Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 104

Thread: What changed?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    I see artillery as a distraction from the core of the game which should be infantry combat which also tends to require performance tweaks. That being said it seems like every time there is a momentary population dip it gets posted about it here or on Steam and gets related to something else that's missing. IDK what game you're playing but every day when I get off work there's at least 100 in a server without fail.
    Gameplay Suggestions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjUuaVXTJsY


    Old Pennsylvania Discord: https://discord.gg/MjxfZ5n

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by Poorlaggedman View Post
    I see artillery as a distraction from the core of the game which should be infantry combat which also tends to require performance tweaks. That being said it seems like every time there is a momentary population dip it gets posted about it here or on Steam and gets related to something else that's missing. IDK what game you're playing but every day when I get off work there's at least 100 in a server without fail.
    I must respectfully disagree with you PLM... Artillery is not a distraction, it was an intregal part of Civil War combat. Learning how to integrate combined arms to achieve an objective was important to success then and now. It is a highly requested feature in this game. Minimizing the artillery branch will only serve to alienate gamers who enjoy that aspect of the game. This game was never advertised as an Infantry game so why start that rhetoric now?

  3. #3

    USA General of the Army

    John Cooley's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    381
    Quote Originally Posted by Poorlaggedman View Post
    I see artillery as a distraction from the core of the game which should be infantry combat which also tends to require performance tweaks.
    And, therein, lies the answer ...
    Artillery and Cavalry were a draw for a great many players and the desire to make this game into an Infantry Line Battle Sim has resulted in inactivity for many.
    "Wait and see what the final product becomes" has replaced the desire to test graphical tweaks and Infantry tactics.
    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.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by John Cooley View Post
    And, therein, lies the answer ...
    Artillery and Cavalry were a draw for a great many players and the desire to make this game into an Infantry Line Battle Sim has resulted in inactivity for many.
    "Wait and see what the final product becomes" has replaced the desire to test graphical tweaks and Infantry tactics.
    Indeed if it was just Infantry I would still like the game but not as much as I am looking forward in seeing it ALL come together on the large battlefield of Antietam
    Richmond Howitzers, 3rd Company

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by brentcarter View Post
    Indeed if it was just Infantry I would still like the game but not as much as I am looking forward in seeing it ALL come together on the large battlefield of Antietam
    I usually look for precedence to game visions. There just isn't any for a large, well-functioning battlefield where players work closely together. You'd always have to break it into smaller parts. There was once a bug where most of the Antietam battlefield was open and a whole bunch of us wandered around a big part of it for a while before it was fixed. The thing is huge. Take away the desertion areas and double, triple, even quadruple the player counts to 800 (unlikely) and you have WWII Online with muskets. If you've never had the pleasure of trying that game... it's boring, incredibly boring and unrewarding. And it has everything. You can play an anti-aircraft gun if you want. The primary reason it sucks is because you chase after a concentration of action that somewhat resembles your expectations and you never find it. What's the point in having things if they don't all come together at some place and time?

    Artillery gameplay will be hurt by infantry gameplay. Good luck zeroing the gun in on an enemy infantry blob snaking it's way in a single file zig-zag to advantageous terrain. How many shots can you get on them that way? How much effect will have? Do you think anyone's going to walk into your guns when they don't even want commit into a frontal attack presently vs infantry? The only map where teams will go straight in is wooded terrain. It's definitely not really a 'line battle' simulation right now. It's a rush-one-flank-or-the-other-and-hope-you-get-there-before-the-enemy-get-there-first simulation. I don't know where these lines are that are spoken of. At vast distances, yes people can orchestrate them and blast away all around at 300-400 yards to limited effect. I suppose you can find some groups willing to do that and also be artillery target practice at the same time. But other than that take some screenshots when you see lines operating anywhere but strictly behind cover. Some recent patches have helped, but shouldn't that be the focus before other things are moved off to? That's all I'm saying.
    Last edited by Poorlaggedman; 05-01-2019 at 05:45 PM.
    Gameplay Suggestions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjUuaVXTJsY


    Old Pennsylvania Discord: https://discord.gg/MjxfZ5n

  6. #6
    Well it's Civil War Combat so that's a 90% infantry experience. 90% of the casualties are caused by infantry.

    I'm not saying they shouldn't put artillery in... but there should be players who operate as formations first. This sort of happens in specific circumstances presently.
    Gameplay Suggestions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjUuaVXTJsY


    Old Pennsylvania Discord: https://discord.gg/MjxfZ5n

  7. #7
    will they ever bring war of rights to Mac

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by golfking View Post
    will they ever bring war of rights to Mac
    The devs have stated previously that they currently have no plans for launch on mac/apple

  9. #9
    Rbater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    Maryland Capital
    Posts
    89
    Quote Originally Posted by Poorlaggedman View Post
    Well it's Civil War Combat so that's a 90% infantry experience. 90% of the casualties are caused by infantry. ....
    I think you mean dysentery, not infantry for casualties. Devs more dysentery plz for that infantry experience lol

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Drax View Post
    The devs have stated previously that they currently have no plans for launch on mac/apple
    And to add, performance on Windows/PC currently = mac getting like 5 frames. It just wouldn't run well unless you had an eGPU for that mac.

  10. #10
    WoR-Dev TrustyJam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    5,133
    Quote Originally Posted by Rbater View Post
    I think you mean dysentery, not infantry for casualties. Devs more dysentery plz for that infantry experience lol



    And to add, performance on Windows/PC currently = mac getting like 5 frames. It just wouldn't run well unless you had an eGPU for that mac.
    CRYENGINE does not support Macs.

    - 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
  •