"WEE for what it truly is": a different angle

User avatar
OpusTheFowl
General
Posts: 6660
Joined: Sun 26 Feb 2012 19:52
Location: White Rock, Canada
Contact:

Re: "WEE for what it truly is": a different angle

Postby OpusTheFowl » Fri 11 Jan 2013 18:34

What I would suggest (as I totally agree with the spam issue) is a 'rate of loss' factor that helps govern your overall force's moral.

It doesn't matter if it's grunts or high end tanks; if you lose a lot in a short period, your whole force should be temporarily hindered (moral). If you have a Cobra rush with 20 units and they all die within a minute, the Lep spam coming down the road as a secondary spam rush should also be effected by that...not long but enough that it makes losing lots of units quickly very counterproductive.

User avatar
D-M
Posts: 8794
Joined: Sat 23 Jul 2011 11:10
Contact:

Re: "WEE for what it truly is": a different angle

Postby D-M » Fri 11 Jan 2013 18:35

We don't know yet the solutions the dev have considered but don't worry Sotek, from what many press articles said, they are aware of the problem and have thought of something to solve it.

If only they would talk about, thought i guess that if they do, then the whole forum would probably be engulfed in a Syria-esque flame war.
Image

User avatar
solvens
Major
Posts: 1989
Joined: Fri 1 Jul 2011 00:56
Contact:

Re: "WEE for what it truly is": a different angle

Postby solvens » Fri 11 Jan 2013 18:40

Sotek wrote:Now, assuming that WEE aims at being competitive

It will never be truly competitive, (as a SC2 for example). I doubt that a game where weapons can miss and have variable damage will interest real pro players in an E-Sport competition.

Otherwise I agree with you.

FirestarterMKD wrote:Re-pricing units solves nothing.
There needs to be a nerf on units traveling on roads, as I've suggested before, but nobody cares/listens.

You're well placed to know that almost every person at Eugen is entirely busy with WALB development. They are a company, they have to make money, and sadly reworking the core mecanics of the game isn't profit-making considering the game is at the end of its life.

Nonetheless, I hope there will be something like that in WALB.
IMO, one of the best propositions I saw was to make destroyed vehicles block the roads, so blobs are slowed down.
Image

User avatar
elmoking
Lieutenant
Posts: 1457
Joined: Fri 19 Oct 2012 22:50
Location: Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia
Contact:

Re: "WEE for what it truly is": a different angle

Postby elmoking » Fri 11 Jan 2013 18:45

DeuZerre wrote:One of the other things that could be done would be to increase map size: You send recon early and have time to see the "Braindead" tactics and react accordingly, istead of being overwhelmed by that single unit. Really a "See -> React" where recon is the key, even more than these days.
Open range, bridge too far and mile island in 1v1 ranked rather than, say, storm eye or summer night. this would make for much more intelligent play imo.
Image

ikalugin
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 10430
Joined: Sun 6 Nov 2011 01:00
Contact:

Re: "WEE for what it truly is": a different angle

Postby ikalugin » Fri 11 Jan 2013 18:57

OpusTheFowl wrote:What I would suggest (as I totally agree with the spam issue) is a 'rate of loss' factor that helps govern your overall force's moral.

It doesn't matter if it's grunts or high end tanks; if you lose a lot in a short period, your whole force should be temporarily hindered (moral). If you have a Cobra rush with 20 units and they all die within a minute, the Lep spam coming down the road as a secondary spam rush should also be effected by that...not long but enough that it makes losing lots of units quickly very counterproductive.

Both would be solved by the ADATS :P
Image
Spoiler : :
We need more missilez code for the missilez god.
Praslovan:
"Tactical Ikalugin inbound on this position in 10... 9..."
Image

User avatar
enohka
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 928
Joined: Sun 21 Oct 2012 04:25
Location: HEAP
Contact:

Re: "WEE for what it truly is": a different angle

Postby enohka » Fri 11 Jan 2013 18:59

elmoking wrote:
DeuZerre wrote:One of the other things that could be done would be to increase map size: You send recon early and have time to see the "Braindead" tactics and react accordingly, istead of being overwhelmed by that single unit. Really a "See -> React" where recon is the key, even more than these days.
Open range, bridge too far and mile island in 1v1 ranked rather than, say, storm eye or summer night. this would make for much more intelligent play imo.



this would make the game nothing but bored... Three mile island is even too big for 2v2 ranked..

