WG4 Vision: What works, what doesn't, what needs improved?

User avatar
another505
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13128
Joined: Sun 21 Jul 2013 05:18
Location: Hiatus
Contact:

Re: WG4 Vision: What works, what doesn't, what needs improved?

Postby another505 » Tue 23 Jan 2018 01:05

keldon wrote:
alphafoxtrot wrote:No it isn't by any metric outside of the groups that want US screwed.


It's a DLC problem and not US problem per se. USA is nasty/cancerous enough in a 2v2+ enviroment.

I remember playing with you in 2v2 against israel and USA(or norad?). Pure cancer.
Never again, i wanted to face against Israel and USA together.....

Patriot
Longbow
A10?
Nighthawk
atacms
raven
Merkeva BS
AGL merk
Maglan
F-4 LGB + F-15 LGB
160mm Mortar
Tzefa E + pre nerfed barak 2..
Image
Of Salt

urogard
Brigadier
Posts: 3055
Joined: Sun 4 May 2014 13:31
Contact:

Re: WG4 Vision: What works, what doesn't, what needs improved?

Postby urogard » Tue 23 Jan 2018 02:36

Markenzwieback wrote:
Razzmann wrote:The whole playstyle revolves around min maxing high point units with Rifleman spam. However cancerous some of these units may be, they do fit.

These units are unfit to the games scope and fail to find their equivalent in other nations.

Regarding US rifleman spam: That's what you have to rely upon when you don't have any other cost-effective infantry. And one can easily apply the same tactic with other nations/coalitions, which tends to happen less because they have more cost-effective infantry options available to the,m.

But you did use reservist with Eurocorps too, didn't you? That isn't too far off the min-maxing argument either. ;) Its not just the US, the entire meta resolves around this concept; in more or less highlighted ways.

One major problem with current WG implementation is that you're not punished for using super-cheap meatshield units.

If you send a bunch of reservist/line infantry squads/5pts transports to eat up tank shells while your SF and superheavies are advancing right behind that, then that's a problem with implementation of mechanics as opposed to a min-max problem.

An exploding M113 shouldn't panick all infantry squads 75m around it and make them instantly useless at combat. But sending 40 reservists to their deaths as cannon fodder over an open field should make a dent in the morale of your SF/Superheavy 150-500m behind.

User avatar
Grabbed_by_the_Spets
General
Posts: 6550
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2012 11:40
Contact:

Re: WG4 Vision: What works, what doesn't, what needs improved?

Postby Grabbed_by_the_Spets » Tue 23 Jan 2018 08:25

alphafoxtrot wrote:
Razzmann wrote:
Grabbed_by_the_Spets wrote:the internal balancing team at Eugen

US is fine.

No it isn't by any metric outside of the groups that want US screwed. Even the US haters and pro-balance peps on the Spacebattles and Sufficent Velocity forums acknowledge this.


You're mashing words here.

People are acknowledging that there are holes in certain parts of the US army that shouldn't be there. For example, US lacks any proper Short ranged anti-tank unit and their Bradley's are rocking up with obsolete TOW's for what they should have, it leaves a hole that shouldn't be there. US is not the only nation to have this issue, in fact, just about all nations have this issue.

US still has some of the best units in game, they are still a bloody tough opponent. Meta wise they are still very viable as both a nation and a collation.
Image

User avatar
keldon
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2044
Joined: Tue 16 Sep 2014 16:38
Location: Liebe Grüße aus Stuttgart
Contact:

Re: WG4 Vision: What works, what doesn't, what needs improved?

Postby keldon » Tue 23 Jan 2018 14:16

another505 wrote:I remember playing with you in 2v2 against israel and USA(or norad?). Pure cancer.
Never again, i wanted to face against Israel and USA together.....

Patriot
Longbow
A10?
Nighthawk
atacms
raven
Merkeva BS
AGL merk
Maglan
F-4 LGB + F-15 LGB
160mm Mortar
Tzefa E + pre nerfed barak 2..


It was gainst uncle Sam and David, i still have the replay. But chin up, at least you flooded them in ASFs 8-)
Image
> Sources for tuning Red Dragons --- Sources for tuning Blue Dragons <
亲们!大国梦哦!
小钱钱,真心甜,鼓钱包,放腰间,大国梦,早日圆 。啷个哩个啷♪

User avatar
another505
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13128
Joined: Sun 21 Jul 2013 05:18
Location: Hiatus
Contact:

Re: WG4 Vision: What works, what doesn't, what needs improved?

