|
i miss the times of airland battle where the two best decks were Cat C swarms of East German reservists and 50's napalm bombers or Polish Heli assaults.
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 22:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 07:23 |
|
|
Napalm bombers? No, the best time was when the 45 point cluster bombs did equal damage across their area of effect, and destruction was still the main mode so you could confirm all your AA kills. There was exactly one match that I didn't win in ranked 1v1 with this strategy and that was a draw. e: in EE, infinite time limit hell's highway was also great when you did nothing but spam 12 CVs and as many shilkas as you could and just hide them all over the map since destruction doesn't end until all CVs are dead.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 01:29
|
|
|
No no no indirect fire flame tanks and infinite rocket planes was the best meta.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 02:01
|
|
|
What about when AVRE/CEV had perfect accuracy and indirect fire, or when Smerches launched mini-paveways?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 03:46
|
|
|
Those were bad because they weren't a neverending stream of cheap planes blowing up everything you owned forever until a bunch of cheap T-54s rolled in and murdered what was left.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 05:50
|
|
|
The CEV thing was bad because they would direct fire indirectly, meaning they could shoot at stuff through forests from the other side. The MiG-21 spam was real bad though, I remember losing a ranked game to you real fast running it. I think we talked about a Roland 2 build beating you if we fought again though, the 2 top armor was pretty huge against that spam. My favorite gimmick will forever be the 5 point BTR-60PAI carrying Motostrelki though. I killed so many CVs and heavy tanks (and won so many ranked games) with that AP1 poo poo tier autocannon. Mazz fucked around with this message at 06:09 on Feb 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 05:57
|
|
|
КПВ supremacy!
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 06:52
|
|
|
Mazz posted:The CEV thing was bad because they would direct fire indirectly, meaning they could shoot at stuff through forests from the other side. The MiG-21 spam was real bad though, I remember losing a ranked game to you real fast running it. Yeah Roland 2s could have had some real survivability and would make incredibly efficient trades, and I imagine that if Wargame had any semblance of a shifting meta more than 0 people would have run them if the cluster bomb special was more popular. Would have led to some interesting matches because aside from taking out AA the cluster bomber's other purpose was brutally removing light ATGM carriers before swarming the hard stuff with cheap tanks and maybe a missile plane if I had the points left over, so it still would have been a running battle, just not as lopsided. I'm sad this was before ranked matched pact vs pact though because tearing down the BUK/Tunguska wall was incredible when I pulled it in larger games.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 08:16
|
|
|
It's kinda funny seeing a real blast from the past in the SU-122(it was really efficient even in ALB and a lynchpin of my anti-house approach) still be dominant in RD. I do remember running a cat C west german deck in ALB that was a bunch of heimats and panzergrenadiers mixed in supported by those rancid raketenjadgpanzers, winning because people didn't bring enough anti-infantry firepower.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 13:29
|
|
|
Units really need end dates, the game desperately needs a resource mechanic with more than one dimension, and team matchmaking like LoL and DOTA 2 have had for five years. It would change the game a huge amount if you could know that the opponent won't be bringing at least some of the 800 units in this game at the start. Also rebalanced deck selection to look more like ALB's soft caps. And either an "all carrot" specialization model that gives a deck some bonus for specializations without downsides (so that people will actually take them) or just remove non-specialized decks entirely. Those are the only ways specializations will work. Push end date to 2005, finally put in the Javelin to bring the US up to the same level as the USSR now that asymmetric boondoggle balance is dead, China becomes a real faction and NSWP becomes playable on both RED and BLUE. Euro factions already have 2000s units so who cares.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 16:50
|
|
|
