Members - Veterans
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

706 Excellent

About Rolf_Mützelburg

  • Rank
  • Birthday 06/23/13

Faction & Soldier

  • Faction
  • Soldier
    All types

Recent Profile Visitors

1639 profile views
  1. Help test NEW Encounter map on prototype!

    I think @boomthekid's picture is a better example of what I'm suggesting, minus the Roman aqueduct shaped bridge.
  2. Help test NEW Encounter map on prototype!

    Put a house on either side of a river, make both houses part of the cap zone. Players have to cross the river to cap it, but aren't prevented from entering the cap zone by the river: simple works
  3. Help test NEW Encounter map on prototype!

    A shallow creek with a chest high slope on either side could turn the water from an obstacle to cross, to a defensive line from which players can use as cover. The river needs to be scaled down ALOT. The water should be no more than a foot deep at any point, and should not spontaneously turn into a 6 ft deep river as that would be unnatural. Also, if you guys actually wanted to do a real mill, this would be a great Idea, instead of the river being in front of the spawn, making it part of the cap zone would be much less intrusive to people as they commute.
  4. Help test NEW Encounter map on prototype!

    As a matter of aesthetics, if you just want some water for scenery, there is nothing saying it can't be just a shallow creek. Not every river has to be 6 ft deep. I remember the old Tutorial level was Very nice looking, it was naturally layed out, and it too had a tiny little creek and bridge. It didn't affect combat, but it was nice scenery. The level just consisted of a large farm house and a field. Very natural environment, nice tree coverage, mid to long range combat, good dynamic lighting. Yall should revisit that old tutorial map for ideas. The creek in it appeared to be a seasonal river that carved a large strip out of the woods. In the summer when the snow was long gone and the river shrank to a creek it left a strip of fertile ground, perfect for a small farm. That sort of unnecessary back story is what makes a level look alive, or at least that it had once housed life prior to the war moving in. That is important for making the levels feel and look natural. You need to design your towns and villages to be functional in peace time, then modify them for war after.
  5. Help test NEW Encounter map on prototype!

    I agree the more spawn options the more dynamic and less easily camp-able it becomes. Players will use what ever works best, so giving them more options doesn't hurt. Single point caps like this are all about "locking the doors" The way to win is secure the entrances to the cap zone proper. If you can't secure the cap point, you can't win. Making it so neither side can secure a decisive victory for the sake of forcing a stalemate, will have the effect of disenfranchising the player, and make them feel like they have no say in the outcome of the battle. I call it the 'Verdun effect' as it directly parodies the monotony and pathetic waste of the Western Front in WWI. I'll write more on that later, my point is, the level is lame and grind-tastic.
  6. Help test NEW Encounter map on prototype!

    The river is also really unnecessary. We have more than enough of them in this game. I know its a lame suggestion, but its honestly for the better, all the river does is complicate the simple task of commuting to battle, something no one likes wasting more time than needed to do. It makes balancing spawn points harder by arbitrarily putting obstacles in front of one and not the other. Or on the other hand forcing you to put arbitrary obstacles or distance between the other spawn to balance out the two sides.
  7. Help test NEW Encounter map on prototype!

    Aside from not having anything remotely looking like a mill... and YET ANOTHER FKING RIVER CROSSING, No bugs yet. I like the idea of the large sized cap point, but the lack of players on the test server, and the low player cap in general made it frustrating to test. We were left simply hunting for each other in this giant cap point. Both sides spawned less than 30 seconds away from the cap, so no sooner would would kill someone they'd be back hiding in an attic somewhere the next minute. With no gains anywhere the game was boring and stale. The map aside from having more brown trees than usual, was generic, and boring. No aesthetics, no decoration, not natural in its layout. The stock assets are out of place as usual. I have to say it works as a level before I get into detail. It works in the most basic sense, it doesn't give either side a noticeable advantage, at least not relative to what is normal in this game. The problem is, it took over a year for this... I don't mind waiting for something good, but what ever Reto spent the last year working on, I don't see it. This level looks like it could have been drawn up in a half hour. I'm sure the terrible map editing software makes the process arduous, but the fact is, someone with a streamlined level editor could throw together something just as lame in a day or two just using vanilla assets. We expect more than that from professional developers, especially after waiting a year. I understand there are technical issues beyond our knowledge that make level design nearly impossible, especially the fact Reto only has one dedicated level designer. But, there are other more well polished and well designed games coming out, and I don't see this as competitive. I can believe that this may very well be Reto doing the best they can. If so, their best isn't good enough. The players who went to visit Reto spoke highly, saying there were great things coming down the line. I said then, as I say now. "I'll believe it when I see it." This looks lame.
  8. Reto Insider summit summary

