|
Update World in Conflict: Mission 15, Liberty Losthttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRzbkNmJZ2YI had to mute the audio for the cutscene because youtube was blocking it, so please enjoy this alternate version. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ah2I166f_U&t=19s This mission is sort of out of place, I feel like they slipped it in just because they wanted a mission where you save the statue of liberty. There is no convoluted plan needed to attack New York with chemical weapons, just launch them with cruise missiles from 500 miles off the coast. Beyond the fact that our allies are not up to the task, it's still pretty fun though.
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2020 06:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 05:22 |
|
|
That trailer is so awesome. I assume they made this New York mission just so they can do that trailer. Or they made the trailer first so they had to make a New York mission.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2020 06:57
|
|
|
loving love Fiona Apple posted:That trailer is so awesome. I assume they made this New York mission just so they can do that trailer. The MP version of this map was miserable, it really skewed towards teams that could coordinate their air and infantry, which 1) voice comms were rare so it was via typing and 2) air players loathed spending points on transport choppers when they could get into chopper duels over the middle of the water. Everybody was mad all the time and nobody had fun.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2020 13:34
|
|
|
Tulip posted:The MP version of this map was miserable, it really skewed towards teams that could coordinate their air and infantry, which 1) voice comms were rare so it was via typing and 2) air players loathed spending points on transport choppers when they could get into chopper duels over the middle of the water. Everybody was mad all the time and nobody had fun. I agree this map was an absolute pain in the rear end both in Single Player and Multiplayer. Anyway here's the actual NYC Trailer if anyone want to watch it. Song is Shadow on the Sun by Audioslave which is probably why your video was blocked until you muted it. fucking love Fiona Apple fucked around with this message at 13:44 on Aug 27, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2020 13:40
|
|
|
loving love Fiona Apple posted:I agree this map was an absolute pain in the rear end both in Single Player and Multiplayer. Thank you! It's a problem with licensed music in videogames. The Tears for Fears song Bannon listens to on the Humvee Radio didn't trigger anything, but the Music that plays while Sabatier talks to his mistress did.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2020 17:05
|
|
|
There's no way this wasn't the mission they shopped around to sell the game. Hoo-ahh screaming army rangers storming the statue of liberty to take it back in time from the dastardly Russians before America is forced to destroy her to save New York while mournful violins serenade everything.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2020 18:47
|
|
|
Update [b]World in Conflict: Mission 16, Aftermathhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMrxnaaIli8Back to the present, and time to pick up the pieces in the USA. Not before the game makes us feel bad about Bannon one last time though. I'm honestly not sure about the US military's stance on radiation zones in combat, though I'm pretty sure the Soviet one was 'Drive Through it'. Either way I appreciate the time they took to make the variable intensity screen radiation filter.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2020 03:22
|
|
|
I suspect the large fires might be towards the edge of the blast zone because the stuff actually in the middle just gets demolished, rather than set on fire 
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2020 03:46
|
|
|
I get what they wanted to do here but looking after AI vehicles after an entire campaign of watching them lose thousands of vehicles is not fun, even if the enemy AI vehicle numbers are somewhat reduced to compensate. I guess if Bannon isn't around someone has to haul around the repair tanks.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2020 01:49
|
|
|
Kibayasu posted:I get what they wanted to do here but looking after AI vehicles after an entire campaign of watching them lose thousands of vehicles is not fun, even if the enemy AI vehicle numbers are somewhat reduced to compensate. You either die a hero or you become a Bannon. OwlFancier posted:I suspect the large fires might be towards the edge of the blast zone because the stuff actually in the middle just gets demolished, rather than set on fire That is a good point. A black smear of ash can't really catch on fire.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2020 17:52
|
|
|
So you asked some things about nuclear stuff and I figured I may as well provide some answers, and I'll pretty much stick to like, the kind of things you can learn in a college physics classroom. First thing you asked was, "is that too much or too little devastation for a nuke" and you answered with "I don't know" and that's basically right. The game didn't actually tell us how big the weapon used was, and we don't have that clear of a survey of the affected area, so. It's hard to get a sense of scale in general, but the Beirut explosion earlier this year was in the scale of a very small nuclear weapon. Smaller than average but not necessarily the smallest, at least according to wikipedia, and what we see here isn't that outlandish so y'know. Second, you bring up a thing about Soviet armor doctrine being to just drive through an affected area. There's two things about