Patch (v 1382)

Yuibernd
Sergeant Major
Posts: 271
Joined: Thu 2 May 2013 09:52
Contact:

Re: Patch (v 1382)

Postby Yuibernd » Fri 12 Jul 2013 08:14

I like how Eugen systematicaly destroys the game. Just good I already played 270 hours before that.

Well, its not like it was predicted already weeks ago, but just keep listening to nerf whiners Eugen, soon the game will be completely unplayable. After making infantry useless you just need to buff planes a bit more so everything else becomes useless.

Also: People believing the campaign can be fixed without creating a complete new AI. :lol: :lol: :lol:

v-snejok
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 656
Joined: Sat 25 May 2013 12:03
Contact:

Re: Patch (v 1382)

Postby v-snejok » Fri 12 Jul 2013 08:26

Radioshow wrote:
v-snejok wrote:
Yuibernd wrote:No Pact buff?

Looks like another week of no WAB. :roll:


You can play NATO, they are easymode now)


Someone got butthurt by NATO :lol: :lol: :lol:


Please do not comment on me and do not join with me in chat on the forum, you are not pleasing to me as a Troll.

User avatar
StormTalon627
Master Sergeant
Posts: 165
Joined: Sun 5 May 2013 05:37
Contact:

Re: Patch (v 1382)

Postby StormTalon627 » Fri 12 Jul 2013 10:02

Yuibernd wrote:I like how Eugen systematicaly destroys the game. Just good I already played 270 hours before that.

Well, its not like it was predicted already weeks ago, but just keep listening to nerf whiners Eugen, soon the game will be completely unplayable. After making infantry useless you just need to buff planes a bit more so everything else becomes useless.

Also: People believing the campaign can be fixed without creating a complete new AI. :lol: :lol: :lol:


I honestly don't think Eugen had this in mind, I don't think they would kill one of the cornerstones of a combined arms strategy game and let it turn into starcraft or some other boring RTS. I think it was just a very nasty unintended side effect that came from fixing a bug that made downed chopper inf nearly invincible, though I think the proper fix for this would be to only allow them to have a fraction of their rifle ammo and that is it (I mean, how could you lug out a bunch of LAW/RPG and MG ammo out of a burning wreck while under fire, they should just have whatever ammo is on them).

I am right about the whole "super inf nerf was a mistake and will be fixed" thing, right Eugen? Right? :?
Image

spinkick
Corporal
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue 4 Jun 2013 04:29
Contact:

Re: Patch (v 1382)

Postby spinkick » Fri 12 Jul 2013 16:09

Now that the bug is fixed all that they have to do to fix inf is to change the situations that cause them to go into panic in the first place. Of course you should have an accuracy penalty if you are freaking out.

Being passive aggressive or a baby about X pet issue does not help things at all. Lets be adults here and discuss the issues at hand. I'm sure they can work better with constructive thoughts rather than a bitchfest.

User avatar
Uncle_Joe
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 907
Joined: Thu 18 Oct 2012 07:01
Contact:

Re: Patch (v 1382)

Postby Uncle_Joe » Fri 12 Jul 2013 19:54

Well, it doesn't appear to have been any form of intended 'nerf' to infantry, but infantry were benefiting from a critical bug.

The problem is that this bug was reported in beta (and confirmed in the first week of launch) but never fixed until now. When beta balance was being addressed, this bug was in full force, greatly magnifying the effects of infantry...but the END RESULT was correct...properly used infantry were very good at defending close terrain.

Now the opposite is true. They are nearly useless anywhere except in town sieges and even there, it just takes longer to dislodge them. They are no longer truly dangerous.

What irks me the most is that apparently no testing or even theory-crafting arose before fixing a bug which DRAMATICALLY swings game balance. And now the game is far less interesting as a result.
"Don't you know that in the Service one must always choose the lesser of two weevils?"

User avatar
EliteSniper
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 659
Joined: Wed 22 May 2013 07:28
Location: Stratis

Re: Patch (v 1382)

Postby EliteSniper » Sat 13 Jul 2013 01:59

Uncle_Joe wrote:Well, it doesn't appear to have been any form of intended 'nerf' to infantry, but infantry were benefiting from a critical bug.

The problem is that this bug was reported in beta (and confirmed in the first week of launch) but never fixed until now. When beta balance was being addressed, this bug was in full force, greatly magnifying the effects of infantry...but the END RESULT was correct...properly used infantry were very good at defending close terrain.

Now the opposite is true. They are nearly useless anywhere except in town sieges and even there, it just takes longer to dislodge them. They are no longer truly dangerous.

What irks me the most is that apparently no testing or even theory-crafting arose before fixing a bug which DRAMATICALLY swings game balance. And now the game is far less interesting as a result.


