Mrdamien03

Members - Veterans
  • Content count

    224
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

110 Good

1 Follower

About Mrdamien03

  • Rank
    Technician 4th

Faction & Soldier

  • Faction
    All
  • Soldier
    All types

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Mrdamien03

    Bazookas and Panzerschreck

    That's an obvious visual bug. In game they are balanced with the same stats. There is one difference, one shoots a faster projectile but reloads like 0.2 s slower. (Panzershreck). And the other shoots a slower projectile and reloads like 0.2s faster. (Bazooka). A proof that is a visual bug, look at bazooka graph at 200 mm there are 2 curves. And so it can and cannot penetrate it? It has no sense. It could be a real bug too so some tests should be done.
  2. Hi everyone. Armor update came with a lot of good things. But mostly bad things for infantry players. So today I want to talk about infantry, and about how much it is important in the game. And about how having infantry fun to play is compulsory. I will give some explanations and some ideas about how making it better for everyone. I/ Infantry in the game In Heroes and Generals, an infantry soldier is the basic unit. But they are really important because they are the units that have to capture points and objectives. Infantry is the best unit for capturing (with paratrooper that is a rare and expensive unit.). They are compulsory and then don't cost much to use. In the game your infantry soldier depends on how you play. You can play a fast combat style with assault rifles, SMG's, and LMG's. You can play a more supportive playstyle with medkits, wrench and AT weapons. You can play as a low-cost recon with a scoped rifle, binoculars... There are a lot of playstyles. But in most situations your goal will capture (or protect) the objectives. II/ Infantry problems and why it is even worse now Infantry for some time now was not fun to play. - It is sometimes not cost efficient (you may loose more money that you will win). - It is a weak unit that can be killed by any other unit (recons from far away, any vehicle at any distance...). The good things were: - cheap unit for generals in War - good for capturing - could annoy tanks before updates (tanks could kill infantry, but infantry could kill tanks too) But with the update appeared some new problems (or drawbacks): - the unit can now be farmed by anything (unless you play really well of course) Any other unit is stronger than infantry. - the waiting time after death can be stronger that before, and because you are getting farmed even more. You may litterally not play anymore. Of course your waiting time may be lower with worse equipment, but you are more likely to die too. And at the end, you will wait for respawning. III/ How can we make infantry better for everyone? Some basic ideas are: - More infantry weapons As an example there are 11 weapons (for each faction) and 14(15) vehicles 4 planes and 10 (11 for SU and GE) tanks. I don't even talk about cars, motorbikes, and trucks. Well, there are more vehicles than weapons. Plus, mostly every vehicle can be usefull at one time. Whereas some weapons are unused because they are useless. So that's even less than 11 weapons. Infantry need more weapons. And there are a lot of ideas. Even concepts, like shotguns, like flamethrowers, like antitank rifles (that are coming soon!)... Some weapons have no "tier", and could use one. Like some tier 2 rifles. There are a lot of choices that are possible. - More weapons' mods About weapons, an easier to do thing is creating more mods for more diversity. There are weapons with only 1 mod possible in 1 place making it the only choice (you use it or no.). Except about sights/scopes and maybe bullets, in any other mod place there should have a mod possibility about: - precision - recoil - damage - eventually range... Of course balancing it requires thinking about it. Because one mod may be a lot better than an other but... well that's already the case. Some mods are far better than an other and then are must-have. While the other are useless. - More infantry types / subclasses Armor update is a rework of (more or less armored) vehicles. About infantry, we could expect an infantry update. It will be important to do one day. Especially if infantry is still more important than vehicles. And then a rework of infantry could be more subclasses. Paratroopers and recons are already more or less infantry subclasses (with a different role for recon). Paratroopers are really fun to play, but could need some tweaks. Recons are not always fun to play because they are sometimes useless, and some infantry could be recon-likes with better stats. They need some more utility. I think I gave that idea like some years ago, but I couldn't find the topic. Well with paratroopers and recons, some obvious subclasses could be: - Medic - Engineer Some ideas that were given and think about by Reto-Moto: - A resistance class (with less equipement but they could have access to silent gun and maybe more melee weapons) We could think about - A special force class (with powerful assault equipement) - A commander class (more supportive way to play and being the step between the Heroes and the General sides of a battle) Each sub-class could have a bonus or a specificity. Some ideas are: - Basic infantry could have a damage reduction because being the worst class in-game they could need it. - Recons could have Camouflaged badge effect from their start without having to use it. - Engineers could be the one with high explosives, and AT weapons. - Medics could have better heal effects / equipments on other players. ... Well, at the end there are a lot of possibilities about infantry. But the important thing is that something is done about it. It didn't changed for years now. Except in bad ways. The fact is they were not fun to play, and with armor update that's even worse. And now they need your help. So please, help them.
  3. Mrdamien03