Or make Cat A, B and C more of a front line versus reserves sort of distinction. So if you're A, you get all the latest and greatest stuff like T-80s. B gets T-72s and T-64s, and C gets T-55s and T-62s. This is including the upgraded variants, so cat C isn't completely hosed. So you can either go with boondoggles, middle of the road or straight up Eastern Front. Most units would go into one category if there are other vehicles that can fill its high-level role (like ATGM carrier). Units with critical roles (like air defense) without many alternatives (like for minor nations) would potentially have more than one category. FOBs and the like would be all categories as usual. No prototypes either. Then make the categories relate to deck type. If you pick no specialization, you're limited to one category. If you pick a specialization, you're limited to A+B or B+C. Minor nations and coalitions get a bonus category, so their general purpose decks would be A+B or B+C while their specialized decks would allow every category. In the other direction, picking BLUFOR or REDFOR instead effectively costs a category, so you have to pick a specialty deck and it can only be A, B or C. So instead of decks choosing the level of restriction they want to accept, they're all restricted and instead they need to pick the type. Even a deck like Cat A USSR has the problem that even if they can do everything, it's not going to be cheap or plentiful. If they want staying power with their boondoggles, then they need to pick a specialty type like armored so they can mix in some Cat B units.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 19:51
|
|
|
I'd certainly try that one out. A mode I'd like to see, using the present system, would be for Eugen to create a game mode that restricts lobbies to only decks created by Eugen officially. Then, have them create a variety of official decks for each nation or coalition, spanning Cat A through Cat C, with a couple of sprinkles of specialized/typed decks and some gimmick themed decks (i.e. "This is a Soviet Guards Armored Battalion TOE" or something close to it). That would encourage more people to do battles that place restrictions on decks (currently, nobody ever does this); which would also encourage both units that don't see a lot of use (because Eugen can just slot that card into the deck and you don't get to min-max it back out) and also encourage people to play in a less tryhard fashion. I dream of the day that I log in and, instead of a dozen tactical low point game lobbies and tryhard teamstacks with the meta of the day, I instead see Cat C NK vs. U.S. Marine themed games.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 03:58
|
|
|
Thanks everybody for summing my wishes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 06:10
|
|
|
If I had the means to make whatever I wanted just happen with games, I'd love to see lopsided maps with deck restrictions. It'd be super far from doable with normal resources but I really like the idea of scenarios like Mukip's trying to do.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 06:16
|
|
|
If you smoke radar AA can it still see to shoot planes?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:If I had the means to make whatever I wanted just happen with games, I'd love to see lopsided maps with deck restrictions. It'd be super far from doable with normal resources but I really like the idea of scenarios like Mukip's trying to do. Totally. "Fall of Seoul" with appropriately outnumbered and understrength SK units vs a huge NK Rush with arty etc would be sweet, for instance.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
Yeah, there's tons of potentially interesting and fun gameplay buried under the multiplayer meta. I'd probably enjoy trying to use any themed deck in a themed game more than the actual competitive multiplayer.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 21:35
|
|
|
My Wargame Wishlist By: 12 year old American Schoolgirl Margaret 1) Dear Santa. Please bring me a pony. 2) Also, please bring me a gimmick mission called the Three Lost Tanks, in which three tanks : a TO-55, a Challenger Marksman, and a T-80U lose their way and get lost in a magic woods. They meet their mystical friends, the BMP-3 fairy and the M3A2 CFV elf. Their frolicking is cut short by the arrival of a North Korean armored battalion - endless T-34s, T-55s, and teeming hordes of reservists. Can they survive? 3) Mines. We already have "Detracked" status. Why not mines, mine clearing vehicles, mine artillery, etc. 4) Doggies. Mine-detecting doggies. I <3 Corgies. They're the best. So make them Mine-detecting Corgies please? Except I don't want to see doggies get hurt, so please make them ferrets but only when they die because ferrets are icky. 5) Hero unit mode. Literally rip off Starcraft 2's co-op mode. 6) Actually, I'm worried about the lost tanks. So maybe can they meet the brave swashbuckler Sir Rafale, who sweeps the skies from the evil MiG-27 of the Red Baron? 