[QUOTE=LordLoss;31190894]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.[/QUOTE]
Yeah. Like no one bought the map pack before it was made free for the two week period.
[quote]but I'll have to take your word for it.[/quote]
You are free to look at the gamefiles.
[quote]And maybe not but it'd be cool if we at least were allowed to if we so chose.[/quote]
There speaks nothing against it, but it won't be a focus of us.
[quote]Are these new maps going to be paid DLC only? [/quote]
There will be free and non-free maps.
[quote]Like no one bought the map pack before it was made free for the two week period.[/quote]
Why do you assume people haven't? There have been thousands of people who obtained it.
[QUOTE='[DMS]Instinct;31192247']
Why do you assume people haven't? There have been thousands of people who obtained it.[/QUOTE]
While this is true, before it was made free from the steam summer sale my friends who had bought it before it went free had never once gotten more than 1 or 2 public players in a lobby at a time. I never bought it because of this, and even after it went free and I obtained it it was nearly impossible to more than 1 or 2 public players at a time. It was only truly ever good for playing with 3 to 5 friends, where we could form our own teams and I knew they all owned it. While I can't blame anyone for them being paid DLC, not everything can be free, it simply doesn't work for as low a playerbase Men of War has.
[QUOTE=DaveP;31189116]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]
Playing the sub base mission in men of war with people on vent in coop was the most fun Ive had in men of war.
The thing that always bothers me aesthetically and doesn't actually matter at all is how some units don't use desert or winter camouflage when they already have it. Is that an easy fix or no?
[QUOTE=DannyD;31193613]The thing that always bothers me aesthetically and doesn't actually matter at all is how some units don't use desert or winter camouflage when they already have it. Is that an easy fix or no?[/QUOTE]
The engine handles different textures through the use of Texmods, which AFAIK have to be set in the editor before the map can be played. A trigger to change the Texmod a unit uses would definitely allow for different camo on different maps, but that doesn't exist.
instinct
why did you give the usa shotgunners instead of an ATR which was used very little but actually used in combat
UNLIKE DEM JAP TANKS
Instinct, will combat FFA ever return? It was a great game mode for when you only had an uneven amount of players. Or will ever a FFA version of assault zones or victory flag be introduced?
Assault Squad updated, not sure what's updated though.
[QUOTE=clanratc;31195150]Instinct, will combat FFA ever return? It was a great game mode for when you only had an uneven amount of players. Or will ever a FFA version of assault zones or victory flag be introduced?[/QUOTE]
I will never understand why they removed FFA.
I got this game for free with that special The Sun had for greenman gaming. I haven't had a chance to play it yet but I am looking forward to it
[QUOTE=Teh Zip File;31195318]I will never understand why they removed FFA.[/QUOTE]
and removed victory flag, crapped on it, and readded it in the dlc which you either have to buy or had used that ticket thing
[editline]18th July 2011[/editline]
oh god 1gb patch something new pls pls pls
Anyones Men of War AS start Updating?
[editline]19th July 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=W0w00t;31195743]and removed victory flag, crapped on it, and readded it in the dlc which you either have to buy or had used that ticket thing
[editline]18th July 2011[/editline]
oh god 1gb patch something new pls pls pls[/QUOTE]
Oh. Thats probably why its going to take 50m to Update...
They gave HMG limited arcs, nerfed sandbags and changed gun models.
I don't really see why that takes up 1.1 gigs.
[QUOTE=Teh Zip File;31197001]They gave HMG limited arcs, nerfed sandbags and changed gun models.
I don't really see why that takes up 1.1 gigs.[/QUOTE]
Because they probably changed the 1.pak, 2.pak etc. files instead of simply adding another like their supposed to. No idea why.
They also updated the shaders and added new models (for some reason).