radiation that are worth knowing - the first is that the more radioactive something is, the faster it becomes less radioactive. A lot of really, really terrifyingly radioactive stuff is radioactive for like, fractions of a second (and this stuff can disable and kill VERY fast - not all radiation deaths are decades down the line). There's plenty of stuff that's radioactive for very long periods of time, and it's typically not that scary - bananas and kitty litter are famous for setting off alarms but I don't think most of us are that afraid of them. The second is that not all radiation is the same - if some thing is radioactive, that thing may emit alpha, beta, or gamma particles. Alpha stuff is generally the most nasty, but it's also the easiest to protect against, since it needs to actually get inside your body. If you inhale an alpha emitter, that's really really bad and so radioactive dust is pretty scary, but making a filtration system for a closed vehicle that keeps most of that stuff out of people's lungs is pretty achievable. Beta is also relatively easy to shield, and exposure can be reduced dramatically by like, decent clothing. Gamma is however extremely difficult to shield against, and it's possible the Soviets were counting on "if you drive over it, as opposed to building trenches in it, you hopefully won't get that badly exposed." (a third thing that isn't quite just straight physics is that normal nukes are designed to deliver a massive explosion to a big circle; if you irradiate the area really badly, that's pretty necessarily a bad nuke, because you want to have all the energy go into a blast over a fraction of a second, and energy that's radiation over hours/weeks/years is energy that wasn't in the blast) Anyway that was a lot of words probably not that well explained, the still images over bannon's voicemail at the start were devastating.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2020 00:44
|
|
|
It's also possible their vehicles will be designed to handle NBC hazards by virtue of being late cold war era equipment, they started slapping that on a lot of stuff because it was assumed they would be used when the nukes started flying. So things like closed air systems that pressurize the tank so you're not breathing in the fallout.
OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 11:35 on Sep 6, 2020 |
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2020 11:31
|
|
|
I think they Col. Sawyer's garbled radio transmissions are based on the ionazating effect of the Nuclear explosion:quote:Gamma rays from a nuclear explosion produce high energy electrons through Compton scattering. For high altitude nuclear explosions, these electrons are captured in the Earth's magnetic field at altitudes between twenty and forty kilometers where they interact with the Earth's magnetic field to produce a coherent nuclear electromagnetic pulse (NEMP) which lasts about one millisecond. Secondary effects may last for more than a second. I know little of the physics of civilian radio equipment and even less of military grade radios (do they have an alternative to bouncing the radio signals off the ionosphere?) and their operation, so I have no idea if it would garble the radio transmissions like shown in the video, but its not entirely pulled out of thin air.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2020 17:30
|
|
|
Parenthesis posted:I think they Col. Sawyer's garbled radio transmissions are based on the ionazating effect of the Nuclear explosion: The Wikipedia article is a little misleading here. It's talking about high altitude bursts in a general nuclear exchange. A funny thing happens when you're high up enough with a detonation: beta radiation will ionize the hell out of much larger than ground level areas of atmosphere and do it for a much longer time than a ground level detonation. That not only screws radios that bounce off the ionosphere, but it makes big areas that reflect radar waves too. Relevant to the Ft. Teller story, part of the strategy for dealing with an ABM system is to detonate a first wave of high altitude high yield bombs at the edge of a defense system to blind radars and EMP satellite based defenses. But the same effect totally happens at ground level. That ionized air reflects radio waves and will blind radar and cut radios. It just doesn't last as long or go as far. The radios we see being used are man portable AN/PRC 77s and vehicle mounted AN/VRC-12. Both are FM VHF spectrum radios. That's relevant because while FM signals can bounce off the ionosphere the conditions needed to do so are very narrow and these radios aren't gonna make it happen. They're short range and mostly LOS. Also amusingly, armor and infantry radios could both talk to the artillery and command, but not each other. So yes, that nuke would absolutely block their VHF radios like that, but not because they're bouncing signals off the ionosphere.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2020 20:31
|
|
|
I see. Thank you for the clarification.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2020 21:33
|
|
|
Parenthesis posted:I see. Thank you for the clarification. This explains a little better I think https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_blackout
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2020 23:47
|
|
|
Yeah thank you for the info Centurium. Most things I know about nuke effects are when you set off 1000, not 1. I was very unaware of what happens with nukes in a tactical sense. I kind of assumed 'Bomb but big' at that scale. Very interesting that the radio interference happens independently of EMP frying electronics.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2020 21:49
|
|
|
Update [b]World in Conflict: Mission 17, Once More Into the Breachhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjD9chB6Lh0Sorry for the delay! Been working on a history podcast and some other things. I really enjoy this mission, mostly because you finally get a full roster of tactical aid, and can really go to town and be mean to the soviet forces. Also Sawyer starting to lose his mind and treat us like Bannon is a nice touch. Maybe Sawyer is the kind of leader that just has to poo poo on somebody, and now if Bannon is gone, we're the whipping boy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 06:16
|
|
|
You know my biggest take away from that map is that apparently the Soviets have decided to attack Iran for some reason. I really wish we knew more about this world.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 09:24
|
|
|
I am wondering how China and the USSR end up on the same side given they are not, as far as I know, particularly friendly at this point in history. But I guess if wargame red dragon can get away with it I won't complain too much. Sort of makes sense in that I guess China would rather the USSR not control the USA unilaterally.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 14:33
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I am wondering how China and the USSR end up on the same side given they are not, as far as I know, particularly friendly at this point in history. But I guess if wargame red dragon can get away with it I won't complain too much. Sort of makes sense in that I guess China would rather the USSR not control the USA unilaterally. I remember reading at the time Soviet Assault was released that China joining in was also meant to be a sequel hook - they were thinking about a sequel involving a Chinese invasion of Australia and the US doing modern day island hopping to claw their way across the Pacific. Soviet Assault was supposed to be a quick, cheap expansion to bide time and maintain interest until a proper sequel could be announced. Then the game proved a critical and financial disappointment and welp.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 14:42
|
|
|
The big thing that sticks out watching the missions is the game seems like a real slog a lot of the time. Like MBTs parking five feet apart shooting each other in the face a dozen times to get a kill. The lethality of weaponry seems like it's all over the place and it's hard to see the point in anything except heavy tanks. I have my gripes with Wargame and the eternal strategy of Men In Houses but I still can't help but think "christ this would never fly in that game"
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 15:45
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:The big thing that sticks out watching the missions is the game seems like a real slog a lot of the time. Like MBTs parking five feet apart shooting each other in the face a dozen times to get a kill. The lethality of weaponry seems like it's all over the place and it's hard to see the point in anything except heavy tanks. It feels really sloggy looking back, and I think that's partially changes in fashion (the build up phase of AOE2 was like 15 minutes! 15! AOM felt like lightning by pushing that to around 6), but I think more so it's the design goals required it. The SP campaign wasn't the main goal, it was the MP, and the goal was to have all 4 roles coordinating far more closely than WG expects team mates to coordinate, and was expecting them to do this via text and flares. Enabling communication between players requires a slower pace and that increases with slower comms. Plus the way the AI plays/the mission design really pushes tanks. They're not as brutal about punishing tanks with helicopters as players would be, for example.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 16:25
|
|
|
Tulip posted:It feels really sloggy looking back, and I think that's partially changes in fashion (the build up phase of AOE2 was like 15 minutes! 15! AOM felt like lightning by pushing that to around 6), but I think more so it's the design goals required it. The SP campaign wasn't the main goal, it was the MP, and the goal was to have all 4 roles coordinating far more closely than WG expects team mates to coordinate, and was expecting them to do this via text and flares. Enabling communication between players requires a slower pace and that increases with slower comms. The AI seems to build more infantry in response to Heavy Tank spam. Which might be ok, but they advance their infantry in a giant blob in open ground. Also unlike Wargame, buildings and forests can get knocked down. It only takes a few minutes for a forest or city to get turned into a blasted hellscape with no cover. I feel like there should have been some different defense bonus for bombed out forests and towns. Maybe no concealment but higher cover?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 17:23
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I am wondering how China and the USSR end up on the same side given they are not, as far as I know, particularly friendly at this point in history. But I guess if wargame red dragon can get away with it I won't complain too much. Sort of makes sense in that I guess China would rather the USSR not control the USA unilaterally. Honestly if anything the China/USSR team up in this game more sense than in Red Dragon. In this game WW3 is in a precarious stalemate and the PRC finds itself in a position to not only turn the tide but also solve most of it's border disputes with one swift stroke. Meanwhile in Red Dragon it's basically. "Hey China we're on the verge of falling apart. We figure the best way to get pass that is to pick a fight with the US. You in?" "Hell yeah we are!" 
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 18:07
|
|
|
WiC pacing is pretty fast, though it might not look it here. Multiplayer, as mentioned, was really quick - TA on all sides blowing up everything, hard counters to every unit archetype, you name it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 20:09
|
|
|
Me, the first time playing this level: "A couple of tanks keep spawning behind me over that bridge on the hill while I try to capture this town, gently caress it I'll just blow up the bridge." Me, 5 minutes later: "Guess I'm restarting!" I've never seen friendly AI take out the commander's car, nor have him turn off the road. I always just called in 3 A10 strikes along the road when it spawns which I thought was an appropriately cool way. Also I think Sawyer's line about Webb taking the dam was a mis-read line that didn't get caught. Sawyer says "About god drat time, Parker!" but the subtitles say "About god drat time! Parker!" so Sawyer likely was supposed to be yelling at Webb but the actor didn't see the end of the first sentence. Anyways if you're into exploding the American Suburban/Rural Dream with heavy artillery this is definitely a highlight mission. It's a nice looking town and you go through all the highlights - religion, business center, local industry, and finish in the residential area. And of course none of it survives. Kibayasu fucked around with this message at 21:22 on Sep 15, 2020 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2020 21:20
|
|
|
Update World in Conflict: Mission 18, Fratricidehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8g9qZAjRulMQuick update, apologies for the split save, I had to get this uploaded before I leave on a trip tomorrow. SerCypher fucked around with this message at 09:24 on Sep 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2020 09:15
|
|
|
I like to imagine lebedev has been following the company the entire time in that limo lol. Like he drove it all the way to france and then onto the cargo ship and all the way from seattle. Then airdropped it into norway. And the boot is just entirely full of cigarettes and casette tapes. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 06:07 on Sep 27, 2020 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2020 06:05
|
|
|
SerCypher posted:Been working on a history podcast. Uh, I am intrigued. Podcast about? Can we get a link?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2020 11:55
|
|
|
Fun fact, as far as I can tell it is impossible to lose the "survive" segment at the end of the mission. When I first did it the US army killed everything I had and took all 3 control points. By the time I was able to call in more units my tanks died very shortly after they touched the ground because if you aren't killing the US tanks quickly enough they will get dozens of them throughout the area around the diner. But with enough patience and air strikes attrition will eventually win no matter what you do. Oh and I guess the colonel is dead, yeah RIP.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2020 22:21
|
|
|
Jesenjin posted:Uh, I am intrigued. Podcast about? Can we get a link? Yeah! My wife is Chinese and she wanted to talk about Chinese stuff to a western Audience. So it's history and politics and stuff. This one is on the genesis of the 4 pests (the famous thing where mao killed all the sparrows) and how they continue in different forms up to today. https://www.withchinesecharacteristics.com/episodes/episode-3-four-pests-campaign Kibayasu posted:Fun fact, as far as I can tell it is impossible to lose the "survive" segment at the end of the mission. When I first did it the US army killed everything I had and took all 3 control points. By the time I was able to call in more units my tanks died very shortly after they touched the ground because if you aren't killing the US tanks quickly enough they will get dozens of them throughout the area around the diner. But with enough patience and air strikes attrition will eventually win no matter what you do. Very interesting. It is easy to get overrun there. I always find it fascinating when videogames try to build anxiety with no actual fail state. Like when in a horror game you can see a monster prowling around but it won't actually attack you. Update  World in Conflict: Mission 19, Before the Stormhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9x3KzKdbCcIt's the second to last mission! For some reason this mission is just really enjoyable. I think it's that the enemy really only gets infantry and light vehicles, so your unstoppable infantry blob can just instagib everything that gets close to it. Normally heavy tanks can just fly through and crush your infantry, but in this mission they're UNSTOPPABLE.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2020 08:51