7) Operation Fulda Gap. Attacker starts off with a medium-high number of points (very high income), an "uncappable" air/land spawn, but no other objectives or spawns. His goal is to take out the Defender's spawn, overwhelming him with his superior income over time by attrition. Defender starts off with a ton of points (normal income) and a ton of units already pre-placed forward on the field, creating a grinding defense in depth. They have the recon advantage, but are fighting an uphill battle economically and their reinforcement points are somewhat far away (at least, before they start losing ground), making it hard for them to hold ground while amassing a reserve force that can maneuver to meet threats. 8) You could get this from the existing defense mode (what was it called? Siege? Nobody ever played it) with relatively little effort. See, it's like I got YOU a present! Free time! 9) Operation Red Rover. This is a quick time-waster game you could play while waiting in between lobbies for hours at a time! Step 1) Find a way to shorten the load times for this mission, because you don't need like every single unit or anything. Step 2) BluFor gets 100 Afghanskis, 100 LAAD RedEye squads, and one card each of vetted recon Mistrals, Patriots and Tunguska-M. OpFor has 100 Rocket Hips, 100 AH-6 Little Birds, and one card each of vetted MH-60 DAP, OH-1 Ninja, and KA-52. How many helicopters can OpFor get across the finish line? Will they rush through a weak point? Or will they sneak around and snipe the retarded kid Timmy in the nuts, and flood through the gap? 10) Mom says it's mean to make fun of Timmy. So maybe he can be the Red Baron. PS: I named the Corgie Hob Gadling. PPS: Lisa G from Art class is icky too, so make the ferrets Lisa G because ferrets should go to heaven too but Lisa G shouldn't.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 04:53
|
|
|
Everyone should create a Category B and Category C deck. We need to play more 1980 and 1985 games.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 07:48
|
|
|
So after installing this game and playing a couple of games I noticed some different things from before: NB: I have only been playing 10v10 so far. And pubbies are as bad as always. 1. So the Swedes have a pretty decent line nowadays with the 121, Lv90 and some other stuff. 2. Is there some soviet helicopter rush going on? Seen a bunch of games with shitloads of Hinds, which isn't a problem if you bring your AA along. 3. Is infantry useless nowadays? They seem to die like crazy versus tanks and holding forests with them doesn't seem to work? 4. Are tanks actually good in forest fighting nowadays? Cause I saw a bunch of T72S going into a forest and clear out my Pansarskytte90, IKV105s and Strf9040s. 5. Have arty been nerfed in effect? I have been the recipient of some arty, but it didn't seem that effective versus armoured tanks and APCs? 6. Antiradar planes doesn't seem to be that much a problem? All in all, it seemed like the game was in a much better balance state than before?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 09:07
|
|
|
1. Swedes are okay. They get up to eight of their heavies, which is more than anybody else, although they aren't quite on the level of real top-end tanks. Not sure I'd take the Swedes into a tough match but they aren't awful. 2. That's just 10v10's for you. 3. Infantry are very easily killed now, which is as it should be imo. They work best when split up and scattered about in a mutually supporting web, supported by Su-122/grenade launcher vehicles etc, and if you have too many you can always just keep them in "reserve" in the backfield. 4. Tanks can beat groups of infantry fairly easily forest, but you should be using the aformentioned tactic to and then swarming the tanks 5. Availability and reload times on some artillery has been nerfed. 6. They wouldn't be in a 10v10, there's too many players worth of AA on field.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 10:34
|
|
|
Leif. posted:My Wargame Wishlist You're a loving treasure
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 01:21
|
|
|
Have people been getting hard crashes recently? In the last 12 hours I've had like 3 or 4 ctds. I don't recall having more then 1 or 2 since I bought the game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 01:47
|
|
|
Yeah someone I play with crashed a couple of times last weekend out of nowhere, and I timed out loading a level.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 01:53
|
|
|
Well I guess I can take solace in the fact that at least it's not something I did. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 02:48
|
|
|
A couple friends and I played some comp stomps last week (which was more fun than I remember), and I also had a crash a few minutes into the first game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 03:32
|
|
|
We've gotten surprisingly good regular games without being stomped by tryhard teams recently. I've been too busy nights to be on the last week or so though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 15:51
|
|
|
