Wolfbane

Members - Veterans
  • Content count

    503
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

30 Neutral

3 Followers

About Wolfbane

  • Rank
    Master Sergeant

Faction & Soldier

  • Faction
    All
  • Soldier
    Infantry

Recent Profile Visitors

1,057 profile views
  1. Wolfbane

    Sneak Peek: M9A1 Bazooka

    @Reto.Millan @Reto.Hades @Reto.RedBjarne Is it the future plan to keep punish players for destroying tanks, or is the prices on AntiTank gear going to change? Atm, I would guess that average repair bill per tank destroyed is prob around 1-3K if you using a bazooka. Shooting bazooka long range to take out tanks across rivers/across bridge, shooting and missing at moving tanks, hitting tanks not at optimal places... not all shots on tanks are optimal. And the reward for destroying tanks is nothing compared to the cost it takes to destroy them. And where some tanks cost 14 credits to spawn, it does not seem balanced system. Just remove the entire "Cost of repair/maintenance" on everything in the game, lower the earnings, and let people use gear they have bought. There would still be a need to earn credits to buy new gear, skins, soldiers, vehicles..... Just not a cost for people to use gear...
  2. @Col_Shedi_Potter Clearly, you dint read my post and understand what I wrote. Or just ignored what I wrote. I said, there is no good way to test if your theory works or not with bullets, because you will not know if you are fireing "special bullets" or "free default bullets". So STOP doing test with ammo, as only way of checking. You will not get a result you can rely on 100% by only using ammo as an test. TEST WITH SCOPE !!!!! Best way you can test, if you want to test if mods are played for free, is by testing a gun with a scope and preferred on a rifle that fires a lot of bullets, like AVS, STG or M2. ofc its also doable with mods that change Rate of Fire, but that is not as good test, since you can think you have a certain rate of fire, and be wrong. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ps... if you plan to do any testing, try and not play on WAR, but do tests in "Staged battle". - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Best way to test is with scope since you clearly will see if the scope is there or not. *1* Play one of the following guns... STG, M2 or AVS (depending on what faction you play) *2* Disable Auto Repair on your scope. *3* Play games until your AVS/M2/STG scope is down to about 10%-15% durability. *4* Make sure you have not left any games prior to this that has not finished. (dont leave games that has not ended) *5* Jump into a new game, shot like crazy, Empty your gun at everything that moves. Ways to see if your testing given any results... *6* Did you lose the scope on the rifle midgame. (If so... Test successfull... and test shown that you can not use mods on rifles without paying for them) (Keep in mind we dont know when the game checks for your durability on gear, if its each second, miliseconds, minut, hour, or each time you die/spawn, or only after game as your claim is.... so keep that in mind.) *7* After game is over, look at your durability on the scope on that rifle, if it got durability still..... then you failed your test and have to restart the test. *8* After game is over, look at your durability on the scope on that rifle, if it shows no durability, then maybe you are correct, Now do same test a few more times. (why only maybe?, because you dont know if you fired the last shot at the last second of game or not, so you have to test this several times to see if its likely) (It could also be that the game only checks each time you SPAWN's . If that is the case, then this also is a reason why the "maybe correct" needs several tests.) (And that is why a gun that fires a lot of bullets is better for this test, because you are more likely to faster get to a result that shows if your claim is true or not.)
  3. I know that 1+ year ago, when M2 was a good gun. On the old Mountain town.... hmm... its was prob more then 2-3 years then, anyway.... Playing M2, having Autorefill on as always, there was a long battle, and mid game, my scope disappeared midgame during my stream. So.... Mods on gear, do take damage/usage ingame, and if your mods on your gear cant support that, then you lose it, even mid game. ofc... this was as I said on the old mountain town when M2 was still playable. Mountain town that could last for 3hours... So many things could have changed since then. Maybe RETO saw the stream and made changes after that... I dont know. @Col_Shedi_Potter So... You 100% tested this? Or is this only a theory? Have you gone to a game with 1% ammo left and played a long game and not run into any problems. The best test is prob to do what I mentioned, have a scoped rifle, remove auto repair, and then play till 1-5% left, and jump into new game and see if it lasts a long game. Because the problem with "ammo" is that you don't actually know if you are using good ammo, or "default-free-ammo". An image on the bottom right, displaying your rifle is modded to have special ammo, is not same thing. RETO maybe only loads image of what mods the gun is pre battle, and you actually only playing with default-free-ammo and think you are using special ammo. Same goes with all other mods. The mod that is easy to see if you have or not, is simply a scope, because you can see when the scope disspeares from your rifle...... Go test, and come back with nice info. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PS. You want to grind credits as infantry, Pick a gun that you think is good without mods, play that and see insane amount of credits roll in. Suggestion of good guns without mods: STG, Johnsson, AVS, DPS 28, 1919, PPS 43, MP40, //Wolfbane
  4. Wolfbane

