Different types of vehicles

[Eli-Te]

This might sound stupid (and it is), But I think this game could go with some playable ground and naval vehicles. But then again this game is made and marketed for planes. I think this could give the game a diverse set of fun playstyles

[Peregrine]

I'd love to command a Shard or one of the Tanks and IFV's.

[Chernobyl No.4]

Originally posted by Peregrine:

I'd love to command a Shard or one of the Tanks and IFV's.

You technically can by selecting a unit on the map and right clicking, it will provide a WP order. You can use it to move defenses at the base towards the front.

[Peregrine]

Originally posted by Chernobyl No.4:

Originally posted by Peregrine:

I'd love to command a Shard or one of the Tanks and IFV's.

You technically can by selecting a unit on the map and right clicking, it will provide a WP order. You can use it to move defenses at the base towards the front.

I am aware of that, but it's not the same, unfortunately, and it's extremely clunky.

In addition to not always obeying orders, the units are extremely prone to getting stuck, "Forgetting" their order, or especially with the ships, MOVING A RANDOM DIRECTION OR STOPPING for no reason.

I try to arrange the units so there will always be at least one tank at the lead, (It's the slowest, and one of the strongest, so the unit will maintain cohesion) with IFV and AD behind to cover, but if they are not behind the tanks, the units will race off at full speed with no intention of maintaining a formation or their column order, cannot be ordered to quick halt or react to contact, and will find it extremely difficult to go offroad, even sometimes getting stuck for a basic turn around with several vehicles now stuck somewhere.

This combined with the inability to designate targets to prioritize is why I am not satisfied with the current order system for the ground units.

(Quick example of that) I've had MBT's firing for their lives at a non threatening LAV with an MG while being engaged by MBT's and ATGM armed IFV's IN THE OPEN and lost several units (MBT's and IFV8's / Linebreakers) as they tried to kill the recon truck (LAV 45) and allowed Linebreaker IFV and MBT's to engage them unanswered.

[Chernobyl No.4]

Originally posted by Peregrine:

I am aware of that, but it's not the same, unfortunately, and it's extremely clunky.

In addition to not always obeying orders, the units are extremely prone to getting stuck, "Forgetting" their order, or especially with the ships, MOVING A RANDOM DIRECTION OR STOPPING for no reason.

This combined with the inability to designate targets to prioritize is why I am not satisfied with the current order system for the ground units.

(Quick example of that) I've had MBT's firing for their lives at a non threatening LAV with an MG while being engaged by MBT's and ATGM armed IFV's IN THE OPEN and lost several units (MBT's and IFV8's / Linebreakers) as they tried to kill the recon truck (LAV 45) and allowed Linebreaker IFV and MBT's to engage them unanswered.

Agreed. The feature as of now is less than optimal in use, I only find it helpful in repositioning AA and stopping suicidal Shard pushes. I think the main solution is a copy of Arma 3 AI modes, Safe/Aware/Combat/Stealth for ground units, it will obviously have the formation options. It would be beneficial if you could put a radar unit on stealth and it stops emitting, keeping its position safe.

Prioritization of targets is certainly needed, watching a column of MBTs get picked off because they targeted a scout car is tiring. The majority of engagements, it's who fires first wins and double-so when you include firepower. MBTs are uncontested when air is not intruding, they are pretty much invulnerable. When it comes to their path finding land and sea it is most definitely a map issue, AI finding themselves off road get confused and just sit static waiting for rescue or try to climb Everest. I pretty much given up on trying to keep the units in unison, I rather prioritize in retreating all my AA back to the highway bases. I don't think you can really create a solution for that without some heavy coding or reworked AI.

In short, a lot of work needs to be done on the ground AI. I doubt, we will see a massive overhaul to the ground AI anytime soon, it is a lot of work, but small updates overtime would be appreciated ;) A dreamer is going to dream.

[Peregrine]

I too will dream, and I like the idea you present.

[AAA Battery]

this will not see the light of day unless modded in, as devs denied this feature. a dev actually tried it and its like playing "unavoidable airstrike: the simulator"

[Peregrine]

Originally posted by AAA Battery:

this will not see the light of day unless modded in, as devs denied this feature. a dev actually tried it and its like playing "unavoidable airstrike: the simulator"

You need to plan it, and of course there are unavoidable airsrikes, that's part of combined arms warfare.

If "teams" would actually.... have some TEAMWORK, it can be negated to a large extent. You would need to plan the CAL / DAL and the OCA / DCA to cover the ground advance but it only really would take 2-3 players to pull the air cover off, and the ground could be handed by one, thus a team of 4 could beat most if not all but the most dedicated threats.


This makes the game MORE appealing, engaging, and fun to me.