Members - Veterans
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

9 Neutral

About Gauldronborn

  • Rank
  1. Gauldronborn

    Vehicle Gameplay Update - Handling - Round 2

    I believe that all tanks should be allowed to rotate on the spot or none. If the tank could not do it historically, you should at least have it as an upgrade option. This is a big nerf to tanks that can do it in the life version and it further increase the already large gap in factional tank balance. This ability "doubles" the "turret rotation" speed. It also increases "camouflage" ability because it is easier to position in hedges for these tanks, especially when you spot an enemy tank and want to turn your tank to face them.
  2. Gauldronborn

    About tank hunters

    Of course you can cap if enemy tanks are shelling cap points. How can you "lemming" into the cap point taking the exact route you just did, from the same direction after a sniper, tank or base defender just killed you seconds ago taking that same approach. You know that guy is gonna shoot you from that window so you try to flank him from the opposite, same with tanks and snipers. And dude read the other posts, we already said that all tankers is happy with inf being able to kill them. Tankers do not expect to be able to just farm inf the whole match without retaliation, that would be game breaking. I Spot on. But really do hope that they bring in tank vs tank battles as soon as possible.
  3. Gauldronborn

    About tank hunters

    Don't think you understand. Tankers will switch to inf,.. if they can.. Especially in war matches, tankers consider it a stupid thing to do if you spawn tanks while there are no enemy tanks. The problem is that there are usually no aux seats available or if there are one, someone else took it. The thing then to do is to quit the match and go sit in the matchmaker again. But I must admit that I will sometimes rather stay in the match and try to escape rather then sit in the queue again, depends how long the queue was. The problem is also that it is usually not just one rambo. There are usually a few, that is inf that should be capping points like the game is meant to be played.
  4. Gauldronborn

    About tank hunters

    Which of these are most annoying to be killed by for you; Tank, Sniper or Plane? I don't think anyone disagrees with this, everyone agree that tanks can't be left to rain down HE unchallenged. Tanks that does this are very easy targets for planes, other tanks and AT inf. The shot effect of tanks are very easy to see and when they shoot if gives away their position. Don't think any tanker thinks that they have a right to be OP. The problem is that tankers are being spawn camped by rambos and there is nothing that they can do about it. The problem is that tanks can't defend do anything when they are farmed by dedicated rambos. If I want to kill a tank as a rambo there is nothing that tank can do about it.
  5. Gauldronborn

    Honest Reto H&G development review

    I believe you are right,.. somewhat. I think they should at least investigate the ROI for it. The time spent updating physx, PBR and other game engine features would have been done for them and probably better because of having one/ two guys working on it there would be ten times that to make sure that it is done top notch. You can be the best programmer but ten people are going to do a better job then you in the same amount of time. And here better job can mean more small features, maybe update rag-dolls with the physics update or better performance because you did 3 performance tuning iterations before final release candidate. Also these game engine licences usually come with support time or SLA agreement, that just there is like hiring a few more people probably like 3 in reto's case. Sure it would be a lot of work to almost re-write the game in a game engine but they will have to re-write a large portion of it anyway, so start with that. They need to re-write the game menu UI and the war map, so do this in a game engine and then do the action game at a later state. With some of the game engines it is also much easier to build a desktop or mobile app from the same project. So here they don't need to replace their lost mobile developer, just design the war map to be mobile friendly before-hand. But I think that this could be more of a in-house-political issue; the senior devs probably will oppose this. If you then decide to go ahead and dump their baby for a new game engine they might just decide to leave. But with proper change management you can probably resolve this, everyone would be on-board if it is done for the good of the game,.. eventually, I think,.. Or if it is an issue of "oh but we spent so much time building this and look how much we did", then that is an easy issue to solve you just need to see it as sunk costs. You cant factor in sunk costs when planning for the future. At least just research the ROI.
  6. Gauldronborn

    Tank Rant: Why Bother?

    I think the overall concept of countering asset type with another asset type is a good and fun concept, but the implementation of it is off and probably tricky to get right. Lets look at the following scenario to explain; So in a war match you get in these stalemates where inf fight other inf over one point for what feels like hours. I would like it if generals can somehow get notified and then send in tanks to break the stalemate by helping to cap the point. But now the other team notifies their general and he in turn sends in tanks to counter the enemy tanks and you get into another stalemate. Then the same thing happens with planes being sent in. Now if the top level stalemate brakes and one team gets air superiority they will start breaking all stalemates down the hierarchy and their team should win. This is similar to some of the actual WW2 battles and a great game mechanic on paper. But in a game very tricky to implement because you also want players to feel like the hero; on the inf level if they have the biggest gun & lowest latency then they destroy other players and feel like a king, but suddenly they get killed by a bigger gun on the next level and then you lose that "feel like a hero" design concept.
  7. Nice, I like the conversion of Maslow's hierarchy of needs into sfscriv's hierarchy of fun.
  8. Gauldronborn

    german tanks

    It's a good start, but now go play SU tanks and create a guide for them. You will find the experience enlightening.
  9. Gauldronborn

