|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:I imagine marketing departments respond much better to having NEW SHINY SHIPS to sell than to relatively unshiny roster expansions and new nations. This is literally what happened. It was between "Do we go super-ALB with heavy SAM's like Patriots and S-300's, entrenched Infantry positions etc or do we do naval combat?"
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 03:52 |
|
|
I had this bug where the game would start in "bugged" windowed mode. If anyone else suffers from this, go to C:\Users\_Your_Username_\Saved Gaames\EugenSystems\WarGame3, open the file Option.ini with a texteditor and set WindowFormStyle to 1 or 2. (for Fullscreen or Windowed fullscreen). Save the file and start the game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 20:38
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:well noted on the terrain in particular, thats something I've never really voiced my annoyance over. Terraced maps kind of... were a necessity. Yeah I think that the only map with gradients like RD maps was rivers of blood. Much like RD or any game with 3d gradients playing a part it's really hard for the player to see the changes in elevation. They made a clear co session for playability or map readability with the terracing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 21:39
|
|
|
I wish they had added Neutral factions (Finland) that could play for either side, or at least mirror matches as a default, if only to make matchmaking easier.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 22:07
|
|
|
Azran posted:I wish they had added Neutral factions (Finland) that could play for either side, or at least mirror matches as a default, if only to make matchmaking easier. Finland would be an oddly fun unit list.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
I would've set Finland up as available to both Pact and NATO, but depending on which alliance you chose, you got different prototypes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 23:00
|
|
|
Sort of surprised Italy isn't a playable minor tbh.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 23:11
|
|
|
Leif. posted:Sort of surprised Italy isn't a playable minor tbh. If I remember right a dev or marshal on the Eugen forums said they thought about it for ALB but decided they wouldn't play differently enough from existing nations.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:If I remember right a dev or marshal on the Eugen forums said they thought about it for ALB but decided they wouldn't play differently enough from existing nations. I vaguely remember that as well, but then how do you explain SK? Or say, Denmark as compared to Norway? Seems like the argument falls flat.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
Leif. posted:I vaguely remember that as well, but then how do you explain SK? Or say, Denmark as compared to Norway? Seems like the argument falls flat. Isn't the official explanation that they were added for single player campaign reasons?
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 23:40
|
|
|
Leif. posted:I vaguely remember that as well, but then how do you explain SK? Or say, Denmark as compared to Norway? Seems like the argument falls flat.  Don't question their logic.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 23:41
|
|
|
There should be a thread on the RD forums for the "What could have been" nations, and Finland was one of the most likely candidates I think. They did topics for the Mediterranean nations too, search for em on there. All were made by Madmatt IIRC and detail the equipment they would use etc. They did the weird little Bloc nations too like Hungary, Romnania etc, and their equipment possibilities... fact is, most of the nations just used Soviet stuff in their own native language  Its actually kind of neat to see the indigenous projects though when they appeared. Turkey and Italy had a good few, and Finland a couple as well. Finland, if included, would have been REDFOR though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 23:44
|
|
|
From the studio that brought you AK wielding SEAL....
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 23:47
|
|
|
At least Redfor Finland adds diversity to a side that badly needs it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 00:09
|
|
|
There are threads that detail the nations that did not make it in to ALB. MadMat posted his research. I can only find two threads right now, but I remember reading one for Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy and Hungary. Here are the two I found: Romania and Bulgaria & Greece
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 00:48
|
|
|
I can only imagine what even more horrible/offensive deck names goons could come up with if Balkan countries made it into ALB
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 01:04
|
|
|
Since this is alt-history, I want a "one state solution" Israel/Palestine faction with suicide bombers jumping out of Merkava tanks, Iron dome shooting down Smerch rounds, and Qassam infantry firing rocket barrages.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 01:53
|
|
|
Drunk wargame is a lot more fun than sober wargame, I think we (read: me) can attest to that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 07:17
|
|
I EVER SPENT
|
Agean90 posted:I can only imagine what even more horrible/offensive deck names goons could come up with if Balkan countries made it into ALB Shame though that the only thing that shows up for deck names is: ???? Because Eugen are apparently only competent when it comes to breaking features that worked just fine in the previous titles.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
I wonder if Eugen would consider allowing river boats on maps without sea but with rivers, I feel like they are a nice addition to gameplay and would give the naval tab an actual use outside mixed maps.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 22:47
|
|
|
