View Poll Results: What do you think?

Voters
39. You may not vote on this poll
  • Weapon selection is a good feature

    24 61.54%
  • Weapon selection is a bad feature

    9 23.08%
  • Flag selection is a good feature

    32 82.05%
  • Flag selection is a bad feature

    3 7.69%
  • A third regiment per map is a good feature

    34 87.18%
  • A third regiment per map is a bad feature

    3 7.69%
  • Deactivate the historical sequences is a good feature

    30 76.92%
  • Deactivate the historical sequences is a bad feature

    5 12.82%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19

Thread: Question for some Quality of Life Improvements

  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by TrustyJam View Post
    Hello Winkler,

    Thank you for your suggestions!

    Let me just give you a quick rundown as to where we stand currently (note: things very well might change).

    Weapon Selection: I actually think it is now possible to select your weapon via the class selection menu (added in update 175 although I haven't tested it myself yet).

    Flag Selection: We'd like to eventually go from a 1 flag per regiment to a 2 flags per regiment system (as we're able to support more and more players in a server) as the vast majority of regiments featured in WoR historically fielded 2 flags and not 1. An additional flag per regiment would greatly reduce the queue length on the flag bearer(s) which is sometimes way more of a pain now with 200 players instead of 150.

    A Third Regiment: We'd rather expand our two regiments per side towards being more historically correct in terms of numbers within them (the flag change above is an example of this) than we'd want to go for a third regiment (and say, stick to 1 flag per regiment).

    The history lesson after the battles: We'd like to at the very least offer a cvar to skip the narration and flyby on passworded servers to help with easier cycling areas.

    - Trusty
    Hello Trusty,

    Can you provide a little more insight into possible ideas CFG is envisioning implementing two flags? Particularly, will are you considering giving a player the means of selecting which flag to deploy to or leaning more towards 50/50 chance?

    Thanks,
    Rawlins

  2. #12
    WoR-Dev TrustyJam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    5,133
    Quote Originally Posted by Rawlins View Post
    Hello Trusty,

    Can you provide a little more insight into possible ideas CFG is envisioning implementing two flags? Particularly, will are you considering giving a player the means of selecting which flag to deploy to or leaning more towards 50/50 chance?

    Thanks,
    Rawlins
    It's still up for debate but personally I'm leaning towards you automatically being placed in the shortest queue available. This ensures that deployment is spread evenly so everyone benefits from the reduced spawn times equally as well as reduces the risk of a single regiment effectively splitting up for good (as you won't be able to make sure that the same select players always spawn at a specific flag).

    A key focus of ours is increasing or at least maintaining the current player density and so while breakaway groups should be possible within a regiment for shorter periods of time, we do not want to see it becoming the norm.

    - Trusty

  3. #13
    Well, I can imagine a hybrid alternative whereby the interface places the player in the shortest queue by default but allows for a state vs national flag option for the player to override the default.

  4. #14
    Having the option to choose which flag to spawn at would really increase player density during the matches i'm playing. As we play with more than 2 groups/companies per team anyway, spawning at a specific flag means more people continuously fighting at the front in their company and less running around searching for their company because they spawned at the wrong flag or at main deployment.
    So the hybrid option mentioned by Rawlins sounds good to me.

  5. #15
    Thomas Truslow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    119
    Quote Originally Posted by TrustyJam View Post
    It's still up for debate but personally I'm leaning towards you automatically being placed in the shortest queue available. This ensures that deployment is spread evenly so everyone benefits from the reduced spawn times equally as well as reduces the risk of a single regiment effectively splitting up for good (as you won't be able to make sure that the same select players always spawn at a specific flag).
    (...)
    May I also advise against this? If you just leave it to chance - meaning the shortest queue - then it will be very hard for subunits to join together. We already have that now, when two units or more have to share one regiment resp. flag in a skirmish. It would be much better if you could select one out of two flags specifically. And to achieve the effect you want in public skirmishes, then you could just display the length of the respective queue. If the subunit doesn't matter in a skirmish, then players will probably always choose the shortest row. This benefits everyone, players on public servers as well as the ones in organized events.
    https://i.ibb.co/3FsY8gQ

  6. #16
    WoR-Dev TrustyJam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    5,133
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Truslow View Post
    May I also advise against this? If you just leave it to chance - meaning the shortest queue - then it will be very hard for subunits to join together. We already have that now, when two units or more have to share one regiment resp. flag in a skirmish. It would be much better if you could select one out of two flags specifically. And to achieve the effect you want in public skirmishes, then you could just display the length of the respective queue. If the subunit doesn't matter in a skirmish, then players will probably always choose the shortest row. This benefits everyone, players on public servers as well as the ones in organized events.
    Thanks for the advice.