Played a game with Mukip last night. Soviet tryhard and Chinese motorist are two great flavors that taste great together. I'm pretty sure I ran two BLUEFOR decks out of infantry. Did they nerf napalm artillery? My Chinese napalm trucks weren't causing any panic at all. Only units who sat in the napalm for a while seemed bothered. I guess I have to trade them for BM-24s now if I want to blow up a forest or a town.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 17:08
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Played a game with Mukip last night. Soviet tryhard and Chinese motorist are two great flavors that taste great together. I'm pretty sure I ran two BLUEFOR decks out of infantry. I think they've always been that way? The Buratino is the only one that has HE and suppression IIRC, the others just have the fire effect. Which seems minor, but since stunning units forces them to sit in the napalm longer it makes a huge difference. Also the reason I like the Czech napalm bomber more than others.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 17:17
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Played a game with Mukip last night. Sorry
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
Mazz posted:A couple friends and I played some comp stomps last week (which was more fun than I remember), and I also had a crash a few minutes into the first game. Think there's any market for a pure Skirmish/comp-stomp mod? Revised decks purely for it, I mean.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 04:34
|
|
|
Are there any scrub groups? I haven't played in a long time and I'm basically a pubbie...
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 09:44
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:Think there's any market for a pure Skirmish/comp-stomp mod? Revised decks purely for it, I mean. I'm not really the person to ask here, they only played one time and it was the first time I've touched the game in months. I doubt it though, none of them would be interested in the convoluted way you have to do mods for this game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 09:45
|
|
|
With the friends I play with, we mostly play 3v3 or 4v4 comp stomping. Equal numbers of very hard AIs, with randomly generated decks so we have no idea what we're gonna face. The AI on high difficulties seems to get a fairly big availability and income boost, so it can be pretty challenging at least early on. If I'm feeling masochistic I take a random deck myself too, and other than checking it's complete I never look at the deck until we start deploying.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 19:23
|
|
|
I only play era specific skirmishes against PC opponents. It's a lot of fun, especially with Uralgraznomod.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
That sounds lame come play with us we had some good games today. Beat a Russian? team's helo rush and came back to win it. Then smashed on Juche Sun.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 03:00
|
|
|
Reading the original press releases for Red Dragon makes me sad because it reminds me they originally promised like eleven campaigns  That's what I want in the next game. A bunch more campaigns. Real conflicts, more crazy what-ifs, etc... ...and actually rebalance them when units are rebalanced
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 17:07
|
|
|
Are the campaigns good? I'm new to this but I've only played multi; I'm up to level 9 and still have a lot to learn. I suck at 1v1 or whenever there's more than like 25 units of mine on the map, I just lose track of everything so maybe campaign would be good for me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 01:15
|
|
|
Fingolfin posted:Are the campaigns good? I'm new to this but I've only played multi; I'm up to level 9 and still have a lot to learn. I suck at 1v1 or whenever there's more than like 25 units of mine on the map, I just lose track of everything so maybe campaign would be good for me. Also after seeing the chat room for the Wargame series...I don't really want contact with any of those people. Daughter was sitting on my lap and I hit esc to pause it and massive ASCII racial slurs start popping up. Basically it's a terrifying mix of racists and RT reader comments. Mr Luxury Yacht posted:Reading the original press releases for Red Dragon makes me sad because it reminds me they originally promised like eleven campaigns  That stinks, I really like the campaigns and variety you get with them. I like the use of political decisions, but then again I have a bit of a bone for those things as a long term Operational Art of War player. Marshal Prolapse fucked around with this message at 02:11 on Feb 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 02:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 07:23 |
|
|
It annoys the hell out of me that you can't play either side in each campaign
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 02:14
|
|