    Auto-Resolve Experiment Started 10SEP18

    Why not turn on the AR timers on Skirmish and Encounters, can test it and set it to 2h isntead of the old 65min, and only dissable AR timers on "Towns"
  5. Wolfbane

    Auto-Resolve Experiment Started 10SEP18

    "Who plays the battles which no-one wants to play?" You implement the suggestion I made long time ago, and on page 2 of this thread.... that solves Agree. something I said a few years ago, gave suggestion to RETO, but got ignored as always. Also in the spoiler below.
  6. Wolfbane

    Auto-Resolve Experiment Started 10SEP18

    Every change has positive and negative changes with it. And yes u are right, that pushing certain towns would be harder with the changes I mention,.... I even wrote that in the suggestion itself as a flaw. But not being able to ONLY play fights where you have units is a tiny tiny small cost of fixing the game towards a more balanced game. And yes, I have many Generals and many many units, Im aware how this would affect me and others who have shittons of units. When they reworked the "Squad system" so you no longer would select what AT u where actually fighting for. When that was removed, they removed the option to actually fight for your units. AS it is now, you fight in the same town as your units, and you actually dont fight for your units in any other way then "win/loss" of that town.
  7. Wolfbane

    Auto-Resolve Experiment Started 10SEP18

    Never... or .... "Never again" ? I was really active on the forums some time ago. Writing suggestions and stuff on forum. But after several years of no reply from RETO on suggestions, I gave up on the forums... @Mitttiir Already have replies from RETO in this thread, "will be hotfixed tomrorow"
  8. Wolfbane

    Auto-Resolve Experiment Started 10SEP18

    A suggestion I made some years ago 2016/2017... when the talk of removing AR was done. Spoiler = Rant... Suggestion List *1* Each faction have there own "Faction Battle queue #" That means as soon as units meet anywhere, town/skirmish as soon as the units/faction on each side are "fun" then they will be given a "Facton Battle queue #" number will be given to that battle. These "Battle queue" should be for each faction, so there will be a "German Battle Queue", "Allied Battle Queue" and a "Soviet Battle Queue" Reason for each faction to have a queue number for there own faction is to remove confusion instead of a "Global Battle Queue" Because lets say SOV vs USA, have "Global Battle Queue" #1 and #2, then some GER vs USA is #3, and Ger vs SOV is #4. Then there could easy be confusing why battle #3 and #4 started before #1 and #2. But if you have a queue for each faction, then that would not be the case. *2* Battles will start in correct order, battle #1 will start before battle #2 will start, and so on. Battles that are "uniq" lets say assault with 100% paratrooper, will ofc be "special" because if this battle is #1 in queue and people are not in queue as paratrooper then other normal battles would be needed to start. But these battles with only air units are so rare cases. Spoiler = Suggestion of changes to planes and paratrooper. But thread of its own. *3* People will still be able to queue on certain battles, but they most likely won't. Even if their town battle number is 23 for example, but they are aware that 22 other battles have to start before battle #23 will start. What would these changes do? *Nerf clans influences in WAR. This will remove "clans" powers because pushing certain areas will be harder because a lot of other battles have to start before "your" battle will start. With most likely will result in a slower and more even progression of the war map. Instead of spearhead pushes only where clans want to push. *Nerf Soviets options to "pick battles" This system would remove the options for SOV to pick and fight only the battles they want to fight. *Improve game and make a "none AR" system to be viable. This system would make things a lot better because once you "test" to remove "AutoResolve" there are going to be some insane parts of the map vs Soviet that never will be fought, unless something like this is introduced to the game. I am a bit concern about the suggestion because it can impact clans gameplay to much, and I'm not sure how clans would hate the suggested changes. But as always, changes make some people happy, and some people mad. So clans/friends will still be able to play together in games, but pushing in certain areas will be tougher. Problem is finding out what suggestions are better for the game. Flaws - Feedback - Suggestions - Improvements?
  9. Wolfbane