    RNG simply exacerbates the issue of spray and pray weapon design. Accuracy kills, and some people, including Reto don't like that. Just like the OHK rifles, accuracy is accused of being OP. When everyone is spraying, luck starts to replace skill, as you have less and less control of the gun and by extension, the situation. Slot machine gameplay mechanics may be BS, but they are equally BS to everyone, which means players who lack skill have just as much of a chance at getting lucky as a vet. So on paper, RNG and other BS game mechanics create equality: By removing actual gameplay and replacing it with rock/paper/scissors. If you've ever played an RTS game, and watched in bewilderment as two AI who are standing at point blank range empty 3 magazines at each other without scoring any hits, it is because the game doesn't actually measure the accuracy of their shots, it simply uses hit points to determine the winner. Sometimes it's a set number, sometimes its dice. Who ever has the larger number wins. Accuracy doesn't matter. So long as both guns are pointed at the target, the chances of hitting the target are based on the stats of the gun, not the player's ability, or physical situation. RNG works the same way in FPS games. -snip- This issue is old as dirt, and continues to plague the game do to one part neglect, and one parts stubbornness. The ARMOR 3.0 issue I raised from last months dev stream shows they are still in the mindset that they can and should remove skill as a factor and replace it with unavoidable sink-holes that drag everyone down to the same common denominator. The fact they see skill as a problem that needs to be snuffed out, rather than a virtue that they should reward means this sort of issue will remain a systemic problem for the foreseeable future, and until that opinion is defeated, no discussion on RNG will go anywhere. Because regardless to whether we like it or not, Reto is under the impression that it serves a purpose. There for, even if they are convinced through public outcry to remove it, they will simply replace it with some other broken mechanic to try and accomplish the same result.
  9. Reto Insider summit summary

    I'm still concerned about ARMOR 3.0 and the idea about armor being pecked away by bullets and other low caliber guns that shouldn't be able to put a dent in the thing. No light tank, no matter how many shells you shoot, will ever break through the Frontal armor of a heavy tank, or the like. You'd have to land every shot inside the same crater to be able to drill through that much armor with such a small gun. And if that were the case, then it wouldn't be that easily exploited. HOWEVER, this is not what was suggested in the dev stream a few weeks ago. Redbjarn or maybe it was the guy sitting next to him said that any shell that hit the tank, would peck away at the armor's HP, he did not specify that it had to land in the exact same spot, simply that if it hit the frontal plate, the front plate would simply thin-out until it disappeared. And then as an added 'fk you' said you would no longer be able to repair armor. Again, for clarification, I don't have a problem with not being able to repair armor, or that shells can drill their way through thick armor if you shoot the same spot enough times. But the idea that you can do that with any gun, regardless of whether you hit the same spot, in addition to not being able to repair it, means that armor is rendered useless after more than 5 min of combat. There is no skill or strategy, this is the same Яetarded logic that lead to RNG and other game breaking updates that used the socialist version of balance to ruin the game.
  10. Reto Insider summit summary

    technically this is armor 3.0 because they've overhauled armor once before.
  11. Insiders got anything to share?

