Wargame: Ash and Shadows v2.29; Now with a Discord link and Polish language support. Turkey replaces Denmark.

User avatar
Spectre_nz
Warrant Officer
Posts: 413
Joined: Wed 7 Aug 2013 09:06
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Ash and Shadows

Postby Spectre_nz » Sun 19 Feb 2017 18:30

So if you can see the F-35 in game, you managed to install it correctly then?

Wargame modders can't mod the 3D models for units. We have to use the ones already in the game. There is no F-35 model, so, an F-16 is the substitute.

Warlordz
Private First-Class
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed 30 Nov 2016 03:33
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Ash and Shadows

Postby Warlordz » Mon 20 Feb 2017 03:47

Hey,
As you are probably aware, China is developing and testing a new missile that shall serve as an "AWACS killer" ( http://www.popsci.com/china-new-long-range-air-to-air-missile ).

Although the range is pretty far (potentially over 310 miles), this missile would be a wonderful asset for China in Wargame as a debuffed variant of the missile, as China is currently lacking long-range engagement missiles it desperately needs to compete vs the superpowers.

Probably would be best to center the max range around 20000m to allow the fighters(whichever they are designated for) to engage targets more likely to charge at it (ex. Eurofighter Typhoon, F-15C, F16C or F-22 RaptorJesus utilizing the "Salvo" ability that isn't given to Semi-Active Missiles :? ).

This is just an idea, though. As of now, China requires hit-or-miss CQC dogfights to down enemy aircraft and their variety of fighters is... lacking. This is their opportunity to rise to the nations they've learned to fear.. at least in the air! ;)

This is another idea I had... I'm unsure if this would be a simple implementation or not, though.

Simply put... an AWACS aircraft platform for some nations so instead of letting a fighter flop around the airspace to be sniped by an unseen aircraft with ridiculous range, these bad boys can light them up AND take a hit(to an extent).

Potential stats & details:
    Model: B-5( I believe that's the largest in the RD arsenal?)
    Strength: 15/20
    ECM: 10% to 0%
    Air Detection: Exceptional
    Turn Radius: Garbage
    Stealth: 0%
    T.O.T: 80s(to prevent suppression all game)
    Speed: 400km?
    Armament: Acquisition Radar
    Armament Range: 13000-14000(to keep long-range sniping possible)
    Price range: $100-120
    Maximum amount: 1 (prevents chain-spamming)

These stats are based moreover towards balance than realism.

The "suppression"(Acquisition Radar) comes from the simple truth that the enemy aircraft is compromised in an allied airspace. This is why I gave it the ability to suppress, just like ground radars(in the mod).

If possible, the suppression effect should be debased. I'm thinking 35, but maybe higher to affect ALL veteran levels. The AWACS aircraft shouldn't be panicking aircraft just for entering the airspace;it should be worrying them for flying in it for an extended period of time. This ALSO means that Elite pilots will have less trouble ignoring the suppression effect and successfully completing their missions... Unless the enemy decides to do something with this flying reconnaissance boat in the sky. :twisted:

Although some nations wouldn't get the upgrade, QUITE A FEW would. As stated before, the aircraft should NOT be an immense fear factor in air-to-air combat. Just an eye in the sky if a nation is incapable of keeping an "eye in the sky" from the ground via ground radar systems.

I look forward to seeing what you think of this! :D

User avatar
Spectre_nz
Warrant Officer
Posts: 413
Joined: Wed 7 Aug 2013 09:06
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Ash and Shadows

Postby Spectre_nz » Mon 20 Feb 2017 05:35

AWACs are Theater level assets that I have no desire to add.

The Moral damage against aircraft just wasn't consistent enough or clear enough to be a fun game element, and I hardly ever say players make use of it, so I'm not adding it in to 2.0

revolverswitch
Corporal
Posts: 29
Joined: Sat 31 Dec 2016 09:04
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Ash and Shadows

Postby revolverswitch » Tue 21 Feb 2017 07:39

Yeesh, no. Top tier tanks already have the best protection and the best firepower (Damage + ROF). I'm not giving them unmatched range too. There'd be no reason to take anything else.


Would increasing the price to a crazy amount balance it out?

Warlordz
Private First-Class
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed 30 Nov 2016 03:33
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Ash and Shadows

Postby Warlordz » Tue 21 Feb 2017 09:20

Spectre_nz wrote:AWACs are Theater level assets that I have no desire to add.

The Moral damage against aircraft just wasn't consistent enough or clear enough to be a fun game element, and I hardly ever say players make use of it, so I'm not adding it in to 2.0


Sucks to know big bird won't be appearing in the next update.

Back to the subject of morale, though:

Are you only removing the acquisition radars and keeping the suppression system on SEAD aircraft?

Although it seems like a debuff to ground unit capabilities in an aircraft-infested environment, it does seem fair to keep the systems onboard SEAD aircraft.

