Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25

Thread: Prevent Rambo Spam

  1. #1

    USA Brigadier General

    Etherton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Englandshire
    Posts
    301

    Prevent Rambo Spam

    The current situation with players ability to rambo ingame makes it near impossible to operate a line remotely decently on a public server. You come across random players strewn across the map and behind random cover able to kill you and cause mayhem because they arent subjected to the same rules as an Officer. I dont get why this is a thing as the game was meant to force you to play together wasnt it? Is there no way to force privates to actually have to stick closer to their own players? It blows my mind that a game like this simply allows it to be honest, no different to any other game at this time and makes playing as a group, line, regiment etc as just a mess.

    Fix this mess if you want the game you are attempting to develop.

  2. #2
    WoR-Dev TrustyJam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    5,133
    Thank you for the feedback.

    We have no current plans regarding applying officer restriction rules to privates.

    Formation buff balancing will however be an ongoing thing throughout the development of the game (as will all other balance tweaks).

    That being said, we have no intention of effectively removing the out of line formation "buff" (by forcing players together) - a disorganized team with little teamplay should lose the match because of this.

    I'm curious as to how you know what game we are attempting to develop - I don't recall you being on the dev team.

    - Trusty

  3. #3

    USA Brigadier General

    Etherton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Englandshire
    Posts
    301
    I think you need to be more restricting on privates running around, the aim should be to force players to fight together in turn creating more of the combat and fight that people want. Large scale fighting over lines being flanked by single men who can snipe you free of will. Its not about winning or losing matches on public, its about fighting and playing the game as intended which is as a company. If we were able to have private events without the public and enforce this then there wouldnt be the need to play on public servers, at this time it isnt the case so perhaps fixing privates would be better until such a time as privately ran and admined servers can be used properly.

    I dont know why you needed to comment on me 'not being on the dev team' therefore not knowing what game you are trying to make? Ive been apart of the development and have read posts about your aims and ambitions, that gives me an idea. Or maybe im wrong and a Mount and Blade public server is your current ambition

  4. #4
    WoR-Dev TrustyJam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    5,133
    Thank you for the feedback.

    As stated we may very well tweak player behavior via balancing specific game mechanics throughout the development of the game.

    Your description of public matches is, for the most part, radically different than what we're seeing ourselves and reading from a lot of community members (which is why the current focus isn't on harsher penalties for out of line players). Should this change, however, we will naturally look into changing it up.

    Apologies for my last, somewhat snarky remark - your last sentence just triggered me (you sounded like a project lead, basically ).

    - Trusty

  5. #5

    USA Brigadier General

    Etherton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Englandshire
    Posts
    301
    Its just my experience when commanding a line and such on public servers. I know i cant speak for anyone else but certainly in my times I notice it quite a bit and die to it quite a bit. I imagine as you progress servers and upgrade private owned servers and in time private ran events that will be where the enforced lines would go.

    No problem, I think my response was a bit anal aswell :P If i was a project lead I'd have added in the ability to duel wield pistols like a boss haha

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    29
    Agree and disagree. Properly organised and led companies helps to negate the problem; people who want to play 'real'.

    Having public servers inevitably means some dumb Rambo-types play as well. I think they tend to get bored and go elsewhere when they realise they can't play as they do in CoD/Battlefield and win all the time.

    "C’est magnifique, mais ce n’est pas la guerre: c'est de la folie"

  7. #7
    We've quite effectively used individual marksmen, scouts/pickets, and other things that involved only one person for the sake of a low profile. There are a lot of reasons why just barring people from running off is a terrible idea (oh, I forgot messengers, something that is historic). Right now, the skirmish game mode does not lend itself to true linebattle gameplay because why would skirmishes be the same as line battles? Skirmishes were vastly, vastly, different than traditional civil war battles. And the reason why officers have a limit on them was that we had an issue where officers would run off and with their pistol, destroy a line, or greatly hinder its command. The fact that privates and NCOs can run off does not really affect the game.

    If a player who does not want to cooperate with you can't run away and go to a different line or do something, why do you think keeping them in your formation to "follow you" will actually fix that? People who do not want to cooperate are not going to do so just because they are near you.

  8. #8
    They should look at the auto-surrender option for Rambos/lone wolves as explained in Poorlaggedman’s recent post.

  9. #9

    USA General of the Army

    John Cooley's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    381
    Does anyone else see this project continually inching toward being a Line Battle Infantry Sim rather than a Combined Arms Battlefield Game?
    Keep adding penalties for being anything other than a densely packed group of pop-up targets and that is our future.

    I can't speak for all but, for me, I have always preferred (in games AND in real life combat) to be a Wolf that makes a difference NOT a sheep to be mowed down wholesale.
    Very limited Arty with Cav being an after-thought, at best, and eventually dropped, at worst ... does not bode well for the future.

    Please stop trying to invent even more restrictive game mechanics as this game is going from being a great Civil War game and becoming one of the most one-dimensional games ever.
    Encouraging (nay, FORCING) unimaginative, repetitive tactics that were proven stupid and ineffective in the American Civil War makes it a boring repeat of every other skirm fought.

    I have a great desire to see the game succeed (Lord knows we need a good Civil War, as well as, American Revolution game) but ... and again this is my opinion ...
    too many rely on M&B as the Holy Writ of this genre and that is killing projects that try to emulate them.
    Again, if the goal is to become a Line Battle Infantry Sim ... it would have been nice to know before investing almost $1k to play an aspect (Cav) that appears a doubtful addition.

    I can't say it enough ...
    Stop penalizing skirmishers by lumping them into the same category as Rambos.
    They have an important role to play in the strategy changes that were implemented early on in the war and forcing Line Battle stupidity on them only serves to reduce their desire to play until ... hopefully, this Line Battle Only madness comes to an end.
    Which it will not ... as long as the game mechanics continue to reinforce that it is the only "acceptable" strategy for this game and Community.

    Granted, it is Testing but that begs these Questions ...
    If we are adding these mechanics to Test certain features ... why are we adding even more of the SAME restrictive mechanics rather than dropping the Tested ones and moving on to others?
    Why keep adding more of the same Tested mechanics to placate the Forum Whiners who only want to do Line Battles? (Advice: Go back to the Napoleonic Period games where these tactics were the accepted standard OR get a private server and stop trying to tell every new Recruit that they need to 'toe the pop-up target line'.
    We are losing many people because of this approach ... many vets and new recruits.

    /jumps off soapbox and heads off to test WaT ... they are sticking to their original vision, come Hell or high water.
    Just as WoR should be.
    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.

  10. #10
    Moderator

    CSA Major

    Leifr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,268
    CG have repeatedly said that they endeavour to create a game as far away from M&B as possible, Trusty and Fancy haven't even played it. Trusty's response would seem to indicate that they currently have no plans to further penalize out of line players, I would rest easy on that. Cavalry was such a half-arsed implementation in M&B, I would be glad for some serious time spent on developing horses in War of Rights - something not too dissimilar from KC: D would be ace. I've said it before and will say again, it would be best if horses were first made available for Officers and staff/couriers for testing before introducing mounted troopers.

    It would be nice to see some distinction given to skirmishers operating ahead of the main line, or shoring up the flank, but that needs some more discussion and must be made distinct from the true 'John Rambo' who operates alone through wilful intent. It would be nice to have a little more transparency on this from CG, I feel like we're at the point in Early Access where some future plans need to be laid out for discussion. Heck if I know what's happening any more...

    I find it funny that you raise WaT John, it looks to be an identikit NW/M&B clone. Did it ever have vision?

Posting Permissions

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