    I'll believe it when I see it, until then I'm keeping my train ticket to Hell Let Loose on my fridge.
  12. stickies.png

  13. That's not their logic, that's the logical hole in their logic. They didn't get that far into detail to actually consider the ridiculousness of hitting the same spot enough times to drill a hole through 50mm of armor for example. By thier logic, hitting anywhere on the plate will have the same effect as hitting the same spot repeatedly. That is the problem, IRL, you could hypothetically break through a tank that is too big for your gun if at close range, and with a fair amount of marksmanship, you can land your second shot on the exact same point, you could possibly make the second shot finish what the first started. But even that has it's limits. a 76mm AP round may, if you had a good shot, break through a Tiger's hull if you can land your second shot right on the money. But if you're plugging away with a little 20mm, forget about it, the gun lacks the accuracy, and the rounds lack the stopping power to do any noticeable damage, you will be there all day drilling that hole. 150mm cross section, for reference.
  14. Oh that reminds, me: This is like 2 weeks old, but they totally fked up modular damage already. They are implementing modular damage, but they are giving the armor itself an HP pool of its own. Now that doesn't sound like a problem, until you realize that a machine gun shooting AP rounds can now destroy a tank if you shoot it long enough. Armor 3.0 is literally regressing back to Armor 1.0, to the days of early beta when an MG34 could kill a starter tank if you just stood there shooting it long enough. Their explanation, as usual, is a combination of cherry picked facts and a VERY loose application of physics. They state (correctly) that even if your rounds don't penetrate (IRL), they will still leave a mark, and so if you shoot the same piece of armor over and over, the damage will weaken the armor to the point where it will be possible to penetrate it. There is just one, itchy-bitsy, tiny, gigantic detail that they missed: Yes if you shoot the same piece of armor in the *EXACT SAME SPOT* it will eventually drill its way through, however, if your round lands just a quarter of an inch to the left or right, it's like hitting a fresh piece of armor. I'd like to point out, in relation to the previous discussion on this same thread, that this is a pristine example of Reto using historical realism to justify something, but only applying half of the truth, and conveniently ignoring the parts of reality that contradict their ideal sense of "balance". This is 1999 level arcade logic, being injected into what is on its face a physics update designed and advertised using realism. In practice, that means their version of fiziks will allow a 50 caliber machine gun to kill a King Tiger, if the 50cal shoots it enough times to wear away it's armor. And as an added 'fk you' to anyone who thought tanks would ever get a break from Reto's BS: You can't repair armor. They cited realism ironically, as the reason you can't repair armor anymore. Once again, the realistic parts all serve a purpose, and add depth to the game. Then they went and fked up the entire system in one move, by injecting arcade logic into the mix and negated every advantage the other components lent to the game. I hate being right about everything. I really do, because I'm a pessimistic mother fker. So if I'm every right about something, that either means humanity has failed, or Reto moto invented a new way to fk up a previously foolproof idea.
  15. How about that Twitch stream... Nov 1st edition

    Got triggered as fk when he said the tan factory under coat was for blending in with hay fields. Citation: Spawn changes were meh. I don't think they will ruin those parts of the maps or anything like some people where saying. Defense will be harder. That means offense will be easier. We find our selves on both sides from time to time, so it's as much a benefit as it is a hindrance. Don't care much for the new German helmet paint. The green is the only decent one, and that's just because the real German helmets were more of a green tinge to them, than the dark metal grey default helmets. Its really not an improvement, so much as an option to wear a slightly more period correct helmet color. I can't say that is a benefit, since that should have been the default from day one. It's like when a AAA publisher takes a chunk of a game out, and sells you it as DLC. Yea, it's nice to have extra stuff, but not when said stuff should have been the default to begin with. I feel like this game as a whole, is filled with useless garbage, that serves as filler to make the slightly less garbage stuff Reto adds later seem cooler than it actually is. For example: there is no reason why the Panther should be dunklegrau by default, the Panther went into production after grey was phased out, and should be camouflaged by default. You can still sell alternative camo patterns as DLC, but there is no reason to sell the tank grey. You wasted company time, and resources, making a lame default skin for the tank, for the express purpose of one-upping yourself later. Why the extra step? It's not for the sake of realism or immersion, and it does not serve any gameplay related purpose. It's just unethical business. "Designed obsolescence" You should stop that, its unbefitting of a tiny indie company to be following in the footsteps of the most hated AAA giants out there. You're better than that, you don't have some money hungry publisher breathing down your neck threatening to can your project if you don't increase the game's income by 10%. There are plenty of honest ways to make a buck without this sort of dishonest business tactics.