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 » Sat 3 Feb 2018 20:19

To me about SF, is for game flavour
Each nation/coalition has a different mix of good/alright/bad in different categories line/shock/sf

for example
CMW is more line/shock (not say SAS is bad, but you dont really spam them or have them as your main fighting force)

USSR and USA is decent shock with a medium mix of sf/line
Both RD and EB heavily relies on shock and SF
Finland relies on line/shock
and ofc, some like scandi just have good in every category (gev 90, fsk etc. )
Image
Of Salt

urogard
Brigadier
Posts: 3061
Joined: Sun 4 May 2014 13:31
Contact:

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

Postby urogard » Sat 3 Feb 2018 22:12

high_melanin wrote:
urogard wrote:

Before this game dies I want to play a 1vs1 with you.

Image

high_melanin
Sergeant
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu 25 Jan 2018 12:02
Contact:

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

Postby high_melanin » Sat 3 Feb 2018 22:16

urogard wrote:
high_melanin wrote:
urogard wrote:

Before this game dies I want to play a 1vs1 with you.

Image


No, I am saying I find your statements very off. It would be fun to see how you play.

Maybe you missed something but there will be no balance.

urogard
Brigadier
Posts: 3061
Joined: Sun 4 May 2014 13:31
Contact:

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

Postby urogard » Sat 3 Feb 2018 22:26

high_melanin wrote:No, I am saying I find your statements very off.

I fail to see the relevance of your subjective opinion about my statements when you're incapable to objectively argue on their merit.

high_melanin wrote:Maybe you missed something but there will be no balance.

Oh I'm fully aware of how EUG isn't intending on fixing any of the hundreds of inconsistencies they have going in the current armory.
This thread is about a hypothetical WG4.

high_melanin
Sergeant
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu 25 Jan 2018 12:02
Contact:

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

Postby high_melanin » Sat 3 Feb 2018 22:32

urogard wrote:I fail to see the relevance of your subjective opinion on a topic when you're incapable to objectively argue on its merit.


I don't care about having an argument to be honest. It is a dead forum about a dead game. I lurked here for a while and I find interesting how the ideas here seem to be so much different compared to what I know about the game. Why don't you give me this last blaze of excitement before the game is buried and play a 1vs1 against me?

urogard wrote:This thread is about a hypothetical WG4.


As stated multiple times by eugen, SD is WG4.

User avatar
HrcAk47
Colonel
Posts: 2788
Joined: Sat 3 May 2014 18:00
Contact:

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

Postby HrcAk47 » Sat 3 Feb 2018 22:58

urogard wrote:
high_melanin wrote:No, I am saying I find your statements very off.

I fail to see the relevance of your subjective opinion about my statements when you're incapable to objectively argue on their merit.


lol. Hegelian dialectics are not the truth. Rather, prove your proficiency of the game to convince us commoners that you know how to play.

Your comments simply prove otherwise.
The SEAD never bothered me anyway.

SMB Yugoslavia Retexture Mod, now released, v.1.0

User avatar
FrangibleCover
Lieutenant
Posts: 1455
Joined: Mon 14 Nov 2016 21:34
Contact:

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

Postby FrangibleCover » Sat 3 Feb 2018 23:40

urogard wrote:
high_melanin wrote:Maybe you missed something but there will be no balance.

Oh I'm fully aware of how EUG isn't intending on fixing any of the hundreds of inconsistencies they have going in the current armory.
This thread is about a hypothetical WG4.

Do you know, I don't even think you realise why this is a strange reply. You see inconsistencies and imbalance as the same thing.

Here's the crux of the matter: Would you prefer a model fix for T-80U or a price change for M-84A?
What if Wargame stuck to timeframe?
Image

urogard
Brigadier
Posts: 3061
Joined: Sun 4 May 2014 13:31
Contact:

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

Postby urogard » Sun 4 Feb 2018 11:56

FrangibleCover wrote:Here's the crux of the matter: Would you prefer a model fix for T-80U or a price change for M-84A?

Mu

urogard
Brigadier
Posts: 3061
Joined: Sun 4 May 2014 13:31
Contact:

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

Postby urogard » Sun 4 Feb 2018 12:34

FrangibleCover wrote:
urogard wrote:
high_melanin wrote:Maybe you missed something but there will be no balance.

Oh I'm fully aware of how EUG isn't intending on fixing any of the hundreds of inconsistencies they have going in the current armory.
This thread is about a hypothetical WG4.

Do you know, I don't even think you realise why this is a strange reply. You see inconsistencies and imbalance as the same thing.

Inconsistencies are a subset of imbalance in the game
viewtopic.php?f=155&t=58970
viewtopic.php?f=155&t=57789 [this was the thread that highlighted T-80A availability discrepancy, fixed in Red Nation Pack DLC]

There's a difference between inconsistencies and generic balance issues.
- Generic balance issues are highly subjective where consensus sometimes forms but mostly doesn't, mostly because the arguments are based on theorycrafting (e.g. changing accuracy of an RPG/ATGM or changing its AP value, or anything else) [situation X happens often when feature A is useful, but situation Y happens rarely when feature A is bad] and then the debate continues in a circle.
- Inconsistencies are based on hard data where the multivariate formula to determine price of a unit does not match its armory price (in layman's terms: two units which belong to the same class have different stats but have the same price / have the same stats but have a different price).

Example [from the plane thread]
Spoiler : :
Image

This is a price discrepancy pure and simple, nothing else. Just like Malka/Pion vis a vis to the M110/A2

Case in point: Any of the 5 people could have posted the numbers to show that Malka/Pion have indeed the correct price, that would have shut down my argument completely. Instead they chose to challenge me on various grounds other than the hard data I posted [the data they demanded to be shown in the first place].

Inconsistencies exist in 2 sets, the irrelevant/cosmetic set like models, unit icons, etc. and the set which is part of balance one subset of which contains price and availability (and in a few cases veterancy) discrepancies which is by definition objective [because we have the data available in the armory]. The other subset which is part of balance would be the (non-)standardization between unit families and using RL data, but that's not the topic of debate right now.

One could try to claim that certain units/weapons should not be included due to being OOTF or exports or w/e and say those are also inconsistencies. But considering we still don't know the rules EUG used to determine what is OOTF or isn't, then you can't declare anything being an inconsistency since there is no objective standard to compare it to. (At least with wrong models or loadouts you have RL data)

urogard
Brigadier
Posts: 3061
Joined: Sun 4 May 2014 13:31
Contact:

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

Postby urogard » Sun 4 Feb 2018 12:39

high_melanin wrote:Why don't you give me this last blaze of excitement before the game is buried and play a 1vs1 against me?

You'll get the same response as the dozens of people who asked for a 1v1 in dota.

high_melanin wrote:As stated multiple times by eugen, SD is WG4.

#1 Please provide a direct quote, I must have missed this. I think they may or may not have mentioned something about a spiritual successor, but I've never seen WG4 stated by EUG.
#2 Most people seem to disagree.

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests