Megiddo wrote:Question of realism, yes, and fair balance...Anyways, it's Eugen call, and maybe they could indicate their decision on the matter...if something like this realism improvement is a conceivable thing, or if it's simply out of the equation.
Nope. It's not a question of realism at all ! Since most ATGMs can be fitted with anti-personnel charges, like the Hellfire, Ataka, Metys, Spike-LR, etc ...
I won't spoil the patchlog in details, but don't worry : we worked on the javelin anti-personnel capacity.
I'm not a weapon specialist for sure...but nice to hear about the future changes
kinda see what you mean about anti personnel missiles, but most of the time those charges are used against bunkers or buildings, so to say enclosed space objects, with charges able to bring a big pressure and heat into those spaces...or they're used the Fire and Forget way, at very short distance, just for the HE damage...maybe like the basic, non upgraded javelin in AoA.http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/90m ... iles-0441/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9M120_Atakahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9K115-2_Metis-Mhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spike_(missile
Always thought that a bullet was the perfect anti-personnel missile in the open, not those launchers having a ROF of 2-4 missiles per minute...wasting one of their precious rounds on something else than a building full of Tangos, or an armored valuable target
Brought to the game, if we consider that infantry can already take damage from almost all sources and type of weapons, the argument was mainly to say that such long range NLOS missiles seem a bit too much against uncovered infantry, and unfair for the gameplay...They often break the possible "natural" layer of counters we should develop with riflemen, snipers or infantry/light mortar units against infantry launchers, or with infantry like the Viper or the SAS against the Spike LR Puma, against the Shershens or the NLOS Guardian for example. and it could avoid the spams of always the same, strong, "multi-purpose" units.
Maybe that's what you're working on, but in this case the NLOS Javelins and more generally the ATGMs could/should have a shorter range against infantry units (outside of buildings at least)...and this kind of "Fire and Forget", direct sight firing authorization at shorter range, with a direct trajectory and enough dispersion/dodge rate to miss infantry, hit the ground and create this kind of HE blast radius only... So to say working a bit more like the Viper, or the non upgraded Javelin, even if upgraded...
Then about the Puma, what would you do? letting the Spike-LR locking and firing against all types of units including infantry, at long distance and without even having sight on these small, mobile infantry targets? nerfing the missile firing possibilities against infantry units, or simply making the Puma to switch to autocanons?
The same for the Guardian and other attack choppers : why not advantaging their secondary armaments against infantry, like rockets and autocanons, with a longer and more "natural" firing range, and overall a better ROF with their canons? That's quite a big work to recalibrate the ranges and counter ranges against choppers i agree about that, but still...you see the problems they have, their short, kinda unfair range against MGs and HMGs...given their physics an their short attack ranges it's really hard to place them, where they should have the upper hand more easily against those units...and as a consequence the differences you have to make between planes and choppers for the AA ranges, or the kind of dodge rates you have to introduce with the chaffs upgrades...
Then there is the LOS system argument and the numerous amount of "transparent" scenery elements...though you already did some tweaks to improve that, it seems.
Anyways, you certainly already know that many units are left as orphans, like the infantry/light vehicle mortars, also the basic infantry somewhere...imho the only "all purpose" armaments should be the "bullet" ones like MGs, HMGs or autocanons...At the limit grenadiers or unguided rockets as well, but that's it...too much powerful units and armaments are "all-purpose"...Maybe that the depth of the counter system and the "coherent realism" of the game could benefit from more specialized units and firing ranges or firing authorizations, don't you think?
Then, many people seem to think the same way...A javelin could certainly be more expensive than a Marine. For my part, i also think that all the price curves for units could be higher to avoid the spams and limit the number of units on the field, and more generally that the HP/Armor levels/power of ALL units could be higher and really grow across the game course.. to have the combat lasting a bit more, to make a real difference between softcounters and hardcounters...and to have a better sensation of "toughness" or efficiency with less units as we go to the tech tree...Hard to say in English, but imo the effects of the counters are not apprehensible enough because the HP levels are generally too low to really notice them, the hit rates/dodge rates system is really unclear, we don't have enough time (HP levels) to retreat, regroup, flank, circle...in a word, fight! Imho we should have more time to develop combat techniques like placement, kiting, splitting or else...i hope you see what i mean. the engagements should last longer with less units involved, to my sense. To put the emphasis on the value of reinforcements, then the snowball effects.
Let's take the time and make the changes or tweaks to obtain a great reboot, that's all we say. You already did great efforts and good changes, keep them coming please