Staff Post Tracker
Because of Ascension day the plans have been slightly delayed. It will go up next week, either Friday or a few days earlier.
That depends a bit on... something! We will remain secretive about it for a little longer :).
Sorry for the inconvenience!
Working on a recreation for this bug, mission IDs would help. I may use this one to try out a new form of BH training/recruitment and have a recreation session on another server if this is something that needs a number of people to cause.
Thusfar, it seems like it's always P-38s involved, anyone witnessed our UFO without P-38s in the match?
This topic is out of control. Reminder for everyone, namecalling on the forums is strictly prohibited. If you think a player might be in anyway abusing the game, contact Customer Support and Customer Support only. Topic locked.
This topic serves absolutely no purpose but to bait. Topic locked.
714912 hours ago, Kmeto said:
Now with 5x headshot multiplier I wonder how many of you idiots will report me. Stock thompson, 64 kills, I had cca. 35 headshots, ok? Reto do you think this is really normal and you want this game to be like this? You force us not to even aim at people just spray
This is not constructive feedback. Besides that, your tone against other players is not really appropriate. Locking the topic. If you wish to discuss the conefire or headshot multiplier, there's plenty of topics about them.
First of all, it's great to hear the issue is being tackled at source; without meaning to sound disrespectful, we can never know whether Reto is open and willing to rework things such as the Adams Conefire changes, so suggesting lowering the headshot multiplier for autos was merely an alternative.
Hold on a moment here, I don't want to create any false beliefs. I've said that I have made your (read: Community) point well known at the right Developers. I also know that the gun balancing has a high priority. But IF , WHEN and HOW the conefire system will be changed is something I don't yet know. In the end, the community feedback is most definitely taken into account, but the Developers have the final choice here in which direction they want to go.
So as much as I may want to tell you that this and that will change, I can't. I will try to figure out how the meetings about this are developing.
Pooh, it's been a long time since this tool, so my answer might not be 100% accurate. But the idea was that defenders (read: Generals) could f.e. place additional objects on the maps like barbwire and other defensive tools. These additional things never took into consideration the changes we currently have in RTS (e.g. General characters, different assault team functionality, etc, etc). For the new RTS however, there's also some neat stuff planned.
254493 hours ago, Rolf_Mützelburg said:
I think yall over do the sight line thing. Choke points seem a bigger issue in my opinion, but I won't go so far as to say your doing anything wrong by focusing on sight lines.
I'm not doing anything with regard to maps; aside from breaking them.1 hour ago, Thisbirdisonfiya said:
1) how far (and not the just some assets answer cus thats been said for months now) are they finished
2) can they be put on test server for testing? i mean if some assets are added just update the test server atleast you can start gathering info about them and then when some info is used to fix some deadly 1sided chokepoint you can gather new info
good idea right?
1) No clue. I just break things, not create them.
2) See above.14 minutes ago, JohanC1. said:
As far as I know most of the stuff in game isnt even made by RETO itself but rather bought from 3rd party artists and designers or downloaded for free. If thats true, and I believe it is because most of that stuff you can just download online, then RETO cant release maps as fast as we would want... because they simple doenst know how to make them...
For example, some stuff like german uniforms are still available for free to download from mediafire.com...
See above. I'm pretty certain mediafire doesn't play a role in the design process though.2 minutes ago, RadicalEdward2 said:
What about bringing back older assets?
As for buildings, yeah, they're time-consuming to create but, this game needs new ones or to have all the old ones redone because their current state of lacking rhyme or reason with floor plans simply won't do.
Also, they're not too time consuming. I made that Airfield Control Tower with an interior and exterior within a month.
While the enthusiasm vis-a-vis google sketch-up is cool to see, creating maps is a lot more complicated and requires a good deal more. (Assets, textures, meshes, colliders, terrain shaping, LOD states, lighting and a list of other things I can't remember from the last time I asked this question.)
I'll try to field a part of this. Like you guys, I also am eagerly awaiting new maps (and annoying Desji and RedBjarne about it relentlessly).
Regarding assets: When a gun, tank, or plane is introduced, there's more or less a Carte Blanche on polygons and vertices. After all, there's only ~40 of them at most at any given time. Map assets aren't quite the same. (I'm using simple rounded numbers for the following example - please note this in context if you quote)
Imagine a bush or a window uses 2 polygons on average. If a new asset then has 3, that's hundreds of instances, or a 50% increase in graphical load. You may be able to draw a tree, or a bunker in a program, but refining the assets down to acceptable load is a lot more tricky.
Regarding Map Ideas: (such as the nice Sketch-up stuff in the post above by @FritzFruegel) This isn't the difficult part. The real challenge with creating maps is in designing them for gameplay and game flow. The maps have to be fun to play on, offer a relative balance for all sides, support all the classes it's intended to, consider sight lines, meta (like APC parking), attack lines, and generally ensure the experience is up to the standards people expect. Oh, and be able to iterate properly with future content while still functioning within current mechanics.
In sum, the gameplay and meta of the map is something to really focus on more than the setting, especially when suggesting ideas.
Hope this might answer a few questions.
3567423 hours ago, Tumult_inc said:
There's some interesting Global Parameters in that BattleSolver. Can you elaborate on those, if they are still active?
What are the Entrenchment Bonuses f.ex.?
Is the Battlefield Commander Level any level from 12 and above, or is it only Generals?
Yeah don't pay too much attention to those ^^ The tool is really old.