Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 78910 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 96

Thread: Harper's Ferry Thoughts, Suggestions, and Prayers

  1. #81

    CSA Major General

    Redleader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Kingdom of Belgium
    Posts
    452
    Quote Originally Posted by TrustyJam View Post
    Thanks for the feedback.

    That was the 2nd round and the end of the event. The first time river crossing was played we had 140 players on. The map ended due to time running out. The Union was breaking.

    - Trusty
    First map (river crossing)
    I agree, the first map CSA had a chance of winning (Union was breaking), but we took a lot of time organising ...the pushes we're 'pretty' succesfull in doing damage to the Union lines.
    I also experienced two crashes and that's more then I've been having last months (they we're rare) -< Filed an errorreport.

    Second map
    CSA took a good starting position early on, I also must thank the Union for making such a tight firing line ... my buck N' ball was effective in shooting three at once (is that a record ?)
    Union took advantage by shooting between the narrow spacing between the white fences ... it took some while for CSA to adapt tactics ... but we did
    This was a very close map (both breaking)


    Third map (High street)

    Note : forming up between houses while Union is charging -< DEATHTRAP ... nowhere to run while an officer unloads his fancy pistol... friendly fire and a massacre

    Both sides where imho evenly matched and maybe the first map was less dynamic and the last two tends to favour CSA more then the first map (you know ... charge ... die ... repeat)
    I write for my personal account and from personal experience, unless stated otherwise.

  2. #82

    CSA Captain

    Hitsme Indaface's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Texas Ya'll
    Posts
    14

    Alpha Tester Feedbac for the Harpers Ferry Cluster

    Over the past couple of weeks, the community has spent a lot more time playing on the new cluster of maps at Harper's Ferry. The two maps where you fight in town are very playable, and if we were allowed access to use the buildings, they would really be top notch. But the bridge crossing map kills the vibe for the cluster.

    The problems with this map:
    • The union team can reach the point in about the same amount of time as it takes for either confederate spawn to reach the start of either the railroad or pontoon bridges.
    • Once reached, the confederate has to run the gauntlet, about a minute of running in a narrow-confined space directly at the enemy with no cover. In this time, the enemy units can easily get off 2 shots at you, decimating the ranks.
    • If the confederates attempt to stop on the bridges to return fire, they become easier targets. (We all know that it takes around seven seconds for a rifle muzzle to steady itself enough to make accurate shots. The Yanks can be sighting in for most of the confederate crossing. But the confederates would have to stop for 7 seconds exposed in the open to shoot at their opponents who are in cover. Additionally, they would be winded from the long sprint, which further hinders their shooting ability.)
    • The union forces have a single spawn, while the confederates are split into two spawn locations. I think that the devís intent here was to allow more rapid deployment across both bridges. However, as has been witnessed, the union can keep 1-2 people at both crossings as guards and have the balance of their line in the middle, where they can easily maneuver and repulse charges from both bridges in a timely manner.
    • The union forces can watch the confederates just after they move out of spawn and see where they go. If the confederates had a shorter run to the point of contention, this would be less of an issue. Unfortunately, it takes around 3 times longer for a confederate to reach the point than a Yankee (I am aware that some confederates at the start of the map often reach the point before the Yankees, but that is only accomplished by sacrificing loads and bayonets and when this is done, usually the union shows up immediately with both before either loads or bayonets can be done). This leaves plenty of time for union officers to organize a deadly ambush no matter the amount of coordination among the confederates.
    • Force a higher number of confederate players to union players so that it is not an evenly matched scenario. If a military commander were to commit their forces in this manner in the civil war they would need certain advantages in order for them entertain the risks involved. It could have been superior artillery, or even simply many more soldiers, to win by attrition.



    The things this map got right:
    • I like the options that the union team have to defend against river crossings. If anyone reading this were to plan a defense for these two crossings in real life, they would try to stop the enemy on the bridges where they are most exposed. (in fact, I would have set up cannon with canister shot to shoot down the bridges).
    • The placement of the union spawn is excellent. You really get the feel of a reinforcing soldiers' response to an impending attack running down the hill to the waterside.
    • The map is beautiful to look at
    • Weapon availability feels much better, now that the confederates get a mix of rifles.



    My suggestions - I donít think that implementing all of these would be good, as it could well shift the balance in favor of the confederates instead of the union. Instead, I think implementing a few of them would help to strike a balance.
    • Unify the confederate spawn point If unified, place it somewhere between the bridges. It would still take longer for the confederates to reach the point, so the defenders would still have an advantage. This would reduce the number of out of line losses, because people would spawn together, and organization would be easier.
    • If unable to do above, allow the confederates to choose their spawn point.
    • Put lots more hard cover on the confederate side of the bridge. Not just bushes, already, seasoned players have learned to turn down graphics so that only hard cover remains, making the spotting and shooting of players in heavy brush at a distance super easy. The confederates should be able to maneuver to the bridge of their liking without being seen or worse picked off.
    • Maybe allow rebels to control the artillery to an extent. Would it be possible for the officers to trigger the artillery barrages at the point areas? Maybe on a timer of sorts, so that they could coordinate the barrage with their crossing?
    • Stop the artillery (lets face it, its confederate artillery or shells would land on the confederate side of the river now and againÖ) from barraging the point while its held by confederates (any degree of red Ė letís face it its irritating to finally get a small toe hold on the other side only to have artillery wipe you out.)