    How long is Reto’s definition of ‘Yet’

    Bayonets may come one day in a melee update. It could come with some subfactions/factions like Japan, we could expect some kind of katanas too for example. An update like this would give probably: - new melee (and melee/distance hybrid) weapons (bayonets, swords, throwing knifes, maybe exotic stuff like kunais and shurikens...) - maybe a rework of how actual melee weapons are used (showels and knifes) - maybe some combat badges The problem in a FPS is that either melee weapons are OP (like 1 hit kill knife), either they are useless. But it is not a priority anyways.
  4. Mrdamien03

    Is the game good or bad?

    My opinion is that the game is overall better but some minor tweaks are needed. The new systems are pretty interesting. We now need more content and it will be okay. About the game, it depends on how you were playing, because at the moment the game is: - infinitely better if you were only playing tanks - so-so if you were playing everything - randomly better or worse if you were playing planes (if your plane now is pretty bad well don't play it. There was 4-5 P38 against nothing there is now 8-9 medium-heavy ge planes against nothing... And if now your plane is pretty good, just spam it.) - worse if you were playing only recon/para (less infantry, more vehicles) - a lot worse if you were playing infantry only At the end, I'm especially waiting for the new weapons and vehicles that are coming soon. - New AT weapons - Heavy Tank Destroyers - Tier 3 Medium fighter planes
  5. Mrdamien03

    remove loving respawnig time to max 10sec

    At the moment even infantry can reach a really big delay. It is a balance factor for more powerful equipment. So if you play with your best assault rifle, that is full of mods, with some antitank grenades and medkits you may wait a lot more than if you are running naked; The system is good but not yet finished. We will see more changes in the future probably. At the moment: - there may be too much waiting time in some case (like 3 or 4 minutes for playing one life of infantry well... maybe in staged ok but in war this is gg. Defenders got easy life, and attackers just can't play anymore). - the system is good but sometimes not appropriately balanced yet. (For example a Tiger 2 tank has the same time than an IS-2 or Pershing tanks while being infinitely better...) To conclude, for the moment you have to play with a lot less mods and think about how to optimize your equipment for having a decent equipment without having too much waiting time. But if you want a tip... at the moment don't play infantry except on encounters. Just play tanks (and planes if you are a decent pilot), they were reworked and are really good now.
  6. Mrdamien03

