm glad 'kneeling' is still part of the game, but in a way 'kneeling' shouldn't doesn't become the 'preferred' battle position.
    Kneeling during the civil war wasn't common, but it did happen ... even prone position.

    At the moment we have a mix between maps where smaller/mobile skirmish units are more effective then a 'tight' line formation.
    Even when line battle would be more effective, it does take a little more organisation and leadership

    'Hooker's push' would be a good example where big line battles could take place (and now severs can even support 100 players), but as 'modern age' persons ... we tend to take position near cover or try to make a smaller target.

    Other things :

    • Good to know the info screen now shows if you're attacking or defending
    • Balancing is always a hard excercise and like 'Kane Kaiser' already brought it up, it's may really vary on the fact if it is regiment vs regiment or just 'players', like Trusty also brought up, much of the defending armies are used to 'kneel' to reload and this might prove an issue.
    I write for my personal account and from personal experience, unless stated otherwise.

  9. #959

    CSA Major

    John Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by TrustyJam View Post
    January 10th - Update 90 Released!

    In this alternate scenario, we present the possibilities of what would have happened had Hooker diverted some of his attention to the lightly defended hill and attempted to silence Stuart’s horse artillery shortly after the fighting in the Miller cornfields.

    - Trusty
    Thank you very much for your continued hard work, much appreciated. When my pitifully slow connection has downloaded the patch, I'll hop on and have a look around.

    Just one observation though, rather than a criticism. Historical realism has been the great watchword of the game since I have been playing (around 7 months) and is often the stick used to beat opposing viewpoints on these forums. Are you able to share the rationale of introducing a 'what if.. 'scenario? Are you testing areas that could be potentially fought over as part of a larger free flow battle later on, in which case it would be perfectly justified.

    And if your in the mood for another 'What if...' could you please arrange for JEB Stuart's Cavalry Corps to put in a little appearance......even if on foot

  10. #960
    WoR-Dev TrustyJam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    5,133
    Quote Originally Posted by John Jones View Post
    Thank you very much for your continued hard work, much appreciated. When my pitifully slow connection has downloaded the patch, I'll hop on and have a look around.

    Just one observation though, rather than a criticism. Historical realism has been the great watchword of the game since I have been playing (around 7 months) and is often the stick used to beat opposing viewpoints on these forums. Are you able to share the rationale of introducing a 'what if.. 'scenario? Are you testing areas that could be potentially fought over as part of a larger free flow battle later on, in which case it would be perfectly justified.

    And if your in the mood for another 'What if...' could you please arrange for JEB Stuart's Cavalry Corps to put in a little appearance......even if on foot
    In short; we have the battlefield and its surroundings created and we thus want to include areas that were part of the battlefield (just because there was no infantry combat at Nicodemus it doesn’t mean it wasn’t part of the battle (hence the arty there).

    We’re also not recreating Harper’s Ferry just to have infantry combat on bolivar heights (would be a gigantic waste of resources and time as well as denying players to experience the accurate locations due to the fact that no battles took place there).

    - Trusty

Posting Permissions

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