    Unfortunately, in the current state, the map is considered broken by most confederate players. As a testament to this, I have even seen matches where the confederates spam the re spawn button to quickly accumulate losses and more rapidly cycle the map. Iím sure that the devís are cooking up some nice changes to add balance to this map so itís a more enjoyable experience. It would be nice if you guys could confirm your plans for this particular scenario, it would be nice to know that there are planned changes (however far out they may be). Thanks for your time to consider my feedback as always.

  3. #83
    WoR-Dev TrustyJam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    5,014
    Thank you for the feedback!

    Great job on it and the layout of it I think.

    The map balance is constantly being changed. The Union got 50% 1842’s on the map in the last update for instance.

    Adding more cover is a tough one as the maps are as close to a representation of the area’s visuals in 1862 as possible (the Confederate side of the Potomac is already covered slightly more up than it was in real life).

    We have no further balance plans for the map currently but that doesn’t mean they won’t happen. Naturally, if the majority of our players are skipping the map they won’t happen as we’ll have no data to base the balance changes on.

    - Trusty

  4. #84

    CSA Captain

    Hitsme Indaface's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Texas Ya'll
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by TrustyJam View Post
    Adding more cover is a tough one as the maps are as close to a representation of the areaís visuals in 1862 as possible (the Confederate side of the Potomac is already covered slightly more up than it was in real life).

    We have no further balance plans for the map currently but that doesnít mean they wonít happen. Naturally, if the majority of our players are skipping the map they wonít happen as weíll have no data to base the balance changes on.

    - Trusty

    Hey Trusty,

    Thanks for taking the time to respond so quickly!. Have you not been unable to collect this data over the past couple of weeks? I would think you would have some data collected from the servers plus with the consistent feedback like this from testers we might be more open to changes (even if they can't take a high priority). What sort of data are you seeking to collect? If your looking to get a sampling of win/loss ratios for a particular map, you should certainly have that data already. Please elaborate, and maybe we can assist in gathering the data you need to make informed decisions.

    Also if there are no further plans for the map, and the map continues to see terrible responses from the community, will CG consider removing the bridge crossing map from the cluster? I get that this is alpha, and the time to test stuff... At the same time if a map is that bad, you wont see nearly as much testing of the other 2 Harper's Ferry maps. In my opinion, this is a shame, as those are two very exciting maps to play on.

  5. #85
    WoR-Dev TrustyJam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    5,014
    Quote Originally Posted by Hitsme Indaface View Post
    Hey Trusty,

    Thanks for taking the time to respond so quickly!. Have you not been unable to collect this data over the past couple of weeks? I would think you would have some data collected from the servers plus with the consistent feedback like this from testers we might be more open to changes (even if they can't take a high priority). What sort of data are you seeking to collect? If your looking to get a sampling of win/loss ratios for a particular map, you should certainly have that data already. Please elaborate, and maybe we can assist in gathering the data you need to make informed decisions.

    Also if there are no further plans for the map, and the map continues to see terrible responses from the community, will CG consider removing the bridge crossing map from the cluster? I get that this is alpha, and the time to test stuff... At the same time if a map is that bad, you wont see nearly as much testing of the other 2 Harper's Ferry maps. In my opinion, this is a shame, as those are two very exciting maps to play on.
    Please reread my previous reply.

    The map balance was changed as late as late update - looking at several week old feedback is thus not really representable for its current state balance wise.

    Map balance is an ongoing thing. Tweak a tiny bit, see the feedback after the change, then change a tiny bit more based off that feedback and see the feedback of that change, etc. etc.

    - Trusty

  6. #86
    WoR-Dev Hinkel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,866
    Quote Originally Posted by rbsmith7 View Post
    [*]Giving the Confederates a sizable rifle team in order to counter-snipe until user-directed artillery is implemented in-game. This is a fantasy scenario, why are 2/3rds of us carrying 1842's?
    Very Respectfully,
    I actually like the idea of a skirmish unit for the south. Might be an option for further balancing

    In the real battle, Mississippi and South Carolina units were stationed at that side of the river. Right now, you can choose the 3rd South Carolina ingame which is equipped with Springfield 61 and Enfields. So its not like 2/3rds carrying 1842

  7. #87

    CSA Captain


    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    583
    Interesting update to the spawns on Harper's Ferry...however I don't know how that fixes the problem. The CSA's issue is that the dual spawns split units up, making it hard to get a coordinated crossing going in the first place with the added effect that the Union can see the CSA's movements anywhere they are. The Union having split spawns doesn't have that same effect: They can still just rush the bridges.
    Currahee!

  8. #88
    WoR-Dev TrustyJam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    5,014
    Quote Originally Posted by LaBelle View Post
    Interesting update to the spawns on Harper's Ferry...however I don't know how that fixes the problem. The CSA's issue is that the dual spawns split units up, making it hard to get a coordinated crossing going in the first place with the added effect that the Union can see the CSA's movements anywhere they are. The Union having split spawns doesn't have that same effect: They can still just rush the bridges.
    We will need to get some proper testing in before we'll be able to say - but the split does mean the Union is going to be facing the same communication issues as the CSA when spawning. The 2nd Union spawn is also quite a ways further away from the bridges than the old one.

    - Trusty

  9. #89

    CSA Captain


    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    583
    That's fair, away I go to test!
    Currahee!

Posting Permissions

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