    The main thing I'm worried about is that it becomes the norm to split up (as you already allude to is happening in passworded play) if it's made too easy to do so.

    Fighting in the skirmishes game mode is not about being easily able to isolate one self to one's own section of a regiment - it's primarily about working together within said two regiments per side. In regards to your point about public play always opting for the shortest queue; All it takes is two leaders within a regiment not being able to work together for a fraction to happen ("Everyone that thinks officer so and so is an idiot, spawn with me on the regimental flag!").

    I find opting with an approach that emphasizes collaboration rather than makes it easier for break-away groups to happen makes sense from our teamwork-centric approach to things - but I do realize that most players in general would almost always choose the option that gives them more personal freedom to do as they please.

    At any rate, please continue to provide feedback as it is much appreciated.

    The addition of a second flag is not right around the corner as we'll need to overhaul (if not remake) the entirety of the spawning system (an old system created by an employee no longer part of CG).

    - Trusty

  7. #17
    How about as an option in the Server Settings, so Oranized Play can decide it by themself? Also for CO´s and NCO´s, an other Regiments? than all are Happy.
    Last edited by Icke Carter; 10-02-2021 at 08:29 PM.

  8. #18
    Thomas Truslow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    119
    Hello Trusty,

    First of all, thank you for the prompt and also very detailed response!
    Quote Originally Posted by TrustyJam View Post
    The main thing I'm worried about is that it becomes the norm to split up (as you already allude to is happening in passworded play) if it's made too easy to do so.

    Fighting in the skirmishes game mode is not about being easily able to isolate one self to one's own section of a regiment - it's primarily about working together within said two regiments per side.
    (...)
    All well and good; this is not a question of fundamental attitude, but rather of practicability: If you don't work together, but scatter your forces all over the map, then a clever opponent will eat you up bit by bit by concentrating his forces; we see this regularly. So please no worry about us intending to really isolate subunits from each other. While one should have the option in certain tactical circumstances, it's usually not the smartest plan... After all, we really intend to cooperate closely within one regiment and also between the two (or more later on?) regiments.

    We have simply made the experience that a unit or a battle line is no longer properly manageable above a certain size. Up to 30 men, it is already hard, but still okay. But from 35 men and more, it becomes very difficult to maintain formations and to change them quickly. IF you want to operate in a closed form and not chase around like a wild horde, then this IS important. And that's why we decided to form into two platoons when we have reached a certain size. That is still feasible in terms of numbers; one can manoeuvre swiftly and without any difficulties. These platoons then work closely together and are under one leadership.

    And that should be pretty close to the overall spirit of the game as I've understood it so far, correct?
    Last edited by Thomas Truslow; 10-03-2021 at 08:25 AM.
    https://i.ibb.co/3FsY8gQ

  9. #19
    I tried shopping some of the two flag ideas around on Reddit to get some feedback. I think the most insightful comment was that if the primary reasoning for the flag was quality of life changes (reducing queue for higher population) than cutting the spawn time on flag would be the most economical and straightforward way of addressing it.

    I think that makes a lot of sense to me... though for asthetic and tactical diversity reasons I'd prefer two, at the end of the day the effort may not be worth the actual reasoning for the update.

    Gameplay with large regiment sizes for me often comes down to the talent of my NCOs as helping privates form and behave and leading when I'm down for 2 minutes at a time are the biggest noticeable impacts of playing with a larger regiment. It requires slower movement in order to maintain organization as well, and just a better team so the officer doesn't have to basically wear all the hats.

    I do realize that my first impulse is to do all the roles as officer,any of which I should trust NCOs to perform. I need to start trying to ask them to do more ordering things as I believe in the long run that will be the key to managing larger units effectively.

    This also means the fast and nimble skirmish movements I'm accustomed too are something for smaller groups. I feel like most clans operate on that level and are providing requests for tools assist in skirmish numbers rather than the thicker numbers.

Posting Permissions

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