zaerius

Members - Veterans
  • Content count

    4,034
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,770 Excellent

5 Followers

About zaerius

  • Rank
    Brigadier General

Faction & Soldier

  • Faction
    All
  • Soldier
    Infantry

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. zaerius

    Flash player

    I'm just curious, is the RTS still running on flash? If it is what's gonna happen when Adobe will start to block it soon? https://www.macrumors.com/2021/01/02/adobe-ends-flash-support/
  2. so the fps players should pay half of the cost of the spawns...but you would like to keep all the profits they make? Sounds like BS to me. You arent paying for the spawns, you are investing your warfunds, and if you are smart with your AT placement, you will make profit. Just be glad that your ATs are getting played, because if reto makes players to pay additional fees for spawning in war, Im quite sure a lot of players would loose interest, and you would just sit there and watch your ATs getting wasted by autoresloves.
  3. No, the spotting mechanic was added when they changed to the new spawning mechanics. Players with light loads could respawn 2s after they got killed, making it impossible to get even remotely close to the APCs and cap or destroy it because the same players were just spam respawning on it knowing your exact location. It had nothing to do with spawncamping.
  4. Why not start with this and test out what effect it will have on the gameplay? Dropping the HS multiplier is a major change, most likely screwing over all the hard work you've done with weapon balancing. While this might seem like an easy to implement solution on the short run, I believe it will completely throw off the weapon balance, and on the long run you will have a lot more work on your table as a direct result of this. I would suggest to look into other alternative solutions, that might be slightly harder to implement, but wouldnt have as huge of an impact. Tweaking the headshot hitbox is a great way to start, and if its still not enough, then you should look into other minor changes. I understand that you are low on resources, and any major overhaul is out of the question, but there are other solutions which wont take up much programmer time, and could yield significant improvements. Changing the headshot multiplier based on the range of the weapons is a question of adding one simple variable to the damage calculations. So when your weapon deals 100% dmg on "range near" your HS multiplier is 4x1=4, if you are further away and your dmg drops down to 70% your headshot multiplier follows the dmg curve and it would be 4x0.7=2.8. I personally think headshots on close range are not an issue, IMO what is frustrating when you get a HS from a range where you know that the gun isnt accurate enough to land a HS by precise aiming. I think this solution is at least worth a discussion with a programmer, to see how time consuming would it be to implement, because this could kinda satisfy both sides. The community is kinda equally divided on this topic, and it doesnt matter what decision you make, you will piss half of the playerbase off. I would rather take it slow, and make small changes than trying to do one major change and completely change the gameplay.
  5. All 3 issues getting some work done, would indeed revitalize the game for many, but they are far from being simple fixes. Ive been very vocal about this for years, an FPS game is trash without proper 3D audio. RETO always brushed away these complaints saying, that its way too complicated, they dont have anyone who knows how to work with audio engines, and they would have to outsource this task to a 3rd party. In case of Redbjarne, every time this was brought up he acted like he is completely unaware of this issue. I honestly think this isnt, and never going to be a high priority issue for this company, since overwhelming majority of the playerbase are casuals who play on speakers anyways. It only matters to a small percentage who are using sound as part of their skill. I honestly dont know what system could work be balanced and fun. If they bring back the old penetration models, tanks with heavy armor would become untouchable. This only worked in the old days because you had weakpoints (basically bugs) in the models, like the hatch, the front MG mount, lower glacis where the armor angle wasnt working properly, tracks and so on. The only way you could defeat a tiger, or even an E8 at some point frontally, was to aim for those buggy points. Remember, with armor 2.0 all of these models were fixed, and the armor wear was introduced as a counter balancing feature. Personally, I liked the old tank gameplay much more. I think it was more fun, easier to understand, balanced, skill based. I think having this modular system is not a good idea in a combined arms game, where infantry can criple your tank in a single shot, making you unable to flee. I used to enjoy fighting off rambos in the old days, and I was pretty good at it. Now its not really fun when your tracks are insta gone. Also I would say the entire system is just way too complicated, you have to spend a lot of hours just to kinda have an idea wtf are you doing. In WT this works, because you have visual feedback of every single shot you did, you see the internals of the tanks you are hitting, and you can adjust accordingly. In this game its just trial and error, and the inconsistent modular dmg isnt helping. How many times when I went for the gun breach I made emmental cheese of the turret, and the gunbreach was magically dodging everything. Same issue with tracks or engine. I shoot the track, I hit the transmission??? I think RETO overreached with this one, and they made something that is far too complicated to do properly for them. disable Qing as specialized unit into war match-Ive said this so many times, and I still believe this is the way to go. Every player should be able to Q for war matches only as Infantry/Para, and based on their actions they should get boosted token gain/extra tokens. There is no need for hard caps, just increase the timer by a lot for specialized classes. If you are just sitting AFK on the respawn screen, waiting for your 2nd panther, good luck deploying that till the match ends. If you want to spawn that, hop into the game as infantry, go on points, heal your teammates, repair your friendly tanks and you could get your next panther in no time. I think RETO is afraid to make this move, because they are afraid they would loose a bunch of war players, but I think on the long term it would be the opposite. WAR would be a totally different experience compared to stage, and players who get fed up by tank/plane spam would start to play the more infantry and objective oriented WAR. -no overstacking (some hard limit for max troops in active battle) I dunno if you played back in the old days, where each line could take only 10ATs, and an AT had to run empty before you could send in anything else. It had its drawbacs, but I think something based on this idea would be a lot better than what we have currently. Lets say each line would be able to take 9 inf/para ATs, 1 recon, 1tank, 1plane AT. For specialized ATs perhaps it could take 1 of each class? What really I miss from the old RTS, is our ability to play for our own ATs. It added a completely new level of gameplay, where not every loss was a loss. If you and your squad did great, you made profit. I really dislike the current random AT resource distribution, I really liked to have control over my ATs XP/WF gain. So as I said at the start, these arent simple fixes, but let me pitch you one... Let the attackers individually switch between lines!!!! Srsly how hard this could be? Simplest solution, let me leave the squad, and let me be my own squad leader.