|
|
|
For the second to last mission it's pretty relaxed outside of that initial secondary objective which is weirdly one of the hardest in the game if you don't know its coming. If you take even 20 seconds to look around before heading out you will probably miss it. Infantry ball against the AI is always a kind of fun because it's just unstoppable unless you're under time pressure. Maybe the map got finished late and someone said "Well we gotta put it in somewhere." And if you can't find the spetznaz you can always play See a Tree Burn a Tree.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2020 21:40
|
|
|
Update World in Conflict: Mission 20, One Last Fighthttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkT6pDdOfQ0Apologies everyone for the delay, this is the last mission! I really should have wrapped this up sooner, but at least it's done. Despite the utter insanity that the mission is at this difficulty, I love everything about it. From the out of nowhere gospel song at the start, to the payoff of the CD Player at the end. Thank you everyone who watched and commented.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 08:04
|
|
|
World in Conflict is one good-rear end video game. Shame we never got a sequel to it but Wargame has been a pretty acceptable replacement. Unfortunately it still doesn't scratch that Small-Scale Tactical Gameplay itch. fucking love Fiona Apple fucked around with this message at 09:13 on Oct 30, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 08:52
|
|
|
Is there a reason they can't fire a nuclear missile at the chinese fleet before it actually lands in seattle? Like if you know they're going close enough to the islands to fire ASMs at them presumably you can hit them with a nuke in puget sound?
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 16:23
|
|
|
I still want to know where that choir in the intro comes from. That part taking the 4 points along the harbour was a huge pain in the rear end for me. Never thought about fully fortifying one point before the rest so it turned into a ridiculous test to call in either very precise support attacks or a lot of micro movements of tanks and repair vehicles to deal with the infinite spawns. Like you said you can't really not use heavy tanks against the numbers the AI has so you just don't have enough vehicles to spread around either. That last bit is basically just luck as well, better hope your artillery lands in the right places and that they don't decide to have a dozen tanks shoot at 1 repair tank. OwlFancier posted:Is there a reason they can't fire a nuclear missile at the chinese fleet before it actually lands in seattle? Like if you know they're going close enough to the islands to fire ASMs at them presumably you can hit them with a nuke in puget sound? Listen, don't worry about it. Anyways if you want to fan-wank it away the thinking can be that the Chinese ships would probably see it coming and scatter the fleet. Or that since there isn't a large presence in the Pacific one couldn't be launched from a location that wouldn't risk it being shot down. Not to bring too much realism into this game but unlike what the loading screen or real-life press pictures show in general navies actually have quite a bit of distance between ships but when you're unloading troops and equipment in a harbour everything kind of naturally has to gather in fairly confined area. loving love Fiona Apple posted:World in Conflict is one good-rear end video game. I think the best you can do these days for ones completely devoid of the usual base building are the Dawn of War 2 games. Or maybe the Men of War games? Homeworld Deserts of Kharak may qualify because while there's resource gathering there's only the one base building which is your carrier.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 18:13
|
|
|
Yeah don't worry about it. We've already had the most powerful navy in history fail to stop not one but TWO amphibious invasion forces. Why worry about nuclear weapon use?
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2020 18:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 05:22 |
|
|
paragon1 posted:Yeah don't worry about it. We've already had the most powerful navy in history fail to stop not one but TWO amphibious invasion forces. Why worry about nuclear weapon use? Actually, I would say they failed at least FOUR times depending on how you count it. 1. The invasion of Seattle 2. Invasion of France 3. The attack of New York could sort of count 4 The Chinese reinforcements which didn't reach land, but also wasn't stopped by the navy Either way, good game and good LP.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2020 00:22
|
|