maps are so fucking BABY sized can't flank worth shit even on THE ONLY 8 v 8 when there were like 1 or 2 more
[QUOTE=W0w00t;31167837]maps are so fucking BABY sized can't flank worth shit even on THE ONLY 8 v 8 when there were like 1 or 2 more[/QUOTE]
I'd rather have low-detail but large maps. You can easily have 2.5km (1000x1000 tiles with 2.5m size) maps in GEM, I don't know why they don't make them.
[QUOTE=Tark;31168488]I'd rather have low-detail but large maps. You can easily have 2.5km (1000x1000 tiles with 2.5m size) maps in GEM, I don't know why they don't make them.[/QUOTE]
because dms is the shittys
It's the worst when a control area has some barricade or something set up inside it's borders and they're all facing one direction.
I forget what map it was, but one literally had a fully covered trench INSIDE the control point facing my side. So their men could just jump right into it from spawn whereas I had to clear it completely to take the point. Even worse, after I took it all the defenses faced the wrong way so they'd just shoot my infantry and retake it.
SOME of the small maps are good, and the large ones are usually the best.
It's those darn medium/small maps that don't know what they want to be and you end up having mortar/sniper heaven and a virtually unplayable field for infantry.
Heavy MG's still haunt me to this day.
i love maps where the opposition is bottlenecked across a bridge, i just put a quad .50 on one side and some AT guns next to it, impenetrable defense.
[QUOTE=teh pirate;31175632]i love maps where the opposition is bottlenecked across a bridge, i just put a quad .50 on one side and some AT guns next to it, impenetrable defense.[/QUOTE]
Until a nashorn starts to snipe your AT guns at 180m with AP >.>
@MendozaMan
I recently found that light AT guns can somewhat effectively counter HMGs and other auto cannons.
So uh, what should I play I have the direct2drive version of the origanal MoW, and I have Assult Squad on steam
what do you guys play more
rate agree for assault squad and disagree for MoW
MoW for tanks only, AS if you want more combined arms. (Also, more players on AS, with less uberskilled russians)
What's the skirmish mode on assault squad like? I love the mechanics of men of war but I hate hate hate playing RTSs online.
[QUOTE=Barnhouse;31177355]What's the skirmish mode on assault squad like? I love the mechanics of men of war but I hate hate hate playing RTSs online.[/QUOTE]
It's nothing special. It's pretty much the same attack and defend mission copy pasted onto different maps.
its also complete bullshit and easy as fuck on easy and medium but IMPOSSIBLE on anything higher
it
it is infuriating 2 say da least
[quote=W0w00t]ALSO DMS BANNING PEOPLE FROM THE GAME FOR CRITICIZING IT ON FACEPUNCH[/quote]
If we were to ban people for what they write on facepunch, I'll guarantee you, you'll be the first one to know.
[quote]In MoWAS they said it would have Japan. Was added in like the 2nd or 3rd patch[/quote]
Or was it the patch called release version?
[quote]I think its with all the companies involved in the development that have caused these problems.[/quote]
DMS has not worked on Soldiers or Faces of War and we don't intend to work on any other expansion for MoW besides, MoW:AS.
[quote]5x harsher damage model on your troops vs the enemy's.[/quote]
Heroic is the only mode that uses an original damage table like you have it in versus multiplayer. On easy, normal, hard, your troops fight much better than the AI. So you are the one having "5x harsher damage". If you then lose an equal fire fight...
[QUOTE='[DMS]Instinct;31182409']
Heroic is the only mode that uses an original damage table like you have it in versus multiplayer. On easy, normal, hard, your troops fight much better than the AI. So you are the one having "5x harsher damage". If you then lose an equal fire fight...[/QUOTE]
Oh it does? Definitely didn't feel like it, when dashing between cover and my guys would take obscene amounts of damage from what looked like stray MG or rifle rounds, while rifles have never been my thing due to their tendency to do ~40% then get the soldier stuck into a 3 second long boltpull.
Maybe it was the amount of troops that made me feel like that. Unless when you say "your troops fight much better than the AI" on the easier modes you mean they literally are better soldiers, which in that case would explain it (EG: partizan vs sturmgrenadier).
Had this in my mind for the longest time;
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/5SCla.png[/IMG]
I just made it too
More like play men of war spend hour picking up helmets
[QUOTE=W0w00t;31166250]THERES more to it
[editline]16th July 2011[/editline]
which im too lazy to explain because what you said is half true except the fact that alot of factors go into the part that makes us lose so bad from faulty ai, lack of balance, and the whole part where usa is dick 4 balls[/QUOTE]
The AI is frustrating, but micro/direct control can fix it.
[QUOTE=hurts;31183524]The AI is frustrating, but micro/direct control can fix it.[/QUOTE]
i am god of micro
sometimes
direct controlling is pretty much the only thing i do with vehicles, because the ai doesn't know how to return fire on an enemy right next to it
except whenever i go in direct control thats the games cue to start lagging or for my performance to go shitty
[editline]18th July 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE='[DMS]Instinct;31182409']
Or was it the patch called release version?
[/QUOTE]
i didn't get mowas on release, so my bad
BUT THIS DOESN'T EXPLAIN THE REST
[editline]18th July 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE='[DMS]Instinct;31182409']
DMS has not worked on Soldiers or Faces of War and we don't intend to work on any other expansion for MoW besides, MoW:AS.
[/QUOTE]
the best expansions delete content yes
[quote]Unless when you say "your troops fight much better than the AI" on the easier modes you mean they literally are better soldiers, which in that case would explain it (EG: partizan vs sturmgrenadier).[/quote]
You don't have better soldiers, as in higher tier units. But your riflemen is more accurate and can get a lot more hits than your opponents one. If you usually play easy or normal and switch to heroic, it can give you the impression you fight super soldiers, but that's just because you had super soldiers before all the time.