And another subject... SPAAGs losing their radars may be a punch in the gut to some units. Firstly, the Ka-50 armed with anti-radar missiles will become almost useless for it's role. No longer will it out-range distant SPAAGs lying in wait; it can only deal with missile launchers that are extremely dangerous for helicopters regardless of ECM/strength values. I didn't even mention how terrifying it is to keep a helicopter alive over different terrain like forests or hills... Always being randomly smacked by MANPADS in wait.

Secondly... unwary aircraft in general. With SPAAGs capable of stunning EXTREMELY quickly(and now without failure because they can't be detected), aircraft can be forced to enter deep into enemy territory while sleeping in the cockpit thanks to the 10 second stun the SPAAG threw at it. Just seems a bit more overpowered since 200pt stealth fighters can instantly lose a battle to a $50 SPAAG, but isn't the same story with an S-300.

Thirdly... These expensive SEAD aircraft lose their usefulness in battles where the enemy doesn't posses radar-guided missile platforms! Factions like the Commonwealth can stick to using the CAMM[L], China can spam PGZ's all over the place, Germany only needs to pay $25 for a deadly SPAAG, etc etc...

Some factions will be incapable of keeping a gap between them and the enemy and so it will end up being a curtain of anti-air behind any and every assault.

I could be wrong about some of this. Just something to think about.

User avatar
Sir Typhoon
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 516
Joined: Sat 30 Jan 2016 13:17
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Ash and Shadows

Postby Sir Typhoon » Tue 21 Feb 2017 18:36

I recently play this mod, and I have found a few inconsistencies:
- BlueDragons supply trucks (500) reach the number of 31 with a 30% of availability bonus, however Norway (40%) reaches only 22 iirc.
- Mortars with 18 RpM cost less than others with less RpM even (The firsts) having more ammo.
- France supply truck has low availability than other trucks with 800 supplies.
- Some units that have only 1 card have more units per card than others with 2 or more cards :roll:.

I didn't remember more. Having said this I want to give my opinion. It's a good Mod, but, ehm, too broken. Who needs coalitions, when you have all that you need in every nation? Maybe some (Nations) are a "bit" weak compared with other, but the rest, holy shit!
Imho the maximun cost for the best units must be 300 (Currently 225?). Furthemore the availavility of all units are incredibly high, for example: 3/4 Patriots per card, really? Given that the number of (Good) seads are extremly low.

But yeah, I know that it is unfinished so currently is a good mod :).

User avatar
Spectre_nz
Warrant Officer
Posts: 413
Joined: Wed 7 Aug 2013 09:06
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Ash and Shadows

Postby Spectre_nz » Tue 21 Feb 2017 20:00

Would increasing the price to a crazy amount balance it out?


Despite appearances in this mod, I try to avoid high cost wunderwaffe for one side only. Basically, I want to maintain the need for considered choice in deck design; In this case, do you take survivability or range? Which compliments your other deck design choices better? Giving top tier tanks the best performance in all fields makes them a non-choice. You always put them in a deck because they're the best at everything.

There's no specific reason to give the Armata a 2450m gun and not also give the same treatment to every other top-tier tank in the game. The 2A82 gun isn't some quantum leap in performance over what IMI, Giat or Rheinmetall are building.
For the instances where a unit has a 2450m range gun, there's a behind the scenes justification, like an experimental RAP round, 'over charged' two piece ammunition (generally only for TD's) or a steerable smart round that can be lobbed on a longer, ballistic arc and still be highly accurate.

Are you only removing the acquisition radars and keeping the suppression system on SEAD aircraft?

Suppression jammers on SEAD aircraft will stay. That gameplay element worked fairly well.

Secondly... unwary aircraft in general. With SPAAGs capable of stunning EXTREMELY quickly(and now without failure because they can't be detected), aircraft can be forced to enter deep into enemy territory while sleeping in the cockpit thanks to the 10 second stun the SPAAG threw at it.


That's the whole point. Stepping into a well built ADN should be hair-raising for the player and near-suicide for their aircraft.
My intent is that rather than having air-power be the number 1 objective of all players from the first moments of a game, that identifying and shutting down the opponents ADN be a much more involved process so that gaining air-superiority takes time and skill, rather than buying a bunch of SEAD and click you're dead. Conversely, I don't want ADNs so powerful that unless you spam arty and are an air-attack micro-god, every plane is a one-use item.

I didn't like how those elements worked in vanilla, so I modded changes. Those adjustments didn't achieve the changes I wanted to see, so I'm adjusting again for 2.0

Thirdly... These expensive SEAD aircraft lose their usefulness in battles where the enemy doesn't posses radar-guided missile platforms! Factions like the Commonwealth can stick to using the CAMM[L], China can spam PGZ's all over the place,


The general tilt of my changes is to keep SEAD necessary, but move away from the current balance of 'Players attempt to take as much non-radar AA as they can' and 'RADAR SPAAG is only useful as missile bait' and 'SEAD plane sighted, race to turn off all your RADAR'
I'm not making this change in isolation. I'm making this change in concert to changes to SEAD, Radar SAMs and non radar SAMs.