[code]General
• Added new Boys At-rifle 3d model
• Added new PTRD At-rifle 3d model
• Added new PTRS At-rifle 3d model
• Added new Type 97 At-rifle 3d model
• Added new PzB39 At-rifle 3d model
• Added new M3A Grease Gun 3d model
• Added new Type 1 HMG 3d model
• Added new Type 4 (Bazooka) 3d model
• Added new Type 100 SMG 3d model
• Added new De Lisle 3d model
• Added new DS 39 3d model
• Added new Repair kit 3d model
• Added new Fuel can 3d model
• Added firing arc limitations to heavy machine guns
• Changed bloom shader
• Changed color balance of the game
• Increased human inform range from 35m to 40m
• Increased range of StuH from 150m to 160m
• Reduced HE resistance of round sandbags
• Removed Specnaz/Commando flare gun ammo
• Fixed water shader issues on some older GPUs
Multiplayer
• Changed start timer of HMGs to 1:00 min
• Changed start timer of AA guns to 1:00 min
• Changed start timer of mortars to 1:00 min
• Changed re-call timer of HMGs to 2:00 min
• Changed re-call timer of AA guns to 2:00 min
• Changed re-call timer of mortarts to 2:00 min
• Fixed pathing issues on Plateau 2v2
• Fixed small map issues
Skirmish
• Added 2 script protections against player AI not responding to enemies
• Fixed wrong AA icon in Soviet Union skirmishes
• Fixed bridges on [Soviet Union] Manchuria
• Fixed achievements on [UK] Arnhem
• Fixed Maxson staying at spawn, not moving
• Fixed Commonwealth heroes who didn't switch to player control
• Fixed some script bugs
• Fixed small map issues[/code]
[QUOTE=Teh Zip File;31197001]They gave HMG limited arcs, nerfed sandbags and changed gun models.
I don't really see why that takes up 1.1 gigs.[/QUOTE]
they could have atleast gave the us the boyes :v:
[quote]Oh. Thats probably why its going to take 50m to Update...
[/quote]
It's all worth it when you get a new feather duster.
Hooray! Ultra-detail water actually looks good now!
American tanks are so stupidly inferior to every German tank ever and the cost values for them don't even make up for it. Just played a match where we repeatedly shelled a King Tiger with 3 M12s, 2-3 Calliopes at a time, and 3 Super Pershings. Never once was the artillery, despite at least 10 direct hits from 155mm HE, hundreds of 114mm rockets near and sometimes on. This crazy amount of artillery achieved absolutely nothing, only once ever did the Calliope manage to track it, and the 155mm HE only confused the crew on direct hits, I don't think we ever killed any crew either. Only once was one of the Pershings able to destroy the gun, after which two repeatedly shelled it from about 90-100 meters with APCR, sometimes daring to shoot from closer ranges. Not a single penetration was achieved, despite shooting the lower glacis multiple times with the APCR's 180mm of penetration. Once we realized the KT's gun was back up we retreated to about 120-130 meters. At that point the KT fired a single more shot after its first and blew up the ammo rack of one of the Super Pershings. At that point I retreated my Super Pershing about 30 meters back, went to tell my M12 to fire a salvo and see if I could confuse the KT's crew for a short while, and in those 5 seconds it took me to give that order MY Super Pershing managed to blow up, damn near the King Tiger's max range.
After that we got a third Super Pershing, and put it in a hull down position behind a hill. It was able to destroy the hull of a Panther descending a hill caught by surprise at about 90 meters, then was promptly ammo racked in a single shot by the KT at what must have been just at the limits of the KT's max range, because the Pershing was at its max range of 160 meters. We lost the game after losing 3 Super Pershings in a matter of minutes. I don't understand how the Super Pershing can qualify for a 10 point hero unit, something the player has to wait 20 minutes for and not get any other special units. The Pershing is so inferior to everything else it's not even funny. It actually also seems that most >57mm guns can overmatch the sides of its turret, where ammo also seems to be stored. I've taken out Pershings with fireflys before from max range just because I managed to hit the side of the turret from an extremely oblique angle. The turret gets damaged, and shortly after the entire tank explodes. I can practically rely on it if I can hit that anything but the mantlet of the tank.
