Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24

Thread: How to make War of Rights Great Again

  1. #11
    Does anyone honestly like the overtime system? Everybody wanted one but it feels like, due to design, both teams now have to play hot potato with the objective until the defender is breaking or the attacker gets so far behind the defender gets cocky. It doesn't feel natural what happens when commanders are desperately trying to get their people to get off of the objective so they don't cap early and let the defender come roaring back in morale and get the advantage of having to be knocked to breaking and then to final push.

    I don't know why this game can't just be like any normal game and have main spawns and objectives that progress through multiple objectives and change with an attack / counterattack. Certain things are great to reinvent and rethink with a project like this but it's gotten convoluted in my opinion.
    Last edited by Poorlaggedman; 04-15-2020 at 11:56 PM.
    Suggestion: Formations, Suppression, Spawning, Leadership https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZqPsbvyD8s


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

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Poorlaggedman View Post
    Does anyone honestly like the overtime system? Everybody wanted one but it feels like, due to design, both teams now have to play hot potato with the objective until the defender is breaking or the attacker gets so far behind the defender gets cocky. It doesn't feel natural what happens when commanders are desperately trying to get their people to get off of the objective so they don't cap early and let the defender come roaring back in morale and get the advantage of having to be knocked to breaking and then to final push.

    I don't know why this game can't just be like any normal game and have main spawns and objectives that progress through multiple objectives and change with an attack / counterattack. Certain things are great to reinvent and rethink with a project like this but it's gotten convoluted in my opinion.
    Well, it's something different for sure. I'm not sure how I would go about changing it but it would be nice if breaking the overtime actually required a majority on point rather than just enough to make the cap twitch like it does right now (which is about 4-6 players directly under a point against a full enemy team). Either that or just state how the mechanic actually works rather than telling us it requires a majority.

    The game would 1000% benefit from multiple capzones per skirmish area. Or just start stitching together two to three maps at a time like Miller's Cornfield + Hooker's Push or Miller's Cornfield + Hooker's Push + East Woods.

    Also a simple melee work will make the developers more money than artillery ever will and I'd imagine it would be much easier to program and release than the artillery system. From what I've heard across multiple communities, its the melee system that keeps people away or makes them drop the game, and nobody really cares about artillery at this point.

  3. #13

    CSA Captain

    Saris's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    South East Texas
    Posts
    1,283
    Is this all yall got to say? A copypasta?

    Texas Poppin B
    My Youtube:https://www.youtube.com/c/SarisTX

  4. #14

    CSA Major

    McMuffin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Reluctantly in Maryland
    Posts
    757


    This is not the way to handle this. A copy paste response that is not even relevant to my actual issue, which I explicitly say is communication not pace, makes this worse. Address this properly. Address it here.
    The chances are by the time you have finished typing a long response to my post, I have changed half of the original post.

  5. #15
    WoR-Dev TrustyJam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    5,071
    Hi there.

    The above was me personally saying sorry that we have lost your support and that we hope to regain it.

    This is the official statement from Campfire Games: https://www.warofrightsforum.com/sho...l=1#post101150

    - Trusty

  6. #16

    CSA Major

    McMuffin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Reluctantly in Maryland
    Posts
    757
    Quote Originally Posted by TrustyJam View Post
    Hi there.

    The above was me personally saying sorry that we have lost your support and that we hope to regain it.

    This is the official statement from Campfire Games: https://www.warofrightsforum.com/sho...l=1#post101150

    - Trusty
    A lot has been said so far and you've all been very quiet about it. A one and done statement when a lot more has been added to not just this thread but the other you linked will not suffice.
    The chances are by the time you have finished typing a long response to my post, I have changed half of the original post.

  7. #17
    WoR-Dev TrustyJam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    5,071
    Quote Originally Posted by McMuffin View Post
    A lot has been said so far and you've all been very quiet about it. A one and done statement when a lot more has been added to not just this thread but the other you linked will not suffice.
    We are reading everything and are discussing it internally to a very large degree. The issues raised are being taken extremely seriously and a lot of time is spent on digesting them. That being said, we are silent because we don’t have anything additional to state at this moment in time.

    - Trusty

  8. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by rbsmith7 View Post
    Glancing at the recent threads on the Steam Discussion Board, maybe a half dozen are asking about the Artillery Update. Lots of people want to talk about the cannons in-game with me, but that might also be because I'm a Battery guy. In any case, people definitely care about artillery as much or more than they care about the melee being updated.
    Well I suppose you're right that I'm being hyperbolic and I do suspect you probably field more discussions about artillery than I do. It's just a common sentiment that I have seen being expressed lately that the delays with the artillery branch have got people wondering whether or not it was worth it for the devs to leave the state of infantry and map balance the way they have been for months.

  9. #19

    USA General of the Army

    Oleander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    647
    There's a list of things that are in the game that need to be fixed before artillery gets put in game, but I see the need to get arty done before those fixes can be put in place. The whole map system needs a rework, out of bounds areas don't make any sense and leave attackers very little in the way of maneuvering when there are clear paths open but out of reach. Certain maps like Graveyard give the Defenders way more flexibility to the point where they can almost make it to the attacker spawn and have a clear line of sight to it. Then there are points that make no sense, either in the middle of a field that is impossible to defend or somewhere obscure that makes no sense. I think the multiple points on map areas strung together make more sense at this point. There's only so many ways you can play king of the hill and keep it engaging before it becomes trench warfare or everyone games the overtime mechanic.

    EDIT
    Quote Originally Posted by Vankovski View Post
    Well I suppose you're right that I'm being hyperbolic and I do suspect you probably field more discussions about artillery than I do. It's just a common sentiment that I have seen being expressed lately that the delays with the artillery branch have got people wondering whether or not it was worth it for the devs to leave the state of infantry and map balance the way they have been for months.
    Main reason I want it is because its literally holding up development at this point since they aren't doing any balancing until it releases.
    Last edited by Oleander; 04-16-2020 at 05:02 AM.

  10. #20
    The flaws in the skirmish map objectives and out-of-bounds markers are just becoming more amplified with much use. Many of the maps have evolved to an undesirable redundancy which is really starting to wear. Changes in desertion zones haven't helped (my mother would have been upset if she could have heard my cussing once I found out the Union desertion boundaries on Harper's Graveyard (one of my favorite maps) changed to essentially restrict the Union team to holding back at one wall at the objective).

    Formations have not achieved the survivability that would ensure more proper use. Nobody advances in a line in any fashion, they just dash from area to area. Fences are not what they were before but teams will still literally form in a column along a fence and shoot over each other's heads rather than form a front facing the enemy perpendicular to them. Flags have to hide or jog around like clowns because they're the equivalent of a helicopter drop zone and people will violently threaten you for staying up front and center with one (and with good reason). In summary the game looks good and smells good and the new smoke effects are great but players are not behaving like they should nor should anyone expect them to given the current game world.

    I'm starting to wonder if the developers are not evil enough to contemplate how systems will naturally be used and abused by gamers. Hell no I don't want to cap when the defenders are taking losses when you'd have to deal with an extra team morale progression which is also a timed zombie swarm.
    Suggestion: Formations, Suppression, Spawning, Leadership https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZqPsbvyD8s


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

Posting Permissions

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