User avatar
praslovan
Major-General
Posts: 3939
Joined: Tue 20 Sep 2011 21:56
Location: Slav inhabited Alps
Contact:

Re: "WEE for what it truly is": a different angle

Postby praslovan » Fri 11 Jan 2013 19:47

OpusTheFowl wrote:
Spoiler : :
What I would suggest (as I totally agree with the spam issue) is a 'rate of loss' factor that helps govern your overall force's moral.

It doesn't matter if it's grunts or high end tanks; if you lose a lot in a short period, your whole force should be temporarily hindered (moral). If you have a Cobra rush with 20 units and they all die within a minute, the Lep spam coming down the road as a secondary spam rush should also be effected by that...not long but enough that it makes losing lots of units quickly very counterproductive.

Coming at right angle a pack of rocked pod helos can wipe out most defenders in 3 seconds (or MLRS barrage while we are at it). That would mean that you who are rushed will get even bigger malus by totally busting your morale.

This idea is as good as calm infantry jumping out of cover because they think stupid.

Morale mechanics are not perfect at all. Adding more to it will only brake it more.

Thing that needs to be done is limiting player to deploy enormous amounts of certain units. Or deploying them at all (empty cheap wheeled APCs, Mi24 base variant without inf ect.) Or something like that.

Shify
Sergeant
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat 1 Dec 2012 23:34
Contact:

Re: "WEE for what it truly is": a different angle

Postby Shify » Fri 11 Jan 2013 19:57

OP NATO!

User avatar
Firestarter
Lieutenant
Posts: 1312
Joined: Wed 21 Mar 2012 22:05
Location: Plunjing Valley
Contact:

Re: "WEE for what it truly is": a different angle

Postby Firestarter » Fri 11 Jan 2013 19:58

OpusTheFowl wrote:What I would suggest (as I totally agree with the spam issue) is a 'rate of loss' factor that helps govern your overall force's moral.

It doesn't matter if it's grunts or high end tanks; if you lose a lot in a short period, your whole force should be temporarily hindered (moral). If you have a Cobra rush with 20 units and they all die within a minute, the Lep spam coming down the road as a secondary spam rush should also be effected by that...not long but enough that it makes losing lots of units quickly very counterproductive.

I suggested that a long while ago but there was an angry mob coming after me :)
Image

DarrickS
J'aime quand on me fait du mal
Posts: 1245
Joined: Mon 13 Feb 2012 01:43
Contact:

Re: "WEE for what it truly is": a different angle

Postby DarrickS » Fri 11 Jan 2013 20:11

Sotek wrote:This is likely my last attempt at reaching the developers and some of my fellow players. My disappointment in WEE has not wavered, but I still have hope for WALB. I will try to convey my bafflement through a different angle, so it can serve a useful purpose for the next installment.

Before everything, let's please not talk about my match or any other. This is no place for drama. My opponent deserved his victory and, as I said in the first place, I should have played differently. Bentguru, Enohka, Komaromi were right in pointing at the holes in my defense, but that was not the point I was trying to make, so I will try to do so more clearly.

So, what is the problem with WEE?

Any top-level player is only a mistake away from losing to a newcomer who is rushing/spamming.

Now, assuming that WEE aims at being competitive and considering the steep learning curve, am I really the only one seeing a problem here? Are there any other STR where a mistake is all it takes for anyone to take down the best? Gaining skill in WEE takes time, but the reward that comes with it does not seem that compelling.

Of course, the "pro" has to make a mistake somewhere - some will no doubt emphasize that point -, but in a "standard" WEE game without initial spamrush, the same player could easily make a dozen mistakes and still come out on top, as in any STR true to the name. Such is the reward that comes with skill/experience.

Given the current state of WEE, I guarantee that I could train a 12-y old to rush/spam and that after a single day he would be able to beat 75% of his opponents. Is this possible in any other serious STR? This experiment has actually been successfully carried out by DarrickS.

That's what I meant when I said that I finally "saw WEE for what it truly is". And please, I am not calling myself a "pro" or Rapeman a noob.

Now, does anyone think that it is satisfactory?


I wont buy WALB.

I have buy WEE for this, like wrote here : http://store.steampowered.com/app/58610 ... uggest__13
"Wargame : European Escalation est un jeu de stratégie en temps-réel intense et spectaculaire, où réalisme et stratégie prennent une place d’honneur !"
Realism & strategy with a place of honnor

WEE was supposed to be a game, not a demo of WALB!
It is!
Past, past is far.

Return to “Wargame : European Escalation”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests