[Copy Pasta form Reddit] Fight going too quick

[DarrickS]

https://www.reddit.com/r/warno/comments/svl2mo/a_few_things_what_annoy_me_the_most_right_now/

"Hello,

I still think there is major core game design issue in this game making it not enough "tactical" or whatever you want to call it

TLDR : Fight are going too quick in general. This is linked to higly excessive accuracy and ROF. It really feel to me what we are not controling humans using weapon, but more a bunch of statics values who are acting like operated robotics turrets. Fast paced game mechanicaly favor APM and lower the impact of tactical decision. In this game, you cant fix a position and flank it, when 2 units meet, one die in an instant except for the worst one nobody use.

- General accuracy just seems very excessive

Lets take a few exemple :

At 885m a M249 / RPK in this game has 50% chance to hit its target in static position

This accuracy is of 30% while moving

With this, you can add the fact the closer, the more accurate you are + the vet system what give huge accuracy bonus

Do you actually imagine hitting your target 50% of the time at 885m ? They all have thermal auto-correcting magic scope ? Having used a weapon for quite a few times in the army, at 300m I would use lot of concentration and time to hit a non moving target.

I can understand the most modern tank using highly effective system can shoot with a high accuracy at 2km, but in general, most units just kill everything they see and it make launching an attack in this game absolutely atrocious and boring

- Using weapon ROF and not human ROF

M249 / RPK has a ROF of 600 bullets per minutes

Nobody in an army is shooting at such ratio

Most army train ppl to use semi-auto or short burst, there is no such condition where you are runing, shooting with 30% accuracy and dumping 600 ammo per minutes.

So yes, on the weapon presentation page it say "1000 RPM", but this is in a shooting range, in very good condition without taking fire yourself

I think a classic rifle like a M16 / AK / 12.7 / 14.5.... should have a ROF of 50-60 at best, and an accuracy of 5% at 885m+.

Also so huge ROF/Accuracy badly simulate the fact soldier can be stressed in combat, will shoot without peaking or aiming properly etc, etc...

IMO, as long as this game will stick to such fast paced fighting between units, it will be more a "ideal showcase of weapons abilities" than a real wargame simulator.

Also more slower fight can only benefit to ppl who are good at thinking and less at clikcing like a made octopus and will nerf camping in general in this game."

[busboy999]

The accuracy statistics are pretty good, I think. However, lethality needs an audit (Eugen says they need to adjust W:RD values to a 1989 standard, MGs need an audit, etc).

The biggest issue with the game's tempo, in my opinion, is the fact that the vehicles are moving 3x faster then their stated speeds in the armory (and those values look pretty accurate).

[DarrickS]

Originally posted by busboy999:

The accuracy statistics are pretty good, I think. However, lethality needs an audit (Eugen says they need to adjust W:RD values to a 1989 standard, MGs need an audit, etc).

The biggest issue with the game's tempo, in my opinion, is the fact that the vehicles are moving 3x faster then their stated speeds in the armory (and those values look pretty accurate).

Letahlity is directly linked to ROF and accuracy so I dont understand your points except to say the same thing than the post differently

[DasaKamov]

Originally posted by DarrickS:

Letahlity is directly linked to ROF and accuracy

Not directly. Lethality is directly linked to armor penetration and damage values. ROF and Accuracy *indirectly* help a unit's lethality by putting a killing shot on-target.

Currently, there's not much of a "Critical Hit" system in-game as is the Eugen standard - most of the time, units which are hit by a weapon exist in the very binary "alive or dead". Lethality can be tweaked by allowing units which are dealt a penetrating blow to suffer critical damage (de-tracked, turret stuck, crew wounded, etc) which takes the unit out of the action until repaired, but doesn't kill it outright.

[busboy999]

I'm agreeing with you, but clarifying what I understand Eugen needs to do.

Accuracy relates to probability of hit. By lethality, I'm addressing probability of kill following a hit.

I'm saying that accuracy and rates of fire are, in my opinion, about right. 50% pH for a Dragon ATGM is about right, for example. What needs to be tweaked to get it all correct is the HE/AP values for each weapon system.

So I am generally agreeing with you, the current state of the game is too lethal which has a negative impact on the game's tempo. Adjusting the lethality statistics though, I *think*, is essentially inserting adjusted numbers on a spreadsheet into the game's code. It should be relatively easy. When the M1A1HC accidently had its main gun's AP dropped to 16, it was identified and corrected in two weeks. The harder part is Eugen has to do whatever it is they do to compare real world penetration/HE estimates for everything and make the decisions on what the new number values are. That has to be done as a whole and can't be nickle and dimed (which is why we have ~2005 era lethality from W:RD affecting 1989 vehicles.

The vehicles moving 3x too fast is also [in my uninformed mind] a spreadsheet fix, unless the vehicles moving too fast is a design decision for playtimes (some people prefer the unrealistically fast gameplay).

However, when you combine vehicles that drive 3x too fast with ATGMs that shoot 1/2 as far with ~2005 era lethality statistics: yea. Stuff is dying fast in the game. Its a very attrition based system right now, rather than a maneuver based system.

[Frank's Pickle Barrel Ass]

Originally posted by author:

Also more slower fight can only benefit to ppl who are good at thinking and less at clikcing like a made octopus and will nerf camping in general in this game

Your post implies that octopuses do not think, but they are actually highly intelligent, with excellent logical inference abilities. Even at slower pace, octopus will be a formidable opponent.

[gribelo]

There is some logic which sounds like this:

90% of humans are idiots. Sad but true.
Idiots have attention span limited to 20 minutes. in WRD they start to mass quit after 40 minutes, not bcz they are losing but bcz they stop to understand what is going on ))
To make more money you need to appeal to wide audience
This means you need to design game so it would be fun for idiots
This means game shoud be fast and straight, with hints and popups, packed with action.

So dont waste your time. Its not wargame, its not simulator, its casual cold war RTS for "everybody". You select all your units and send them to face another player units, thats how its supposed to be played. All these talks about battle simulation is a maskirovka to lure dudes like you into the game.

There is a game about trucks called "Snowrunner", it says "Ultimate nextgen offroad simulator". In fact its a buggy supercasual arcade which is a absolute downgrade compared to prequel, only visuals are better. Its already a scheme of things.

[busboy999]

Originally posted by gribelo:

There is some logic which sounds like this:

90% of humans are idiots. Sad but true.
Idiots have attention span limited to 20 minutes. in WRD they start to mass quit after 40 minutes, not bcz they are losing but bcz they stop to understand what is going on ))
To make more money you need to appeal to wide audience
This means you need to design game so it would be fun for idiots
This means game shoud be fast and straight, with hints and popups, packed with action.

So dont waste your time. Its not wargame, its not simulator, its casual cold war RTS for "everybody". You select all your units and send them to face another player units, thats how its supposed to be played. All these talks about battle simulation is a maskirovka to lure dudes like you into the game.

There is a game about trucks called "Snowrunner", it says "Ultimate nextgen offroad simulator". In fact its a buggy supercasual arcade which is a absolute downgrade compared to prequel, only visuals are better. Its already a scheme of things.

You assume the game's target audience is the entire population ("everybody"). I believe its target audience to be military history nerds who appreciate that they are playing a real-time tabletop wargame.

I can search Steam for any dozen military themed fast paced arcade games. What makes Eugen unique is they've created a game series that provides an immersive and plausible replication of combat that uses statistical models without a ballistics based damage model that is so good that it demands realistic tactical decisionmaking. Its not a simulation. Its literally a wargame, hence why they chose the name.

Nerds like me haven't been playing Eugen's titles for a decade because they are Starcraft with historical vehicles. I would prefer Eugen remain true to its previous pattern. There are a few more realistic realtime wargames on the market, however they cannot achieve the scope and scale (and fun) that Eugen achieves.

[Raven]

Hello,
The problem are not the people here.
The game let you turn weapons ON/OFF the game requires you to position your armor precisely in order to optimize the lifetime of your unit etc.... In other words you have to micromanage a strategic game.

My understanding is that this game tries to give you role of Major General / Brigadier general which means that you are commanding a division or a brigade.

Now in real life as a General you are not micromanaging your units. You are giving general orders and goals to achieve and you have a global view in your area of responsibility. You are not taking your radio to signal F-4 wild weasel to tell him don't use your sidewinders only HARMS /Shriek.

You are requesting an air strike and a mission. The job of micromanaging units is done by other officers, Col. Major, Captain, Lieutenant , while squad managing is done by non commissioned officers.

In the best of worlds we should have an advances unit AI which is doing such roles, by detecting the threat and adapting to such situation.

We are humans not machines and we are only able to do so much. We are not multitasking but we are working on preemptive tasks. It means if you micro manage 2 tanks or an infantry squad you are completely loosing focus on what is happening on the other side of the map.

Now tell me please how many times have you had your artillery being destroyed without knowing it until you needed the unit ?

[busboy999]

Concur with Friendo. Regiment level is a good way of looking at it. I see it as battalion command level with Division assets in support. The number of vehicles and squads you can call in a match doesn't get close to brigade level.

[Raven]

Originally posted by Friendo:

Originally posted by Raven:

Hello,
The problem are not the people here.
The game let you turn weapons ON/OFF the game requires you to position your armor precisely in order to optimize the lifetime of your unit etc.... In other words you have to micromanage a strategic game.

My understanding is that this game tries to give you role of Major General / Brigadier general which means that you are commanding a division or a brigade.

Now in real life as a General you are not micromanaging your units. You are giving general orders and goals to achieve and you have a global view in your area of responsibility. You are not taking your radio to signal F-4 wild weasel to tell him don't use your sidewinders only HARMS /Shriek.

You are requesting an air strike and a mission. The job of micromanaging units is done by other officers, Col. Major, Captain, Lieutenant , while squad managing is done by non commissioned officers.

In the best of worlds we should have an advances unit AI which is doing such roles, by detecting the threat and adapting to such situation.

We are humans not machines and we are only able to do so much. We are not multitasking but we are working on preemptive tasks. It means if you micro manage 2 tanks or an infantry squad you are completely loosing focus on what is happening on the other side of the map.

Now tell me please how many times have you had your artillery being destroyed without knowing it until you needed the unit ?

You play as the equivalent of an advanced guard or regimental commander, the advanced guard phase of battle on normal income would be the first 15-20 minutes where you establish forward positions and the rest of the game would be a main force under a regimental commander. Managing your units properly is very important and is the main focus of the game. Your job is to draft the orders for the attacks/defenses your units will carry out, which should include their exact positioning, spacing, and how fire support is allocated.

Managing your units is in fact the entirety of the game, so I don't really understand the complaint, you're asking for this Cold War RTS not to be a Cold War RTS.

Playing as a division commander or general would be more equivalent to the army general/campaign mode that will come later in development.

My point exactly. You have to draw orders and not to issue orders on what ammunition will be used against what. This is not your level of responsibility. This is not a RTS game. It is more a tactical game with a strategic level which is represented by what unit you will call and when.

I have nothing against the game I have all Wargames + Steal Division 1 and 2.

What people are asking for is more Regiments style of game.

[gribelo]

Originally posted by busboy999:

You assume the game's target audience is the entire population ("everybody"). I believe its target audience to be military history nerds who appreciate that they are playing a real-time tabletop wargame.

Yes, on paper, in theory. In fact franchise is steadily changing its form to appeal to wider audience and all requests from nerds are ignored. Thats the theme of the post. Military history nerds love realistic combat speed and values but game is clearly designed to be faster and values are adjusted randomly for balance and to fit the scale.

Thats what I say. Games are marketed with loud slogans like ultimate simulator, while they are designed with 10-year olds in mind. Its a global practice for industry now, you have been told that the game is a battle simulator, but it ends up to be a pocket scale fast paced arcade. Industry absolutely do not care about quality or gamers demands but only about making more sales.

[capi]

Originally posted by gribelo:

Originally posted by busboy999:

You assume the game's target audience is the entire population ("everybody"). I believe its target audience to be military history nerds who appreciate that they are playing a real-time tabletop wargame.

Yes, on paper, in theory. In fact franchise is steadily changing its form to appeal to wider audience and all requests from nerds are ignored. Thats the theme of the post. Military history nerds love realistic combat speed and values but game is clearly designed to be faster and values are adjusted randomly for balance and to fit the scale.

Thats what I say. Games are marketed with loud slogans like ultimate simulator, while they are designed with 10-year olds in mind. Its a global practice for industry now, you have been told that the game is a battle simulator, but it ends up to be a pocket scale fast paced arcade. Industry absolutely do not care about quality or gamers demands but only about making more sales.

Im totally agree buuuut they said they were going to get slow the game pace, May be we Have to wait a Little Bit More.

[busboy999]

And to be fair, for the first week or two the tanks were driving at about 500kph. Your reinforcements arrived in seconds, not minutes. So, it has gotten better.

[capi]

Originally posted by busboy999:

And to be fair, for the first week or two the tanks were driving at about 500kph. Your reinforcements arrived in seconds, not minutes. So, it has gotten better.

Now just 300kph :P

[busboy999]

yeah....

Definitely not my preference.

Also, reading the manual's explanation of cohesion effects really stuck out. A unit with full cohesion is getting a 25% speed boost.

So an M1A1 Abrams should be driving at 79kph per the armory, and 99kph if we assume that the 25% boost doesn't treat 79kph as a hard cap.

An M1A1 with the cohesion bonus is moving at 360kph as I tested it. That would mean the actual road speed the game is using is about 285kph...which is 3.6 times too fast. It also means that cohesion is giving a bonus of about 75kph...which is just shy of what the vehicle should be moving at in the first place.