    Update 1.12 - General feedback

    I posted this some days ago on the Deploy topic. Being a high importance subject I will post this here too. A lot of field maintenance values will need to be changed soon, because it is not perfect. But the whole system is ready and working. Just not balanced. "Hi guys, today I will talk about deploy timer (field maintenance). I played a lot prototype recently, in some testings battles and some more serious battles where sometimes the level was really decent! First of all I find vehicle update really cool! But one fear that I have to write here, in the deploy topic is about field maintenance. I find interesting that more stuffed characters have to wait more than naked soldiers. And it got some sense. I find really good that field maintenance is now an other balance aspect of the game. To separate even more the best vehicles from decent one. Such as like Panther and Tiger 2 that deserve a much bigger timer than US or SU counterparts for example. But after playing some serious battles and one specificly (I had to fight in every role, heavy fighter, heavy tank and infantry as an attacker in a 3 ways battle finishing with a score like 27 kills 7 deaths 1 heavy tank destroyed 4 heavy planes destroyed) the battle was just awesome. There are two specific moments I want to talk about: - During this long 3 ways battle, I spawned one Tiger 2, despite an enemy air superiority and get destroyed pretty fast. That was my bad. I had the time to meditate on that, like 2 minutes of waiting for respawn as my infantry soldier. I didn't spawn an other heavy tank in that battle lol. So in that case high cost equipment can really cost some time if you don't use them at the good moment. It is really interesting, maybe not noob friendly but it will help against the panther spam or that kind of thing. So that's pretty good! - We were 2 in our faction in this battle for a long time, against 4 or 5 in enemy sides. That was intense and I found it pretty fun. At the end I was defending first enemy objective being attacked by both enemy factions. I killed a lot of enemies and I died some times. Until I couldn't even respawn due to the deploy timer. In my last death I was like "hmm well this is it. We are done for." Because I knew my respawn timer was higher than a full objective recap with some players. So I find it interesting too. Because it can really conclude a never ending battle. Where enemies just can't respawn in time, and then it is a logical end to the battle. But I fear something bigger. And I will explain it here. For a long time, Defender role was and still is too strong when you look at Attacker role. The less lines Defender have to defend, the easier it is. And usually Attacker need at least 3 or 4 lines for having a little chance of winning. With these deploy timers. I fear that Defender will be indirectly buffed (or Attacker will be indirectly nerfed, it depends on your point of view^^). And because it is already a lot better than Attacker. I think it will be a bad thing, if nothing is changed before going live. Here's the idea: Defender is already on the capture point or not really far. Due to this Defender loose less time going to the capture point than the attacker. And possibly has the time to defend it a bit more with traps such as mines for example. And one last fact is that defending (in some case "camping") is usually easier than attacking. Attacker is further from the point. So you loose more time going to the capture point. Plus attacker has more chances to die while attacking. Now let's look at different possibilities with the new system: Attacker dies, Defender lives. Attacker will have to wait a bit (then a bit longer, then a lot, then an eternity...) then going to the capture point again. Attacker dies, Defender dies. Trade kill. Both will have to wait, but Attacker is far from the capture point. Defender IS on the capture point (or not far at least). Both lives. Well some reinforcements will change it to an other case. Attacker lives, Defender dies. Defender will have to wait a bit (then a bit longer, then a lot, then an eternity...) but IS on the capture point (or at least not far). As you can see, Attacker is in a bad position whatever the case. Except if it lives, but he will not live forever. And Defender is always in a good position. Even if it dies, it is not far from the capture point anyways. This is why, if nothing is changed. I think Defender will be indirectly buffed into Oblivion, and Attacker nerfed into Oblivion. Please do something about it. Plus it was a long time something had to be done for buffing Attacker role. I think it is the right moment. A simple idea would be: Defender has a bigger base deploy timer than Attacker. A simple but good idea. Some example of numbers could be like +25% faster for Attacker, and +25% slower for Defender. It would make for a basic 1 min respawn: 45s respawn timer for attacker, and 30s for going to the next capture point. 1 min 15 s respawn timer for defender, but being not far from next capture point a lot less time lost in moving to next capture point. So if Defender spawn on or near the capture point it will come at the same time than the Attacker. 25% may be not the perfect number but at least is the beginning of the idea. Thanks for reading. I hope it will change something. "
  7. Mrdamien03

    Vehicle Gameplay Update - Deploy - Round 2

    Hi guys, today I will talk about deploy timer (field maintenance). I played a lot prototype recently, in some testings battles and some more serious battles where sometimes the level was really decent! First of all I find vehicle update really cool! But one fear that I have to write here, in the deploy topic is about field maintenance. I find interesting that more stuffed characters have to wait more than naked soldiers. And it got some sense. I find really good that field maintenance is now an other balance aspect of the game. To separate even more the best vehicles from decent one. Such as like Panther and Tiger 2 that deserve a much bigger timer than US or SU counterparts for example. But after playing some serious battles and one specificly (I had to fight in every role, heavy fighter, heavy tank and infantry as an attacker in a 3 ways battle finishing with a score like 27 kills 7 deaths 1 heavy tank destroyed 4 heavy planes destroyed) the battle was just awesome. There are two specific moments I want to talk about: - During this long 3 ways battle, I spawned one Tiger 2, despite an enemy air superiority and get destroyed pretty fast. That was my bad. I had the time to meditate on that, like 2 minutes of waiting for respawn as my infantry soldier. I didn't spawn an other heavy tank in that battle lol. So in that case high cost equipment can really cost some time if you don't use them at the good moment. It is really interesting, maybe not noob friendly but it will help against the panther spam or that kind of thing. So that's pretty good! - We were 2 in our faction in this battle for a long time, against 4 or 5 in enemy sides. That was intense and I found it pretty fun. At the end I was defending first enemy objective being attacked by both enemy factions. I killed a lot of enemies and I died some times. Until I couldn't even respawn due to the deploy timer. In my last death I was like "hmm well this is it. We are done for." Because I knew my respawn timer was higher than a full objective recap with some players. So I find it interesting too. Because it can really conclude a never ending battle. Where enemies just can't respawn in time, and then it is a logical end to the battle. But I fear something bigger. And I will explain it here. For a long time, Defender role was and still is too strong when you look at Attacker role. The less lines Defender have to defend, the easier it is. And usually Attacker need at least 3 or 4 lines for having a little chance of winning. With these deploy timers. I fear that Defender will be indirectly buffed (or Attacker will be indirectly nerfed, it depends on your point of view^^). And because it is already a lot better than Attacker. I think it will be a bad thing, if nothing is changed before going live. Here's the idea: Defender is already on the capture point or not really far. Due to this Defender loose less time going to the capture point than the attacker. And possibly has the time to defend it a bit more with traps such as mines for example. And one last fact is that defending (in some case "camping") is usually easier than attacking. Attacker is further from the point. So you loose more time going to the capture point. Plus attacker has more chances to die while attacking. Now let's look at different possibilities with the new system: Attacker dies, Defender lives. Attacker will have to wait a bit (then a bit longer, then a lot, then an eternity...) then going to the capture point again. Attacker dies, Defender dies. Trade kill. Both will have to wait, but Attacker is far from the capture point. Defender IS on the capture point (or not far at least). Both lives. Well some reinforcements will change it to an other case. Attacker lives, Defender dies. Defender will have to wait a bit (then a bit longer, then a lot, then an eternity...) but IS on the capture point (or at least not far). As you can see, Attacker is in a bad position whatever the case. Except if it lives, but he will not live forever. And Defender is always in a good position. Even if it dies, it is not far from the capture point anyways. This is why, if nothing is changed. I think Defender will be indirectly buffed into Oblivion, and Attacker nerfed into Oblivion. Please do something about it. Plus it was a long time something had to be done for buffing Attacker role. I think it is the right moment. A simple idea would be: Defender has a bigger base deploy timer than Attacker. A simple but good idea. Some example of numbers could be like +25% faster for Attacker, and +25% slower for Defender. It would make for a basic 1 min respawn: 45s respawn timer for attacker, and 30s for going to the next capture point. 1 min 15 s respawn timer for defender, but being not far from next capture point a lot less time lost in moving to next capture point. So if Defender spawn on or near the capture point it will come at the same time than the Attacker. 25% may be not the perfect number but at least is the beginning of the idea. Thanks for reading. I hope it will change something.
  8. Mrdamien03

    The official Heroes & Generals Tournament!

    Following the "this game needs more balance" and "new content should be for everyone" point. I, and maybe you, and a lot of other players have every golden combat badge. This is not the case for everyone. So balancing it should imply, not only new gamemodes but reworked (or at least alternatively modified) game mechanics. For example, the battle would be better without any combat badge for a balance purpose. Okay, but now we have an other problem. The game will feel a lot more different (and it is positive! Changes are good sometimes). But of course now Bolt Action Rifles will One shoot anyone, and every 2 hit kills weapons will effectively kill anyone in 2 shots. Some useless weapons may become the best, and some best weapons may become the worst. That's a good thing in one side, but in an other side is not that good because not every player in the game can enjoy it. But every players participating may suffer from it. So you have 2 differents games, balancing one is already hard so balancing 2...
  9. Mrdamien03

    The official Heroes & Generals Tournament!

    Maybe at the end they are different things, but before that this is the same thing: Money. If you use money for something, you will not have this money for something else. Because one side may be competitive (attacker) and the other is not at all (camping aka defender). Plus, soon, with vehicle update and changes to respawn time it will be even more true. Defender will be even better than attacker. So it has no point in being competitive. Both sides should have the same chances, and that's not the case in Assault game mode. Before being competitive the game has to be balanced. And balance is not only about gamemodes. I could talk about equipment saying that having sides with X2.2 scopes, sides with X3.5 and sides with X4.0/X4.2 just can't be balanced . X4.0 and X4.2 are just too powerful for defending. But I have to remember that in some months X3.5, X4.0 and X4.2 scopes will disappear from infantry! They will stay for recons but infantry will have lower scopes. So it will be one less problem about a potential tournament. But once again it may come in a far future. With new gamemodes 1 v 1 scenario are not compulsory but a possibility. Without even talking about 1 v 1 gamemodes, but just a death match gamemode. You could have solo play, and a winner (the one with the most kills for example) or the most captures... So in a virtuous circle idea: before everything the game needs more content. With more content you can attract more players. With more players, you can have even more with more competitive specific play (such as some tournaments in-game). And with more players of course the game will earn more money for creating more content ... At the end without money and without players a tournament is not really possible. But as I said before Reto-Moto hosted at least one LAN battle in their HQ some months/years earlier. It may have been interesting to see, and maybe it is a good sign for the future.
  10. Mrdamien03

    The official Heroes & Generals Tournament!

    If I can agree with some kind of tournament that could be cool for the game (such as little LAN battles that were played some months/years ago in H&G HQ, I'm too far for Denmark but I would have love watching/playing), I don't agree with multiple points that I will explain. - First of all, let's talk about resources. If a tournament could be interesting, there are more important things needed before that. I would prefer some big updates coming first and more content in general than just a tournament. Because Reto-Moto don't have that much resources so it could take a long time that they will not have for something else. Just look at vehicle update. It is coming soon, but it took a long time. Needed but still long. - I would prefer a solo tournament than a tournament that could be only for clans. Because it would feel disgusting for most of players. I clearly prefer some content for everyone, than content for a part of the players. As you said the goal is having more players, not loosing them. - And speaking about a tournament like this, I would prefer that "the best players of this tournament" get rewarded than the best team. Because the best team doesn't mean the best players, but the best players can mean the best team. - At the end I don't think it could be possible with the Assault game mode. In a tournament it would mean even more camping such as a PUBG battle and camping is not that fun in any ways. And once again in favor of clans. It could be decent on Encounter or Skirmish gamemode, but some players may not like these gamemodes. So for that maybe some classical gamemodes like a death match or a Search and Destroy gamemode could be better. So it implies new gamemodes that could be fun for the game. And these new gamemodes would be for everyone so it would be a really good new content. To conclude the idea is not new, but is interesting. It may come in the future, but maybe a medium to far future. If the goal is having more players to the game, the best way is having more content anyways. And reworking oldest content that could be not fun to play anymore.
  11. Mrdamien03

    Plane MGs vs. Hellkitty armor

    Maybe the machineguns (of the plane you are talking about) are considered heavy and not light. Even if they should be light. So they may get more damage (?) and/or at least penetration. Intended or not, I don't know. More tests should be compulsory. One last thing is with vehicle update, it will penetrate the armor anyways!
  12. Mrdamien03

    Hoarder badge part2

    I found sad that hoarder was nerfed into the ground some months ago. I will explain. A majority of combat badges are useless, or just bad. That's a fact, only a some of them are usefull and are used. Nerfing this badge made it a bit less used (there are of course some combos with it) but it was a really interesting badge. Not my favorite, but seing that it nearly disappeared because of this is sad because it helped ruining the in-game diversity. I can agree it was too strong when you have two (+) times the same weapon, but when you got different weapons seriously it didn't deserved that. An avs / m1/m2 / SVT-40 / M1 garand combo for example is not anymore possible but could be really interesting. STG-44 / G43 combo may be still possible but not that usefull.
  13. Mrdamien03

    222 is OP

    It is so fun to play though. Especially if you are playing with a buddy. I'm not sure if 222 is OP or greyhound being the worst vehicle ingame underperforming, and BA-6 and BA-64B being not as good neither. BA-6 is decent if you play with 2 buddies. But 222 is better with only a 2 man squad. I would prefer an abysmal buff about greyhound and a good buff about BA-6 and BA-64B. Plus there will be more recon vehicles, and greyhound being the best for US is either a joke or an insult. It is vehicle update, just buff greyhound (everything could be buffed, speed, turret speed, damage, reload time, precision... it is so useless at the moment lol), and buff russian recon vehicles too.
  14. Mrdamien03

