Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 105

Thread: What changed?

  1. #21
    Hence no dysentery support /\
    Suggestion: Formations, Suppression, Spawning, Leadership https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZqPsbvyD8s


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

  2. #22

    CSA Captain

    Soulfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    813
    Quote Originally Posted by Leifr View Post
    Well fuck me sideways, a small team chooses to work on software performance before anything else - colour me surprised. War of Rights ran like a brick on my system when it was first available, I'm now at a comfortable (and consistent) 50 FPS. The same improvements have also been made to the servers, they're pretty stable these days (mostly!). I have a lingering suspicion that if these technical improvements weren't made and instead CG chose to deliver the alternative, you would be here writing for the opposite.

    Nothing more to add, just a quote from another honourable gentleman: "Zen, restraint, patience!" there is really nothing more to read these days than complaints like that or about "pubbies".

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Soulfly View Post
    Nothing more to add, just a quote from another honourable gentleman: "Zen, restraint, patience!" there is really nothing more to read these days than complaints like that or about "pubbies".
    It's almost like the game is still in alpha or sumthin.

  4. #24

    CSA Captain


    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    544
    Quote Originally Posted by Grumpytoo View Post
    It's almost like the game is still in alpha or sumthin.
    It's not. It's in early access. Alpha was several, several months ago.
    Currahee!

  5. #25
    WoR-Dev TrustyJam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    4,878
    Quote Originally Posted by LaBelle View Post
    It's not. It's in early access. Alpha was several, several months ago.
    It's both in early access as well as in alpha.

    Early access is not a specific point in a game's development cycle. You can have pre alpha early access games as well as practically fully finished products released on the early access platform.

    Alpha: Core game systems are being developed and implemented.

    Beta: Most, if not all core systems have been implemented. Bug and balance testing as well as optimizations is generally the main focus for betas.

    - Trusty

  6. #26

    CSA Captain


    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    544
    Early Access was an entirely separate phase in development, and differentiated from both Alpha and Beta by your own Kickstarter program at some point in time. Forgive me if something has changed, but that was the information I based that comment on.
    Currahee!

  7. #27
    WoR-Dev TrustyJam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    4,878
    Quote Originally Posted by LaBelle View Post
    Early Access was an entirely separate phase in development, and differentiated from both Alpha and Beta by your own Kickstarter program at some point in time. Forgive me if something has changed, but that was the information I based that comment on.
    Yes, our kickstarter program was wrong about that.

    We used the "early access phase" as a marker in relation to how many alpha features were implemented basically and thus what early access would feature on its release and what would come in after its release.

    - Trusty

  8. #28

    CSA Captain

    Sox's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    England
    Posts
    379
    I've not played for several weeks now, and there's really only one reason for that:

    Skirmish Mode is shallow, Pickett Patrol is shallow, and I realise that these things are a means to an end, but I did not come here for a 'quick fix'. Having read, multiple times, that Historical mode was far in the future I just lost interest because what is presently on offer has no depth at all. Now before you reply to this understand something, WoR has given me some of the most immersive experiences I've ever had in gaming. CG have got the basics bang on, I have no doubt they'll get the Artillery basics bang on too, but Civil War combat needs something more than the drop in drop out experience offered by the two game modes WoR currently offers. On paper, re-fighting the Battle of Antietam in an FPS environment sounds fantastic, in reality the game has not delivered......yet.

    Players know how to win these maps, thus the tactics almost never change, and that has gotten stale. Being boxed in on these little maps offers very few of the tactical options that a Civil War game must have in order to be something more than just another shooter in a genre that is already saturated.
    ''I'm here to play an American Civil War era combat game, not Call of Duty with muskets.''.

  9. #29
    WoR-Dev TrustyJam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    4,878
    Quote Originally Posted by Sox View Post
    I've not played for several weeks now, and there's really only one reason for that:

    Skirmish Mode is shallow, Pickett Patrol is shallow, and I realise that these things are a means to an end, but I did not come here for a 'quick fix'. Having read, multiple times, that Historical mode was far in the future I just lost interest because what is presently on offer has no depth at all. Now before you reply to this understand something, WoR has given me some of the most immersive experiences I've ever had in gaming. CG have got the basics bang on, I have no doubt they'll get the Artillery basics bang on too, but Civil War combat needs something more than the drop in drop out experience offered by the two game modes WoR currently offers. On paper, re-fighting the Battle of Antietam in an FPS environment sounds fantastic, in reality the game has not delivered......yet.

    Players know how to win these maps, thus the tactics almost never change, and that has gotten stale. Being boxed in on these little maps offers very few of the tactical options that a Civil War game must have in order to be something more than just another shooter in a genre that is already saturated.
    Hello,

    Thank you for the feedback.

    I’m sorry to hear you think our game shallow.

    I’m not sure I completely follow your point regarding knowing how to win maps (especially picket Patrol maps as all spawnpoints are randomized).

    - Trusty

  10. #30
    As there is no consequence to winning or loosing a match, the game is shallow. Spawn, maneuver to the same few spots whatever the map is, shoot, win or loose, no consequence or reason to especially want to win. Sometimes the leaders get creative, most times it's just doing what you've done in tens of previous matches.

    The picket patrol maps aren't played. While wonderfully random, you get sometimes to do nothing for 10 minutes straight.
    Why not have respawns on picket patrol maps? The basic spawn locations will have to move, true, to somewhere near the biggest accretion of players as they maneuver (just set a fixed 2km distance between enemy spawn positions, oriented and moved continulusly or in increments on a line determined by the 2 biggest concentrations of troops on the map). Or some other simplistic rule.

    Why not consider 25 consecutive skirmishes a campaign, won by whoever wins more times?

    Why not fight the different stages from one of the big battles (surely they can be divided in how many small encounters you'll choose).

    Why not have a string of 25 historical places where battles took place and a campaign starting at the middle one. Your side wins, you push to the next, you loose and you retreat to another location. Sherman's taking of Atlanta comes to mind, why not have that string of engagements?

    Why not have a map with places where battles took place, the aim being to take the respective capitals? Advance on a wide front, you have supplies and quick respawns. Be in a long narrow spearhead, have longer respawns in battle. How far will you push? Have your various regiments actually deployed on that map, countering the enemy movements. At the start of a match, a poll where do we fight now? Attack a new territory, defend what you hold? Have cities and forts that confer boosts to respawn speeds or numbers in matches, so as to make the game strategic in nature.

    Not shallow?!
    Last edited by EneCtin; 05-04-2019 at 07:38 AM.

Posting Permissions

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