[QUOTE='[DMS]Instinct;31188615']You don't have better soldiers, as in higher tier units. But your riflemen is more accurate and can get a lot more hits than your opponents one. If you usually play easy or normal and switch to heroic, it can give you the impression you fight super soldiers, but that's just because you had super soldiers before all the time.[/QUOTE]
Hey, I have a guestion for you:
[B]When are you going to make actually new content instead of fucking recyclingrecyclingrecycling everything?[/B]
And fix the fucking braindead A.I for christ sake, they don't even evade grenades nor toss them back. You disabled the A.I for multiplayer on purpose didn't ya?
[QUOTE='[DMS]Instinct;31188615']You don't have better soldiers, as in higher tier units. But your riflemen is more accurate and can get a lot more hits than your opponents one. If you usually play easy or normal and switch to heroic, it can give you the impression you fight super soldiers, but that's just because you had super soldiers before all the time.[/QUOTE]
It just seems to me that the missions become impossible when you are fighting your equals.
Mainly because they will always have more men then you, and they will have better shit to shoot at you with. (this, you cannot deny. I find myself having to loot shit all the time just to survive)
Even when, near the end of a skirmish you gain access to the good stuff, the enemy WILL one-up you three to five times.
I mean christ, I end up using AT-riflemen just to take out one machinegunner because me sniper fires one shot from cover, and suddenly every son of a bitch and his mother starts firing sloppy but insanely accurate shots at him at ranges that should not be possible.
Winning a match on Heroic requires skills that I do not have nor will be able to understand. Red Tide was easier, and this is no lie by any means.
Here's an idea: He's kind enough to post here, so don't make him regret it or he'll just not bother coming back.
[editline]18th July 2011[/editline]
@ Raisky
[quote]When are you going to make actually new content instead of fucking recyclingrecyclingrecycling everything?[/quote]
Unsure what you mean with recycling. Do you want us to invent new tanks for WW2 instead of making new models of tanks we have used in the past?
Or is it that you want a complete new game out of an expansion? I repeat, you can talk to us about MoW and MoW:AS, all the other games are out of our area of interest.
[quote]Winning a match on Heroic requires skills that I do not have nor will be able to understand. Red Tide was easier, and this is no lie by any means.[/quote]
Well, heroic is not designed for singleplayer, actually not even hard is. Heroic is for 4 super experienced guys who want to have a real coop challenge. Hard is for 4 experienced players or either a super experienced individual. Normal for experienced, easy for beginners.
I think a couple new village and town houses (with at least summer + winter models) would be nice, the current ones repeat a lot.
I agree, but this is something for a potential Men of War 2, rather than for Assault Squad.
If there's one point about Assault Squad that's worth raising, it's that the single player mode makes me value the (albeit shaky) story underpinning MoW. The sneaking out of PoW holding camps, holding back the Germans to the very last, smashing armoured convoys, playing NKVD superspy gave the game an original voice that set it apart from Company of Heroes/Blitzkrieg/Insert WW2 RTS here
I'm just not all that interested in multiplayer
[QUOTE='[DMS]Instinct;31189089']I agree, but this is something for a potential Men of War 2, rather than for Assault Squad.[/QUOTE]
In some of the patches you've released i noticed that you sometime replaced the weapon models or something in that direction.
Making a bigger map/winter maps or generally new interesting maps is a simple thing to do when you compare it to the praise, trust and otherwise happy customers you will recieve. Because i've gotten a better impression of DMS since you started to post here, since some other companies would just shun the idea of interacting with the community and laugh all the way to the bank with their bags of money.
DaveP,
I do agree, they have a certain charm, but they wouldn't fit a large enough audience to justify their production costs, one of the reasons why the expansions split into either heavy multiplayer, like Assault Squad and singleplayer only like Red Tide.
I generally do think the singleplayer as the multiplayer in general need to switch drastically in a different direction for any potential sequel to come, so they deliver the best of all kind.
Shoopiwoop,
yes, we try to update content over time. But it's important to understand that while the game didn't change drastically since Faces of War, a lot of content has been added over that long period of time. It's just not possible to exchange over 100 inventory items and 300 vehicles and tanks in an expansion and on top of that start adding new buildings and exchanging old ones.
As for the maps, there will be more to come, but a recommended player count instead of max player count on standard on every map is more feasible to enhance gameplay. The game is not designed to be played on huge maps with a huge amount of players.
[QUOTE='[DMS]Instinct;31188615']You don't have better soldiers, as in higher tier units. But your riflemen is more accurate and can get a lot more hits than your opponents one. If you usually play easy or normal and switch to heroic, it can give you the impression you fight super soldiers, but that's just because you had super soldiers before all the time.[/QUOTE]
Well I play competitive MP all the time and it doesn't feel like that at all, but I'll have to take your word for it.
[editline]18th July 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE='[DMS]Instinct;31189257']
As for the maps, there will be more to come, but a recommended player count instead of max player count on standard on every map is more feasible to enhance gameplay. [U]The game is not designed to be played on huge maps with a huge amount of players.[/U][/QUOTE]
And maybe not but it'd be cool if we at least were allowed to if we so chose. I've played 8 v 8 maps with 4 players per team and it's been rather fun.
[QUOTE='[DMS]Instinct;31189257']
As for the maps, there will be more to come, but a recommended player count instead of max player count on standard on every map is more feasible to enhance gameplay. The game is not designed to be played on huge maps with a huge amount of players.[/QUOTE]
Are these new maps going to be paid DLC only? Paying for maps never works in RTS games, no one ever ends up playing them, unless you have a massive playerbase to begin with. MoWAS can't really afford to divide its community into DLC and non DLC in my opinion.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