    Too many GE players

    Playing on prototype I can confirm that playing with more equipement/better equipment cost more "points". So if you die with a really modded and powerful equipment, you will wait a lot more than if you were naked with unmodded starter rifle. Like no waiting time for naked guys to 2 min + for full modded stuff. It will be a balance factor too on "OP" tanks such as Panther and Tiger 2. They may have more respawn time/points to deploy than other tanks. Possibly on planes too but respawn time/deploy costs will be really similar. About GE winning nearly every staged battle. It is well known that GE is the most populated faction (this is why you will find them more than other facitons), and a lot of them just don't want to play war prefering staged. They overall are more experienced than US and SU staged players in general. Even if they got more new players (that sometimes just want to win something). More experience, more equipment, more mods and more combat badges. That's a huge difference. Overall GE got best all around guns (decent in short range, pretty good in mid-long range) that are "easy to use". But they grinded for that. STG-44 may be one of the best weapon of the game, and the easiest to use by far. They put a lot of time for grinding it. In comparison US got the best CQC weapons by far (Johnson, M1/M2, M1919) but the worst mid to long range weapons (especially due to X2.2 scope that can't compete with X3.5 or X4.0 or X4.2 scope). SU got the best weapon of the game overall AVS-36 that is a really good cqc weapon and can even fight mid to long range with a X3.5 scope. A starter tip when you start, you will get destroyed probably. As long as you keep playing, you will play better, and you will have more equipment, and knowledge about the game. So you have to keep fighting even if you die. You may do better and better each game. An other thing about knowledge is playing every faction give you really important informations about your opponents in a battle. If you think something is "OP" just try it. If you did really well with it maybe it was, if you did poorly maybe it wasn't. But next time you will know more about this.
  15. Mrdamien03

    Auto-Resolve Experiment Started 10SEP18

    My feedback: Stopping AR will not solve every problem of the game, but I think it is a step in the good direction! AR to me is just too many problems in one and only gameplay mechanic: - AR do not generate any xp/warfunds but can destroy some. When you have multiple millions warfunds you don't care. When you have less than this, you care A LOT. -> Balance problem about war and warfunds. - AR can block an entire war forever making war not fun to play and meaningless. -> "War is not fun" problem, people playing staged. - AR is unbalanced as hell because of Battle Director. I mean in what world 216 infantry soldiers without anything can stop a 99999999999 units army? And better, in what world they can win? Well H&G, only here... -> A lot of fun battles are not fun (there are just too much 999xxx units against 216 infantry, and that's unfun for both side!!!!), and some unfun battles are fun (a perfectly balanced battle like 100 infantry soldiers against 100 infantry soldiers is not "fun"). To me Battle Director works in favor of AR. Both being bad, you got an even worse combo! - AR works in favor of bad behaviours. Here are some things that happens a lot: About last idea, "why sending more than 216 infantry soldiers? The battle is locked for some time, and if there are more units. The battle may start..." Wow the idea is to: NOT PLAY! That's literally unsporting manner! "Why do you send recons/tanks/planes, f**k you ?! " This moment you are sending auxiliary units for helping and getting insulted. That's not an isolated case of course... These units are considered "inferior" by a lot. This is literally "Discrimination". How can we call it,"unitism"? You have to send the same units (infantry) again and again without having any fun at any moment? There are a lot more but a last behaviour about incoming idea, the battle is nearly won by autoresolving. Opponents want to change the future of this battle. And of course the "generals" fighting in the "AR way" of the game don't want players to ruin everything. And may be sometimes toxic towards them. - AR can make people angry ("toxic") if one may play a battle (and loosing it) if it was nearly won by autoresolve. -> Community problem. - AR can destroy any progress too easily, or having progress too easily. When people are not playing, and come back a day later the war will change a lot, especially because of AR. Any progress in a war that would take days or weeks can get destroyed in some hours by autoresolving. -> Balance problem, AutoResolving a battle should take a lot more time. And AR might of course have a lot more problems... Well at the end in a problems/utility ratio, AR is so "bad" that I can only agree for its cancellation.