Nations like ANZAC and the UK are stuck with the issue that in real life, they just don't possess long range radar SAMs but for game-play purposes something needs to be done to keep them viable.

SPAAGs losing their radars may be a punch in the gut to some units. Firstly, the Ka-50 armed with anti-radar missiles will become almost useless for it's role.

Keep in mind I'm also boosting stealth for most helos, to reflect their ability to remain low and hide behind terrain. There will still be viable targets for the Ka-50. Typically I see players use them to hunt out of position top-end SAMs. SPAAG on the front lines is much better dealt with by tanks and arty. Since only one faction gets the SEAD armed Ka-50, it shouldn't be the across the board best way to break open an ADN, as then you end up with a meta focused around something like the Ka-50, Mi-28 micro combo. I want the Ka-50 to be useful and situational, not a no-brainer choice than you have to have in your deck.

I didn't even mention how terrifying it is to keep a helicopter alive over different terrain like forests or hills... Always being randomly smacked by MANPADS in wait

That's always been a threat for helos. I'm not sure what your point is here. MANPADS are meant to be a big counter to helos and flying your expensive chopper near wooded areas that you don't know for sure are clear has always been a calculated risk/rookie mistake.

I recently play this mod, and I have found a few inconsistencies:
- BlueDragons supply trucks (500) reach the number of 31 with a 30% of availability bonus, however Norway (40%) reaches only 22 iirc.
- Mortars with 18 RpM cost less than others with less RpM even (The firsts) having more ammo.
- France supply truck has low availability than other trucks with 800 supplies.

Yep. You're looking at version 1.x there. 2.0 is coming. Balance will have to be done all over again and I'm not going back and finishing balance on 1.x.
Supply units specifically never got their final balance. Some decks got passed over while other issues were fixed first.

Some units that have only 1 card have more units per card than others with 2 or more cards

Can you be specific? Some card/unit break downs specifically gave low numbers of deliberately under-costed units (like the low cost Tunguska for Russia)
Others may just be units that got left out of sweeping changes, or something I planned to take out later but didn't.

Who needs coalitions, when you have all that you need in every nation? Maybe some (Nations) are a "bit" weak compared with other, but the rest, holy shit!

Yes, who needs coalitions was something I was aiming for, especially with the USA and Russia.
In any case, 2.0 is coming with a whole new set of balance issues that'll need to be done all over again.

Warlordz
Private First-Class
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed 30 Nov 2016 03:33
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Ash and Shadows

Postby Warlordz » Sat 4 Mar 2017 06:48

Secondly... unwary aircraft in general. With SPAAGs capable of stunning EXTREMELY quickly(and now without failure because they can't be detected), aircraft can be forced to enter deep into enemy territory while sleeping in the cockpit thanks to the 10 second stun the SPAAG threw at it.


That's the whole point. Stepping into a well built ADN should be hair-raising for the player and near-suicide for their aircraft.
My intent is that rather than having air-power be the number 1 objective of all players from the first moments of a game, that identifying and shutting down the opponents ADN be a much more involved process so that gaining air-superiority takes time and skill, rather than buying a bunch of SEAD and click you're dead. Conversely, I don't want ADNs so powerful that unless you spam arty and are an air-attack micro-god, every plane is a one-use item.


This change is worth a try. Just seems like this will lead to longer games because of the need to use artillery (and a heap of supplies) to sting frontlines. SPAAG will be too useful to ignore. Aggressive players may just shrug this change off anyways.

I respect your decision to do this. It's annoying always getting the "lights off" order from an incoming SEAD jet. Just nervous about the ground-versus-air balance. No longer will a tough air-force-focus faction stand tall against Stalinium, after all.

I didn't even mention how terrifying it is to keep a helicopter alive over different terrain like forests or hills... Always being randomly smacked by MANPADS in wait

That's always been a threat for helos. I'm not sure what your point is here. MANPADS are meant to be a big counter to helos and flying your expensive chopper near wooded areas that you don't know for sure are clear has always been a calculated risk/rookie mistake.


Yeah, that's what I was trying to say. "That's always been a threat for helos". Since you plan to change the ratings on some mechanics, maybe it will balance out.. Just looking at the big picture; where will helos be effective when an army is developed on the battlefield? Flanking will work even BETTER but at the same time flanks tend to yield... more places to find MANPADS/SPAAGs lurking around LATE game.

User avatar
Spectre_nz
Warrant Officer
Posts: 413
Joined: Wed 7 Aug 2013 09:06
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Ash and Shadows v2.01 test version now available

Postby Spectre_nz » Thu 9 Mar 2017 03:11

v2.01 test release now out. Check the first post in this thread.

Jack Sutton
Sergeant First-Class
Posts: 118
Joined: Thu 24 Oct 2013 00:16
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Ash and Shadows v2.01 test version released

Postby Jack Sutton » Thu 9 Mar 2017 18:08

If anyone wants to play the new preview with me (PvP or PvE) just hit me up on Steam. (Jihadist Jack)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests

cron