Postby another505 » Tue 23 Jan 2018 17:49

keldon wrote:
another505 wrote:I remember playing with you in 2v2 against israel and USA(or norad?). Pure cancer.
Never again, i wanted to face against Israel and USA together.....

Patriot
Longbow
A10?
Nighthawk
atacms
raven
Merkeva BS
AGL merk
Maglan
F-4 LGB + F-15 LGB
160mm Mortar
Tzefa E + pre nerfed barak 2..


It was gainst uncle Sam and David, i still have the replay. But chin up, at least you flooded them in ASFs 8-)

I deleted all my replays. I want to ask you for it, yet i dont want to get cancer again :cry:
Image
Of Salt

Sleksa
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2265
Joined: Tue 14 May 2013 12:26
Contact:

Re: WG4 Vision: What works, what doesn't, what needs improved?

Postby Sleksa » Fri 26 Jan 2018 01:42

Jemnite wrote:The Finnish crotale has double the missiles for some godforssaken reason for about 1/4th the cost more, which means you are effective getting double the effectiveness of a very good AA platform for just 15 points which is ridiculous.


Image
Image

urogard
Brigadier
Posts: 3055
Joined: Sun 4 May 2014 13:31
Contact:

Re: WG4 Vision: What works, what doesn't, what needs improved?

Postby urogard » Fri 26 Jan 2018 02:51

Sleksa wrote:
Jemnite wrote:The Finnish crotale has double the missiles for some godforssaken reason for about 1/4th the cost more, which means you are effective getting double the effectiveness of a very good AA platform for just 15 points which is ridiculous.

pic

But seriously, you got to applaud that logic.

M110A2 has 10 HE and carries 2 rounds costs 90 pts
Malka has 10 HE and carries 8 rounds costs 120 pts
You're getting 4x the effectiveness of a high damage output arty for just 30 pts, which is ridiculous.

User avatar
Grabbed_by_the_Spets
General
Posts: 6550
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2012 11:40
Contact:

Re: WG4 Vision: What works, what doesn't, what needs improved?

Postby Grabbed_by_the_Spets » Fri 26 Jan 2018 04:53

urogard wrote:M110A2 has 10 HE and carries 2 rounds costs 90 pts
Malka has 10 HE and carries 8 rounds costs 120 pts


What's the aim time on both of them, it's honestly one of the biggest factors in artillery.

The super long aim time why no one uses the 170mm NK artillery despite it's accuracy and HE.
Image

Fodder
Sergeant Major
Posts: 287
Joined: Fri 7 Oct 2016 20:15
Contact:

Re: WG4 Vision: What works, what doesn't, what needs improved?

Postby Fodder » Fri 26 Jan 2018 07:07

Sleksa wrote:
Image

Honestly tho, Finland has better Crotale than France. (Crotale NG)
Last edited by Fodder on Fri 26 Jan 2018 16:24, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
nuke92
Lieutenant
Posts: 1119
Joined: Tue 14 Jun 2016 21:51
Contact:

Re: WG4 Vision: What works, what doesn't, what needs improved?

Postby nuke92 » Fri 26 Jan 2018 11:27

My greatest fear is that a future EUG cold war - WG successor, hell WG4, could loose medium ranged air defences, 155/152mm and bigger caliber arty and MLRs because of their range, because "that was the feedback and this is what the majority (in reality a handfull of people) of the WG community wants".

And instead get small maps without the usual 5km bufferzones on all sides "because nobody needs them and fans wanted smaller maps which automatically don't allow for heavy sams and arty and helo flanking".

It will have offmap arty with creeping artillery barrages and what not and unique divisions instead of a proper armory for balance with every unit having it's function and niche in your deck. "Because nobody wants 1000+ units".

Also with a suppression and morale system dictating the battle and a yoyo effect for your MBTs because the first shot counts and causes it to tactically retreat towards enemy lines in reverse.

Does some of this sound familiar? This was basically what motivated them for the SD changes in game design, with a lot of these arguments posted on reddit iirc in September.

Because SD44 + cold war + feedback for SD44 = success = Wargame successor...
...and should it fail it will be the last nail in the coffin for any sort of cold war game :(
Image
"Spike MR is more accurate I'll give you that but Konkurs has more range and isn't prototype" - Warchat™ July 2017
"ALB added planes, RD added ships, WG4 will add Ekranoplans" - Warchat™ August 2017

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 24 guests