Azran posted:I wonder if Eugen would consider allowing river boats on maps without sea but with rivers, I feel like they are a nice addition to gameplay and would give the naval tab an actual use outside mixed maps. It'd be a pain in the rear end to balance. Pact players will just spam MLRS boats and NATO will spam STRB-90s. The naval aspect of the game is just too broken to bother with at all, IMO.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
It would just be supply boats and STRBs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 23:49
|
|
|
Is there a way to determine first shot aiming time from the stat card? Something like the Commonwealth Cougar looks alright with the 76mm gun but then you watch it spend 15 seconds aiming for the first round at an infantry transport and then a SPAAG ends up killing the ground target anyway. Conversely the ASLAV FSV starts firing its Bushmaster almost straight away and combined with its high speed it kills heaps of poo poo. Trimson Grondag 3 fucked around with this message at 00:02 on Aug 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 23:58
|
|
|
Yeah, I suppose that's right.  You'd need entirely different maps and units for it to work.Also, do ALL fire support teams have the ability to shoot at infantry? Looking at Pancerovnici, they have an HE value.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
Trimson Grondag 3 posted:Is there a way to determine first shot aiming time from the stat card? Something like the Commonwealth Cougar looks alright with the 76mm gun but then you watch it spend 15 seconds aiming for the first round at an infantry transport and then a SPAAG ends up killing the ground target anyway. AFAIK it's always just been a part of listed RoF, in that the higher the RoF the faster the aiming tends to be. Once you get above like 15 though it's all generally <1s. Any AP 3+ autocannon and/or the 2A72 in RD is pretty ridiculous, they all got some monster accuracy buffs compared to baseline ALB versions. There was another big change though in that they no longer scaled indefinitely at close range, so a BTR-60 can no longer kill anything in the game <350m. Even the bad ones on the Marder I/BMP are good now, but mostly because they cost 15 points in comparison to the old 20-25. Mazz fucked around with this message at 02:11 on Aug 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 02:06
|
|
|
Is there any news when the SP DLC will come out for the grand Korean conflict? I'd really rather have a non 15 turn limit or even once complete have the option of carrying on.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 20:20
|
|
|
MonkeyLibFront posted:Is there any news when the SP DLC will come out for the grand Korean conflict? I'd really rather have a non 15 turn limit or even once complete have the option of carrying on. My PC's still dead, but Ive been reading the forums. Most recent pic a Marshall posted for the final battle (Battle of Pyongyang) was 18k points vs 48k defenders. Pretty much everything was involved in the unit lists. It wss gargantuan. He praised the campaign overall, sans a difficult starting position. That aside, I think this will be the best campaign yet in the ALB/Dynamic campaign format. Cant wait to help test it myself. Narrative and events are said to be more common too rather than just happening early and then stopping. You'll want to keep your naval/carrier groups alive to assure you can get reinforcements to Korea. poo poo is going to be magnificent 
Dandywalken fucked around with this message at 20:35 on Aug 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 20:33
|
|
|
Could you link me? Sounds good but will it be playable from both sides?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 21:04
|
|
|
Speaking of campaigns, I tried to do the Dragon vs Bear campaign post-rebalancing, and it's a drat nightmare. There just aren't a lot of Chinese or North Korean tanks available that can stand up to the Russians, and the lack of good atgms makes it even worse. The only quasi-solution I found was the use of cluster bombers backed up by helicopters, but that didn't really do a good job stemming the tide. Anyone have any thoughts on it?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 21:09
|
|
|
North Koreans and Chinese are really not very good. Eugen never had a decent design philosophy with them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 21:21
|
|
|
Adventure Pigeon posted:Speaking of campaigns, I tried to do the Dragon vs Bear campaign post-rebalancing, and it's a drat nightmare. There just aren't a lot of Chinese or North Korean tanks available that can stand up to the Russians, and the lack of good atgms makes it even worse. The only quasi-solution I found was the use of cluster bombers backed up by helicopters, but that didn't really do a good job stemming the tide. Anyone have any thoughts on it? Its a whack campaign. Soviets shouldnt have above T62's in the area by default. IL102's in the area is lol. Su25 in the area is lol. (in fact either of those existing in an operational capacity, as well as the Havoc, Tor, BukM1, T80A etc) is just loving dumb. Should be lots of T62's, some 72A's or 64A's flown in instead of the god drat T80 and T80A. MiG21's and 27's for strike/ground support. That campaign suffers the most from retarded OOB's. The China/NK list is decent enough aside from some issues (big one is those Chinese BMP-1 clones should just be unarmed trucks. Chinese mechanized infantry in that area of operations was non-existant, as I dont think the reforms under Deng had fully taken place in 1979), but the Soviet one is just retarded. A shame because you could sub out alot of their dumb stuff on each side for more realistic stuff that was in the area and you'd still have a good fight MonkeyLibFront posted:Could you link me? Sounds good but will it be playable from both sides? Afraid not, its still in closed testing. It will be BLUFOR only it seems (sadly ). Whether at release or via mods shortly after, this will be a pretty loving exciting campaign by the look of it.