I should also mention that while our three M12s pounded away repeatedly at even the Panthers, and multiple direct hits occured, to the sides top and turret, the most that ever occured, and even then only once, was a destroyed engine. The engine didn't even light on fire only and only resulted in a mobility kill. The first normal Pershing we had was tracked by a Panther and killed by a Hummel in its second salvo from a single direct hit, which is a lower caliber even (albeit only 5mm difference).
Looking at the prices of the German to American tanks don't even see right. The Pershing costs 1500 points while the Panther costs 1350, and the Tiger 1100. The Panzer IV costs less than the Sherman by about 50 points and has a far superior gun with much more consistent armor. The 76W costs 850, which is nothing more than a M4a3 with a bigger gun as far as MoW is concerned, and thus easily killed by most German tanks. Meanwhile the Tiger gets more armor [I]and[/I] and a better gun. The Slugger is a JOKE now with its top armor of 30 odd mms of frontal armor and comparable turret armor. The turret isn't particularly helpful in 99% of situations. The Nashorn has a FAR better gun, better range, better accuracy, both are open topped, and it has the same armor, [I]and it costs 900 to the sluggers 1100[/I].
Sure the Pershing is faster than the Tiger and the Pershing is roughly the same speed as the panther, there's no long distance logistics to care about (hundreds of kilometers) and the maps aren't large enough to actually utilize the speed. They're far too expensive to rush behind enemy lines too. The King Tiger and Jagdtiger do cost an absolute obscene amount of points, but once anyone gets one there's nothing you can do about them, for instance my situation with the KT or how I know for a fact you can ammo rack IS-3s through the front with the JT consistently. You could go without a single Panzer IV and an infantry squad or something and have enough to have a KT around when the enemy has a Pershing.
American tanks need a serious price fix. The US believed almost through the war that one tank = power of 1, and that two tanks = power of 4, strength in numbers in other words. There's no support for this whatsoever by playing the US over any other faction in the game, as the units are generally more expensive, worse overall, and [I]why don't they have the boyes .55 ATR[/I].
I agree 100%. One ought to be able to get 3-4 Shermans/T-34s for the price of one Tiger/Panther.
m4a3 / m4a4 - 450
panzer 4 ausf g - 400
m4a3e8 76w - 850
panzer 4 ausf h - 550
slugger - 1100
nashorn - 900
pershing - 1500
tiger - 1100
panther - 1350
king tiger? normal unit that is not counterable directly at all by the us aside from the super pershing which is a hero unit and has a 20 minute delay. AKA not replaceable unlike the king tiger.
Not to mention the Super Pershings got a long barreled 90mm cannon and it has LESS RANGE than the 88mm on the KT (which has the range of a calliopes 114mm rocket)
[editline]19th July 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=hurts;31202108]I agree 100%. One ought to be able to get 3-4 Shermans/T-34s for the price of one Tiger/Panther.[/QUOTE]
you can do that with a t34/76 second generation, but NOT the sherman because its stupidly over priced.
[editline]19th July 2011[/editline]
Jumbo 76W should be a normal unit
Super pershing should take its place as a special unit. T29 should take the super pershings place
or something
[QUOTE='[DMS]Instinct;31188976']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]
That's actually an interesting point I've never factored into my arguments. There's only so much content you can have without going to inventing new things that never existed. It actually essentially eliminates that argument.
I still think my major gripe is engine fatigue. Soldiers and Faces of War aren't your games, fair enough, but the simple fact remains that the consumer has still played essentially the same thing 4 times over. Obviously there are changes, but the core experience and problems remain the same. I have a question and I'm not sure you're are liberty to answer. If there were to be a new engined version of Men of War or even a new title altogether, would that be headed up by DMS, or would it be tackled by some other company? What I'm trying to figure out is the hierarchy here. Are you guys given the liberty to decide in which direction the series goes or is that 1C?