  6. More frustration for those who actually aim for the heads. I suppose you have COD and BF in mind, but what about CSGO, PUBG, Valorant? All of them are vastly more popular and more hardcore. The gunplay can be hardcore and punishing, and it could be one of the main reasons what makes the game popular, and at the same time low skill ceiling can deter more skillful players from playing a game for a longer period of time. For me BF becomes boring and frustrating after 30 hours mainly due to the gunplay and DMG. Honestly, getting headshotted was never a major issue for me. Perhaps its because I come from a CS background, while you are used to the more arcady playstyle. OFC there are some headshots where I roll my eyes, but most of the time it really doesnt annoy me at all. Perhaps its a mental fixation, if you are convinced that there is an issue with something, your mind will do a really good job providing proof. It will highlight every instance, exaggerate cases, while completely leave out cases which doesnt satisfy your belief. Just think about how many firefights you win because the guy is just wildly hifpiring and missing all of his shots every game, but every time you get headshotted, even if its on the 10th bullet it will instantly trigger you.
  7. lowering the HS multiplier will just further decrease the skill ceiling, there will be no point to take that extra time to aim for the headshot, since there would be no reward doing so. A headshot should be a OHK for all weapons on closer ranges, and as I suggested multiple times, the HS multiplier should get lower as the range gets bigger. For example Pistols and SMGs should have the current 4x till about 20m, after which the multiplier should steeply drop all the way down to 1-1.5 on 30+ m. I think just straight up nerfing the multiplier will just completely kill that last bit of skill requirement this game has, and it will just lead to an even more spammy gameplay. Rework the gunplay so spraying is punished, but all weapons would be extremely accurate on the first X amount of bullets, and the RNG headshot complaints will fade away.
  8. there are plenty of "non clan" squads in staged that are playing together just for fun, the real issue is not squads in staged, but how to motivate organized large squads to play war instead of stage.
  9. the real question is when will the BS OP this or UP that faction stop.
  10. Certainly the scopes slowed down the gameplay a bit, but IMO this issue was exaggerated a 100 fold after adding extra foliage and the reduction of visible smoke. My issue are not the snipers and campers, for me the problem is the difficulty to spot them. Even if I directly look at the direction they are firing at me, I simply cannot see anything that would reveal their position. A video I made back in 2017 on the issue(notice the lack of visual feedback, which is the same to the present day): Request: add visible, bright muzzle flash, that would make it easier to spot players in bushes. IMO we cant have true weapon balance until we get spam/spray penalties. Without it, its just impossible to find a proper balance with the current gameplay mechanics. @Reto.Hades I hope you know what I'm referring to. Blood screen is fine, its used in many games to suppress players under fire, the problem with how this game implemented it, that the pattern occurs randomly across the entire screen, including the center, where your crosshair is located at, covering the enemy you are trying to aim at. I don't mind the blood spatter, till it appears only at the edges of my screen. I only had problems with this when they changed the direction your character was looking at after exiting the vehicle. It used to be, so your character was always facing the direction you were looking at before exiting the vehicle, now your character is facing the direction the vehicle is going, which is extremely disorienting for me. Simply we need a combination of two existing settings. Currently you can either select Markers "Off" while in ADS OR markers off while you are looking at them directly in hipfire. Combine the two and its all good. The map layouts have to be figured out, for me this change broke the game, and I cant have as much fan as I used to. As an attacker the points are unfairly far, and too big to clear effectively before all the players that you killed return to the point. Perhaps its just me, but Id rather play 3 extremely high quality maps, than to have 100 unplayable ones. But I grew up on basically playing 4 maps for years in CS1.6 so I might not represent the majority of the current gaming audience. I just prefer lower in quantity, higher in quality. Issue: Removal of 'Pick Battle list' which was extremely well liked. Request: Put back the list so players can see info and pick a battle from the RTS map much quicker than having to check every single town and skirmish. Saves players a LOT of time and frustrations. While I also disliked this feature, I also understand why it was absolutely necessary to remove it. Only a fraction of players are playing war, and even those are split into 3 factions. By removing the cherry picking battle list, we can have faster popping battles, since less players are committing to select battles manually. Now that its basically gone, the only one feature they absolutely have to remove is locking the attacking side players to a single line. Let us change lines freely. It removes so much of strategic gameplay. Issue: Broken and frustration spawn 2.0. system Request: Spawn 2.0. needs to be removed (return to old spawn locations, simply just add invincibility timer when spawning vehicles and you're done); While the spawn locations infuriate me, I dont think it should be removed altogether. Spawn locations needs to be worked at, also CPs should be more balanced so they wouldnt favor so much the defenders. I still see a huge potential in the token based spawn system, and I still think it could make this game better, but it needs radical adjustments like making players to work for the spawn tokens as infantry, so they can spawn tanks, planes and recons instead of just basing it on time spent in battle. No, no and No. I am massively against red vs blue. What would be the point then to play anything else than the faction with the strongest playerbase if all weapons would be basically the same across the factions? Till the BA rifles require basically 0 skill to one shot you to the body from 250m with such open CPs and objectives, I disagree, heavyset has to stay. Once BA is made skillful, or the CPs are more enclosed, I agree it can go. There is a difference between RNG and RNG. This game has RNG in most cases on the very first shot you fire, and it remains basically the same for your entire spraydown. This has to change to something more skill based, where RNG increases by the number of bullets you fire and by your firerate. This way players have a way to learn how to keep their weapons accurate by using skillful shooting techniques(tapping, various length of bursting and spraying). A complete removal of RNG would be disastrous, no game has this. While it is a good step into the right direction, decreasing the FOV on ironsight weapons might not be enough. IMO there is too small penalty for taking a scope ov too small advantage for using the ironsight. There must be greater penalties that would differentiate between the two, such as higher turn cone penalty, longer ADS time and such. Even with the suggested changes the scopes will remain just a superior upgrade rather than a playstyle changing upgrade. I am a huge fan of ironsight weapons, but it just seems like a nerf to choose ironsight on any weapon over scope. If you make any changes to scopes vs ironsight IMO it should make ironsigth much more snappier and viable in closer ranges and scopes more clunky. My ironsight player part lowes any sort of buff, but if I have to be honest IMO decreasing the FOV(basically the zoom) will just bring these weapons closer to their scoped variants. EDIT: oh its an old topic...but I already committed to come back from my retirement... so...
  11. zaerius

