Messaggio originale di Zebra Cakes:

I hope 'asymmetrical' multipalyer doesn't just mean another Axis circlejerk like almost every other RTS or RTS mod set in WW2 where the Axis get hilariously overpowered units based off of cheesy history channel myths and the allies just have to contend with needing a large skill gap in their favor to not be BTFO with ♥♥♥♥♥♥ unit rosters that require you to spam and be a micro god compared to Axis just sitting and drinking coffee with their ubermensch. This meme gets really old in stuff like CoH2, Robz, GSM, etc.

Didnt happen in vanilla mowas2 till introduction of p2w by design ostfront dlc. Similar problem (for players) happened in CTA's dlc factions by DMS.
I wonder if Goh will avoid "pay to win" practice in it's future.

As for PvP:
"You will be able to experience the evolution of the armies and their traits as the war evolved. A more competitive mode will be included for the ranked auto-matchmaker but nonetheless will still be historically accurate"

Does evolution of armies and traits mean year periods? I wonder how its going to be balanced, how matchmaker gonna decide which period to set and how they gonna work in first place, cause in mods that tried historical availability of units by year, in most of them (years) "balance" is failed and\or game turns into spamming only certain few units.

Messaggio originale di M4F10S0:

Messaggio originale di lazy_riveN:

Hopefully there will be game modes...

About balance you can read here http://barbed-wire.eu/game-balance-and-history/

As for:

"The answer is not very simple. We will achieve balance by means of taking a big step back to look at the mission and the map as a whole.
For our single player and multiplayer missions, we choose situations that will bring balance based on the tactical situation and the environment. For example; you have the better tanks but the environment forces you uphill or through streets. Or maybe your tanks are very weak, but you have twice as many as the enemy. In other situations, you may have the weaker forces but there is time to dig trenches and foxholes."

Does "multiplayer missions" mean PvE or PvP too? In case they are also used in PvP; are they just a separate "gamemode" for hosting your own games or will matchmaker use them too? If its the latter, competitive aspect will devolve into just learning specific mission layouts and finding the most optimised way to send your preset unit roster (judging from what is written in article you linked), which will get old quick if it is the case for matchmaker.

I would want to make sure that bet code is heavily improved from AS2. I think a huge issue I would see With PVP matches is that players with good hardware would be punished or “slow”ed when a lower performing player joins the match.
I do agree with Romich about that problem of pvp matches reducing to just figuring out the best strategy for workshop, farmland or village.

With beta testing coming up, I'm really getting excited.

Why not to make a demo version with at least 1 single player mission during the beta stage so we could get at least something after all of these years of waiting?..

LOVE YOU GUYS ~~

Messaggio originale di lazy_riveN:

Hopefully there will be game modes that limit units by year. So many of them can be very useful, e.g., Pz 1 or T-26\T-28, light armor cars, etc. That would be a huge advantage and a step forward for a PvP experience in MoW games. And i hope that you nerf those anti-tank guns (PTSR and other) so those light vehicles could live longer and not die after couple of shots from those rifles.

More questions and wishes:
1. Could you implement a "fox holes" as a cover for the infantry ? So they can build it and live much longer. It would help to balance Calliopa\Neberwerfer\arty units in PvP matches.
2. Please DO NOT add any prototypes for Japanese, please ! Especially their unbalanced tanks like Chi-To, Chi-Ri and mothers Ho-Ri 1\2. Only add units that actually fought (this one is for PvP, in course).
Same for all nations for in a PvP matches.
3. Balance anti-tanks RPGs in a PvP matches in late war period game modes. It is especially annoying in AS2 because it turns this game something like present day wars.
4. Again, make light tanks\cars more taugh to a anti-tank weapon.
5. Nerf units like T-60, 222 and other. Im okay with them in general but they must be more realistic - not so accurate, a less rate of fire, more reload time, etc.
6. DO NOT make an "elite" infantry units that can easily survive multiple grenade explodes, PLEASE. Let them be more accurate but not with infinite HPs.

Yes, there will be limiting per year. We will have foxholes.
We will not nerf anything, realism is key. We wrote about that many times. Because we are not refurbishing another game here, be assured everything will be new and realistic.
http://barbed-wire.eu/game-balance-and-history/

The winter snow screenshot with the German 8 wheel armoured car
is the coldest I have ever seen the Gem engine look.

Add snow glint / sparkle for enhanced cold effect if you can / or practical.
https://steamcommunity.com/app/302670/discussions/0/541907675762213439/?ctp=129#c1694924244565798995

Messaggio originale di hawka:

I would want to make sure that bet code is heavily improved from AS2. I think a huge issue I would see With PVP matches is that players with good hardware would be punished or “slow”ed when a lower performing player joins the match.
I do agree with Romich about that problem of pvp matches reducing to just figuring out the best strategy for workshop, farmland or village.

You mention old maps that will not be in our game. Also, we use a different engine than the one you mention. I hope you know we're not refurbishing an old game here! Let's say you know that. Then it is important to understand that we will make sure PvP will be non- biased.

Developing a game that you will never get used to would be a first worldwide. You are right that all you will need to do is figure out the best strategy, that is the case with any game of this kind. Unless you mean something else, we think it will be just fine.

Well R.I.P GoH. Not buying this if i have to buy the crappy CTA game to play GoH. It's a waste of money and pretty anti consumer to force people to buy a bad game, just to play the actual game they want to play. Sick and tired of devs doing dumb stuff like this TBH, that's why i very rarely buy AAA games anymore, because i'm sick of the BS that goes on with them, same thing seems to be happening with GoH as well.

If engine licensing is the issue, then just make your own custom engine from scratch or use one of the many free engines (Like Unity or Unreal 4) to make GoH, don't use the old and fairly broken GEM2 engine that literally crashes from simply being unable to load a 2D grass texture somewhere in the map lol.

But yeah, it's a shame you guys are going down such a bad path with this game. I've Deleted GoH from my wishlist, same for a few of my friends unfortunately. I'm sure many more people probably feel the same way. So sorry devs, but you've ruined the GoH project for me and i can't support it.

Co OP >>>????

This looks Amazing! I hope it has fps.

Messaggio originale di シ ZadenXD ツ:

This looks Amazing! I hope it has fps.

First person mode is not in plan. Did you missed it? It was in dev blog.

ждём всем миром

Please set the option -no arty or heavy tanks-