[quote]Instinct, will combat FFA ever return?[/quote]
I'm not sure, but I believe not. It's very time consuming to balance maps for FFA while this mode is played once out of 500 or more games.
[quote]the same thing 4 times over.[/quote]
Which is correct, but the consumer also demands the same thing over and over again, otherwise there would be no sense in buying a sequel. This is the same with Command & Conquer, Dawn of War, Total War, Star Craft etc.
I do agree though that the game should focus on less, instead of having a bazillion of features of which many don't really fill a purpose and draw attention and time away from the bigger picture. 1C is the owner of the franchise, if we were to disagree with them, we'd need to make a game that's not called MoW, but it can be essentially the same. However, I'm certain 1C and I agree on the direction the game should head for and they also need someone to do the game in first place. Since Assault Squad was a definite success it's a logical step to continue working with us. In case of the engine, they have been supportive in changing it for possible sequels.
In my personal eyes, anything beyond MoW:AS requires a major re-haul to become a really good product. So you can be assured, if we continue the franchise, you will definitely find a lot of change to the game.
I agree with Mbbird. The super pershing is a near useless unit - it gets killed by nearly everything, and the fact that it costs 10 hero points is stupid. The US need a better top tank, the super pershing is just a barely better panther at this point. Something like a T28 with it's 350mm frontal armor would be cool, but, as Mbbird said, all american tanks can be killed by artillery while many others from different factions have some sort of immunity to high-caliber HE rounds.
The 76w is not worth the price, the persing does not match a tiger in the least and the super pershing is a joke, a fly that gets swat by anything remotely resembling a cannon.
Having to use light vehicles all the time gets incredibly tedious too. At least the japs get good AT units :v:
[QUOTE=W0w00t;31203160]m4a3 / m4a4 - 450
panzer 4 ausf g - 400[/QUOTE]
I'd say that's a good price difference. Normally the Sherman wins against the ausf g head to head, and it also has the advantage of having a .50 cal on top.
[QUOTE='[DMS]Instinct;31205687']
Which is correct, but the consumer also demands the same thing over and over again, otherwise there would be no sense in buying a sequel. This is the same with Command & Conquer, Dawn of War, Total War, Star Craft etc.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, but the sequels/expansion packs to those games add more than a shader, a few more units, improved netcode, and a new ui.
hell what do I know I preordered AS
Super Pershing needs to be swapped for a T28. Or a T29.
T28 was pretty much immune to artillery fire, so that fixes that.
[QUOTE='[DMS]Instinct;31205687']I'm not sure, but I believe not. It's very time consuming to balance maps for FFA while this mode is played once out of 500 or more games.
Which is correct, but the consumer also demands the same thing over and over again, otherwise there would be no sense in buying a sequel. This is the same with Command & Conquer, Dawn of War, Total War, Star Craft etc.
I do agree though that the game should focus on less, instead of having a bazillion of features of which many don't really fill a purpose and draw attention and time away from the bigger picture. 1C is the owner of the franchise, if we were to disagree with them, we'd need to make a game that's not called MoW, but it can be essentially the same. However, I'm certain 1C and I agree on the direction the game should head for and they also need someone to do the game in first place. Since Assault Squad was a definite success it's a logical step to continue working with us. In case of the engine, they have been supportive in changing it for possible sequels.
In my personal eyes, anything beyond MoW:AS requires a major re-haul to become a really good product. So you can be assured, if we continue the franchise, you will definitely find a lot of change to the game.[/QUOTE]
when are you going to discuss the unit balance
[editline]19th July 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=kirderf;31206413]I'd say that's a good price difference. Normally the Sherman wins against the ausf g head to head, and it also has the advantage of having a .50 cal on top.[/QUOTE]
Except in Men of War: Assault Squad, where it never does.
[QUOTE=joost1120;31209205]Super Pershing needs to be swapped for a T28. Or a T29.
T28 was pretty much immune to artillery fire, so that fixes that.[/QUOTE]
its thick armor was nearly impervious to any conventional land artillery
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