    corona?

    hah, I almost replied in a serious matter, contradicting the OP's arguments... then I saw its Brosky. Your new avatar almost tricked me
  12. zaerius

    WEAPON BALANCING DISCUSSION 2

    I wasn't suggesting making it 3hk, but to me it doesn't make any sense that the gun with the worst performance on range has also the weakest dmg on close range. I highly doubt many players are running the high dmg ammo on the smgs, it's worthless if you are unable to land your shots past 10m.
  13. zaerius

    WEAPON BALANCING DISCUSSION 2

    The Thompson has less accuracy, range, muzzle velocity compared to the MP40, yet that 70 extra RPM would make the Tommy OP if it dealt equal or slightly higher dmg on close range? I agree with timberwolf above, the Thompson should have the highest close range dmg of all smgs.
  14. zaerius

    WEAPON BALANCING DISCUSSION 2

    Let's take a look then at my hits to kill stats BA- all around 1.4 which is fine due to heavy set SA- all between 2 and 3, also fine LMG- all between 3 and 4 as should be, except the M1919, but at the very beginning of my playtime I used to run it 2hk SMG-all between 4 and 5 except the Thompson, which I used a lot when it used to be 3hk so it's all in line. STG-3.53 is fine due to heavy set. AVS-3.19 perfectly fine, nowadays I play with sniper bullets only, but I used to experiment with the loadouts. M1/M2- I mostly played with it when it used to be 4hk, the 0.02 is perfectly acceptable margin of error. If what you were saying was true, we would see guns perform way out of line, but every stat is Around what it should be.
  15. zaerius

    WEAPON BALANCING DISCUSSION 2

    Yes. Your accuracy consist of total amount of shots fired*100/total amount of hits to get the % value. If I know how many shots I fired, and I know the total amount of kills with a gun, I can calculate how many shots I need on average to kill one opponent, and from that I can get how many kills I get per pouch or mag. If the sample size is large enough, which in my case is, the fast kills (one bullet headshots) will be evened out by all the missing shots or when I loose a firefight. The issue you brought up would be true if the sample size would be small, like one match, where my performance could vary, but as you increase the data pool, the results get more reliable, consistent and accurate.