Dandywalken fucked around with this message at 22:39 on Aug 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 22:34
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:North Koreans and Chinese are really not very good. Eugen never had a decent design philosophy with them. It's really quite too bad; NK would have been pretty fun with a bunch of Strelas or Iglas on their tanks and China could have used heavy tanks and HJ-8 troops; and both of them could have used a non-terrible air force.\ edit: A bunch of marshalls have been hinting on the forums about a helo patch, anyone have any actual details about what's coming?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 22:46
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:North Koreans and Chinese are really not very good. Eugen never had a decent design philosophy with them. Not true. On release, NK had a bunch of insanely broken super units like Koksans/Tokchon and NEVA that violated all sorts of rules, infamously the NEVA having 10HE. It had the design philosophy of "Red Alert," and combined with China having a bunch of oddities like great vehicle ATGM and AA helos, they probably had the tightest design philosophy even if they were not as good as CW and EC with their "Just plain better" designs. However, several parts of across-the-board standardization, like all heavy SAMs are now 9HE and no helos are >300kph basically took everything gimmicky about the faction behind a shed and shot it, and since it was basically just a series of gimmicks with weak fundamentals, it's now just weak fundamentals.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 22:47
|
|
|
Tulip posted:Not true. On release, NK had a bunch of insanely broken super units like Koksans/Tokchon and NEVA that violated all sorts of rules, infamously the NEVA having 10HE. It had the design philosophy of "Red Alert," and combined with China having a bunch of oddities like great vehicle ATGM and AA helos, they probably had the tightest design philosophy even if they were not as good as CW and EC with their "Just plain better" designs. Well I think the main problem there was NK/CN were really only good because they had a bunch of outright broken units. That doesn't make them well designed, more like the opposite. You could tell they weren't actually designed to be better, they were designed around feature creep and the developers not understanding their own mechanics to the point that they had to be fixed nearly immediately. The Juckwidae, Strela APC and J-7H being prime examples, nothing exceptional about them except they were way too cheap and you got way too many. The TY-90 and ZLF-92/WZ-550 (HJ-9 thing) are pretty much the only unique assets anymore, and the 92 itself was a knee jerk reaction in beta to massive complaints about China's lack of anything high end. The scariest part is that Red Dragon is still more interesting as an idea then Blue Dragon even after considering that. EDIT: The part that annoys me about all this is almost all of it is self-inflicted by Eugen. Give this thread like 12 hours to come up with some new units for nations and we could probably put out a national deck for every existing nation that was fun to play and a reasonable choice regardless of situation. Hell, give me/us 2 days and we can probably give you complete stat lines for most of them. They imposed all these weird random rules and their own timelines to unit entry and left so many good/interesting ideas behind. The Javelin/Kornet, LAV-AD, Su-34, Type 96/99, PzH2000, Marder II, the list goes on. Instead we got 5 new nations that feel about as complete as Canada in ALB and an entire new aspect of the game few really enjoy playing. Mazz fucked around with this message at 23:20 on Aug 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 23:05
|
|
|
It's a crying shame that NK isn't the "zerg" faction of the game. 5 point 15-man militia squads, 10 point SPAAG trucks, SF that have speedboats for transport, etc poo poo autonomy, poo poo stats, but massive and cheap availability- think 2 people's worth of ALB cat C Scandinavian stuff
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 23:27
|
|
|
Justin Tyme posted:It's a crying shame that NK isn't the "zerg" faction of the game. 5 point 15-man militia squads, 10 point SPAAG trucks, SF that have speedboats for transport, etc We're obligated to make factions somewhat "equal" in capability though. Having a distinct zerg faction would be sweet as gently caress concept wise, but balancing it against a game where every other army isnt like that would be a bitch. See countless "Um excuse me I served in the blah blah blah Reserves and I must say we could stand up to a Soviet Guards Army unit of equal number just fine please stop with your misconceptions you American fuckkkkkkk." arguments on the WG forums This became a big issue with Scandi and NSWP forces specifically. For some reason, Danes especially seemed vocal about it IIRC. Dandywalken fucked around with this message at 23:37 on Aug 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
And that is why the FRG are so drat good. They just have such incredibly solid fundamentals that the lack of gimmicks does not hurt them at all. Also an idea I've had for Ural Mod is to split up the COM and the EU. Then reform them as CANANZUS and the Entente Cordiale, leaving the FRG on it's own. I feel that this would allow for some buffing of France. The UK would pair quite well with them as they bring the heavy stuff that the French lack. CANANZUS is worth it for the name alone.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 23:59
|
|
|
Mazz posted:Su-34 What loadout do you imagine it with?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 00:40
|
|
|
Any info about the Nordic DLC?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 00:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 03:52 |
|
|
Azran posted:Any info about the Nordic DLC? Nothing aside from preliminary unit lists, which arent open yet. Honestly, expect alot of straight upgrades to older units aside from the neat "wow, thats sweet" units that have already been mentioned like the Ottomatic and the Gripen. Some neat new arty options too though which originated in the area.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 00:53
|
|