    Useful tank in war

    But this is just if there are light tank resources in the match. But I don't agree with this no matter the tank type. And I am sure that you will still end up using someone's tank resources even if you try to play safe. But if you do hang back you are just a wasted resource, better grab cheaper inf resource and help capping. If there are enemy tanks, do not cap points because if you are exposed and not hiding you are dead and wasting someone's tank resources. If there are no enemy tanks you still can't cap points because almost all inf in war have some kind of AT weapon not to mention the crates and dedicated AT rambos. Now with the scenario that you should only cap points if there are many friendly troops with you capping the point it probably means that the point would have anyway be capped. If there are around the same number or more enemy inf in the cap area then you are dead. Bottom line, IMHO, only play tanks in war if there are enemy tanks else play inf aux seat or leave the game. One other tactic that tankers would sometimes try is to be a decoy, keep pestering, taunting & moving and sooner or later you will have half the enemy team running behind you. Just don't stop to try and shoot else you are dead. But this is anyway not a proper tactic, unless you are trying to cure boredom and not playing to win.
  10. Gauldronborn

    Too much AT

    But what I am saying is there is no real reward for farming infantry kills, the same as for farming infantry with another infantry. With infantry you need to capture objectives for the real rewards. The same goes for tanks, you need to kill other tanks, infantry kills adds next to nothing for xp/credits. And if I am playing tank in lets say airfield and a enemy tanks starts shooting HE from a hill; he is as good as dead. I will see him shooting and kill him in next to no time. When planes starts bombing them it is because they have air superiority, the same goes for tanks. At least with tanks you can do something about it. When tanks focus of infantry to win the match, it is annoying sure, but you can work around it (los the tank or kill it. When planes starts to focus on ground targets, there isn't much you can do about it. Now when tankers gets farmed by AT rambos there is also nothing they can do about it. And this is the problem with rambos, it's not being killed by AT weapons; it is being farmed by AT rambos. I think everyone can agree that you can't allow a tank to just farm infantry unopposed and. A tank can't just sit on a hill and spam infantry with HE, that would be gamebreaking. And all tankers would agree that AT weapons is a good thing for the game. The problem for tankers is that they can't do anything about the rambo that farms them.
  11. Gauldronborn

    Too much AT

    I was in a match like this a few months ago, but definitely I don't see tanks "everywhere" So like I said tanks need & want to fight other tanks. But if there are no tanks to fight/no aux seats/ don't want to leave the game to queue again, then tanks will try to help their team with capping. Tanks can't really cap because they will die in a less then a minute when trying to cap themselves so the other option is to try kill the enemy that is trying to cap. Now new players might spam HE into a cap zone when there are other tanks around, but they soon learn that this is a bad idea because the shot effect exposes you to the enemy tanks & rambos
  12. Gauldronborn

    Suggestion for tank spam

    I didn't even think of this, but I bet you are right those filthy sneaky rambos will try to sneak in there, would be like Christmas for them.
  13. Gauldronborn

    Suggestion for tank spam

    The thing is that a large amount of players actually wants tank spam. Have you never seen the smile and the glister in the eye of a AT rambo when there are more than 2 enemy tanks. Or the drool from pilots mounts when they see more than 3 Armor Squad appear on the enemy roster. And of course tankers only play tanks so that they can shoot at other tanks. But yes the infantry gameplay does disintegrate when you have 3 tankers, 3 AT rambo hunters, 3 pilots and 6 snipers in a team. Hopefully they will get started again on tank vs tank battles matches and also some air battle matches. Of course the biggest problem is the 20-ish player limit.
  14. Gauldronborn

    Too much AT

    Dude, this is the H&G forums not BF or WOT forums. Where do you see a tanks everywhere? Or what does your everywhere mean; 1/5 matches? No tankers (not even new ones) would expect to farm infantry. All tankers expect to be able to fight other tanks. You can't even farm infantry as a tanker you need to fight other tanks to make credits/xp.
  15. Gauldronborn

    Suggestion for tank spam

    Interesting solution for a mythical problem. There is no tank spam. There are only witch-hunt calls by players that would like this game to be their own special version of free to play infantry-only fps. How many games out of 10 do you play with tanks in the match? And out of those 10 games, how many times did you get killed by a tank. And then how many times did you get killed by a sniper/plane/team-kill? Seriously, if a tank kills you near a cap point, you then approach it from the other side or just go kill the tank quick? Now if a sneaky sniper kills you that is a bit of a mission to go search and kill them. And for me, planes are a much bigger issue, there are matches where you can't drive anywhere without eating their bombs & bullets. This effectively halts the advance and in turn destroys infantry gameplay for that whole match.