    Auto-Resolve Experiment Started 10SEP18

    2 Paraunits = Large Warfund loss ????? Did u lok at the image I posted in my message? ( http://prntscr.com/ksnryz ) If not, look at, island between Scandinavia and Riga area.... in game . edit: http://prntscr.com/ksot9l Now its 3 towns blocked.... sountill hotfix, SOV wont be abel to push scandinavia, retreat or even reinforce there units. @Gekk0420 - Depends on how the programming is done, only RETO can answer it.
  10. Wolfbane

    Auto-Resolve Experiment Started 10SEP18

    Im not 100% sure if its good or not, but Im all for giving it a try I Can see "problems" with matches against SOV with this removed. I think a slow ramp of AR timer instead would be better approach. Dubble the time. to 2h See if anything crashed, then next week dubble the timer again. 4h... and keep increasing to see where things start to turn bad. Looks like system is already getting abused. 2 Paratrooper blocked entire SOV progression towards Scandinavia, for until tomorrow, when new hotfix comes out. http://prntscr.com/ksnryz
  11. Wolfbane

    AR to Moral Death

    One change to help many vs moral issues. Units regain moral as long as a battle have not started So in other words units in a town that is blinking but never start, should not halt moral gain. Moral should only be halted once a battle has actually started and is played. Atm Moral gain is halted as soon as a town is blinking, Does not matter if the battle never starts. And atm this is put into a system, to lock down towns instantly and just lock down so they cant regain moral. Use 216 units to lock down and hinder 10.000 units from gaining any moral. have 216x2, and u can attack town with 216, once about to AR, you send in another 216 units, so the town gets locked down again, and hinder enemy from moving units out or regaining moral. And while the 2nd wave of 216 is locking down the 10K, the other 216 units of yours cain regain moral in the town behind. Put into system to lock down places, 432 units can demoralize 10.000 units / force them to surrender lack of moral. This way the 216 is locking down the 10K, and the other 216 is regaining moral. And they just swap back and forth untill enemy 10K surrender of moral losses. And if battle starts, that would even be better, because "randoms" with 216 inf on foot, will not win, the battle will end in less then 10minuts, and the 10K units lost moral even faster then the AR. Another change that would be nice would be Once any attack has been made on any town. That town can not be reattacked again for 5minuts. This would give players time to actually move units out of towns, without sitting stairing at the FPS map none stop.
  12. Question reg Leaderboards: Why not use a system that would place all "same class" characters from same account scores together as "one class score"? As it is now, the leaderboard is only beneficial for the players who only play one character. And punishes people who swap between characters.
  13. Wolfbane

    Ways to Fix Town Assault (images and notes included)

    Awesome work, keep it up, and hope reto looks at it.
  14. Wolfbane

    The German side will disappear?

    Nha... Underdog bonus is there to level out the uneven number of players on each faction. Changing the underdog bonus to only care how the war progression is going, would not balance out amount of players on eash side. Underdog bonus is atm counted by amount of online players who have joined war on each faction. I dont think it cares if you actually is doing anything related to the WAR on your faction. (RETO can gladly reply if my assumtions are incorrect) Downside is that Im guessing it does not actually count the active players, and thats why it does not help as much as it could, if it was changed to actuially count active WAR players. Im guessing that insane amount of German players have joined WAR as German but they dont play WAR. But they have joined Germany in WAR so they can check map progression and maybe move units once in a while or seldome once in a while join a game. So they still count as "joined the war on German side", even if they are not really active WAR players. RETO should prob change so they only count active players in the WAR instead. Suggestion is to do the following changes on who is counted towards the Underdogbonus for your faction. *1* Be active in a WAR game or in queue for a WAR game. *2* Recently moved units on WAR map. *3* And once u do any of point 1 or 2you are "Counted" towards the underdog bonus for the following 10minuts If step *3* is to much work for the servers, then I guess simply doing a check each 5minuts and count step 1 and 2 to determine active players. Step 3 is more just to get a more stable number, removing 3 would give more flacturation to the numbers. But might be kinder to the servers. That way all the online players who is playing Stage battles are not counted towards calculating underdogbonus as Im assuming they are atm.