+1

User avatar
Custer85
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 797
Joined: Thu 2 Aug 2012 13:36
Contact:

Re: Patch (v 1382)

Postby Custer85 » Sat 13 Jul 2013 19:45

I have the feeling that the number of players playing W:AB online is getting lower and lower. One thing that might be a problem and a symptom at the same time is the fact that most games are full of NATO players waiting for PACT players.

One of the biggest problems might be the fact that NATO offers more playable decks then PACT.

I have 10 NATO decks: (Bold: the ones I play regulary)
1975, mixed
1980, armored, mixed

Normal mixed deck
Germany, armored
Germany
French
British
USA
USA, marine
1980, USA

I only have 2 PACT decks: (Bold: the ones I play regulary)
Soviet Russia
East Germany

I have once been a PACT only player, so only having two decks that suite my playstyle is boring.

Its fun to create and play new NATO decks because some of the bonuses are actually bonuses. You rarely sacrifice any units. Most of the time you get substitutes for NATOs high end units that are nearly as good but also spammable when you play era decks. With the National decks you have 3 or 4 nations that feature units werth playing from every category which makes them fairly competitive.

On the PACT side it feels like you are only sacrificing something when you are not playing russian national decks. Its still fun to create decks for other minor nations and even era decks, but once you compare them to what you got in your NATO decks you dont even save the deck you just created.

I know its hard to do but: Eugen, please make PACT fun to play. :roll:

User avatar
DeuZerre
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 11125
Joined: Mon 27 Feb 2012 23:17
Location: Universe, Galaxy, Solar System, Earth, Ground, Eurasian Continent, Main Landmass.
Contact:

Re: Patch (v 1382)

Postby DeuZerre » Sat 13 Jul 2013 20:48

Well, I'm often playing PACT because of that. Not that I don't like playing PACT, but I'd sometimes like to dust off my many NATO national decks.
Image
Marshal honoris causa
FLX wrote:Removing the weaknesses from the divisions leads to all divisions being the same in the long run. We won't proceed like that.

User avatar
Uncle_Joe
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 907
Joined: Thu 18 Oct 2012 07:01
Contact:

Re: Patch (v 1382)

Postby Uncle_Joe » Sat 13 Jul 2013 20:58

Custer85 wrote:I have the feeling that the number of players playing W:AB online is getting lower and lower. One thing that might be a problem and a symptom at the same time is the fact that most games are full of NATO players waiting for PACT players.

One of the biggest problems might be the fact that NATO offers more playable decks then PACT.

I have 10 NATO decks: (Bold: the ones I play regulary)
1975, mixed
1980, armored, mixed

Normal mixed deck
Germany, armored
Germany
French
British
USA
USA, marine
1980, USA

I only have 2 PACT decks: (Bold: the ones I play regulary)
Soviet Russia
East Germany

I have once been a PACT only player, so only having two decks that suite my playstyle is boring.

Its fun to create and play new NATO decks because some of the bonuses are actually bonuses. You rarely sacrifice any units. Most of the time you get substitutes for NATOs high end units that are nearly as good but also spammable when you play era decks. With the National decks you have 3 or 4 nations that feature units werth playing from every category which makes them fairly competitive.

On the PACT side it feels like you are only sacrificing something when you are not playing russian national decks. Its still fun to create decks for other minor nations and even era decks, but once you compare them to what you got in your NATO decks you dont even save the deck you just created.

I know its hard to do but: Eugen, please make PACT fun to play. :roll:


Yup, Friday night, peak time in the US and only 800 people were online. It took quite a while to get some of the games off the ground.

Partly I'm going to guess it was the 'balance' patch that most people perceived as a major Pact nerf, part of it is possibly Thursday patch which crippled most infantry and solidified the constant tank rushes, but a big part of it is likely that Civ5 just released it's expansion and the Euros just got it this week and are busy playing it.

But for my money, I've had a lot less desire to play now that I see so many tanks after tanks after more tanks. Any my response is tanks, planes, helos...just like everyone else is using.
"Don't you know that in the Service one must always choose the lesser of two weevils?"

Yuibernd
Sergeant Major
Posts: 271
Joined: Thu 2 May 2013 09:52
Contact:

Re: Patch (v 1382)

Postby Yuibernd » Sat 13 Jul 2013 21:58

Custer85 wrote:I have the feeling that the number of players playing W:AB online is getting lower and lower. One thing that might be a problem and a symptom at the same time is the fact that most games are full of NATO players waiting for PACT players.


Like I already said, it was predicted already weeks ago that this would happen. For me the point to abandon the boat was the avaiability nerf for pact tanks.
Eugen should roll back the last two patches as soon as possible and hope people are coming back, which I highly doubt will happen.
I wont play W:AB again before pact gets a mayor buff. (And no, Iam not a Pact fanboy, I even have more played games as Nato but I hate to see how Pact simply gets nerfed to death)

Return to “Wargame : AirLand Battle”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests