Predictions for announcement from Noun during SNF

I'd wish next updates will improve vehicle pathing or target priority in AT guns/snipers and such.

Btw, why this DLC is worth half than the previous ones?
It says 3.99€ instead the 7.99€ for the others Theater of War.

Think the patch looks good and a clear step in the right direction.

With all the shit Relic`s got recently (and rightfully so), it is time to give credit where credit is due. The Steam Workshop updates, the Dev mode, the free content (maps, mud etc) and the fact that they did not spam out new commanders this time around, is all great news!

Big thanks to Relic & Noun

Good patch. Relic again shows that it can cut through the bullshit, and deliver what is really important.

Im especially excited about the building change.

Huge kudos for not forgetting the Camo bug!

Edited to add: This was before I realised there are a ton of unlisted ninja-changes.
How hard is it to type up a comprehensive change list? I mean, really?

I never called anyone or everyone stupid.

Now, maybe it is just me, but could anyone point me to where Noun or any other official says there would be a "BIG ANNOUNCEMENT" by Noun - because all I got from the pre-SNF hype was that Noun would make some announcements.

Well there you go, that explains everything.

I am stupid, for getting my info from other peoples posts. I haven't seen any official statement, this thread was my first contact with this (miss) information.

I expected big announcement, when in fact Noun never said that. Only cool new stuff, which it is.

Cold/Mud tech is ok in theory.
My suggestions:
...
-Reduce the penalty on retreat through deep snow (pathing is often retarded, and deep snow just makes this worse)
...

This is the sole reason why I always have Langreskaya winter vetoed. I'd say remove the retreat speed penalty through deep snow completely. That would be enough for me.

This is the sole reason why I always have Langreskaya winter vetoed. I'd say remove the retreat speed penalty through deep snow completely. That would be enough for me.

Glad you agree.

Cold Tech is "cool" (pun intended), but its too severe in its negatice effects.

Those effects magnitude should be quite simple to reduce, and that would imo be very much worth the time investing in, especially as they are touted as a selling point for this game.

We need a "Cold Tech Patch" that reduces the negative effects to where they have strategic importance, but arent so severe as to override essential gameplay.

Those effects magnitude should be quite simple to reduce, and that would imo be very much worth the time investing in, especially as they are touted as a selling point for this game.

They are some mechanics that make coldtech a pain in the ass.

Units in yellow cover protecting themselves from cold, like in a crater, get pushed outside by a friendly vehicle moving close. Then, the unit you thought safely sheltered start to die by cold without you noticing. It creates a paralel micromanagement game were you play against buggy mechanics instead a human player.

That happens plenty of times, were nearby mortar shells exploding, units pushing themselves, etc, throw out your units outside a cover or a fireplace warming area.

I think that it would be fine that, while blizzards are active, units idle more than 10 or 15 seconds would automatically search nearby cover to shelter the same way autocover works during gunfire.

Greeb, no offence, but I dont give a shit about a model or two moving out of cover during a blizzard.

They dont freeze in the few seconds it takes you to reposition them.
If you are being hit by a Mortar near a fire, you have to fuck off anyways, and consider yourself lucky if the Mortar doesnt kill the fire and make that objective a freezing point for you in a future engagement.

I completely and absolutely disagree with your suggestion that units should "automatically search nearby cover" after 10-15 of idle. I dont want my units going ANYWHERE or doing ANYTHING without me explicitly clicking them to do so.

You seem to have completely missed the point of my posts, which is that Cold Tech is good in theory, but in practice, its negative effects are too pronounced, to the point they override gameplay.

Let me restate my position for clarity:
My suggestions:
-Reduce the movement penalty in deep snow (including vehicles, proportionately)
-Reduce the penalty on retreat through deep snow (pathing is often retarded, and deep snow just makes this worse)
-Increase the time to freezing (currently its barely enough to make it to an adjacent sector. I understand that as a cool original limitation on advances during Blizzards, but its too stringent atm)
-Reduce the freezing multiplier in deep snow. (Standing in deep snow is tantamount to suicide)
-Increase LoS in Blizzard. (Cool effect, but too pronounced)
-Reduce Blizzard duration. (Again, cool strategic interlude, but too long)
-I dont know exacly what the rate of fire penalties are when Cold, but those too, should probably be reduced.

Greeb, no offence, but I dont give a shit about a model or two moving out of cover during a blizzard.

No offence, but that's because you don't actually play the game.

Units moving through other units, in a fireplace or cover, push them outside shelter.

It requires micro when playing 1vs1 to properly put them in cover, but in teamgames is a real pain in the ass when your teammate's units push yours outside shelter without you noticing it.

When you play at least ONE teamgame you will notice.

An autocover mechanic with a negligible radious only active during blizzards would prevent that. Or some way to relocate the units pushed outside.

Ok, fair point on the teamplay element.

I have a fix to that for your consideration.
Tell your teammate to stop forcing your units out of cover.
Hows that?

------->Here begins playercard bullshit started by Greeb. There goes the thread again...

As to your "dont actually play the game" comment.
Where is your proof of that?
Where the fuck do you get this into your head?
I play when I have time, which is less than Id like.
I DO however play, nor have I any intention of stopping, as unfortunately many have.

You have 300+ 2v2+ as Sov vs a grand total of only 7 games as Ost.
2 games in 1v1. Both Sov. 0 Ost.

Never EVER come at my playercard again instead of the topic of discussion.

Never EVER come at my playercard again instead of the topic of discussion.

It was you who answered my teamgame coldtech issue whitout having played never a teamgame.

And moreover, you used despective language again. Didn't anyone taught you politeness?

Im wondering what will concretly happen if Greeb brings Nullist's playercard again in the topic?

Greeb is kinda right.. he really does post more than he plays.

It was you who answered my teamgame coldtech issue whitout having played never a teamgame.

And moreover, you used despective language again. Didn't anyone taught you politeness?

Yes. I answered it.

If your teammate is forcing your units out of cover, how about you tell him to stop doing it.

There is your answer. Simple solution. Problem solved.

As to "despective" language. I havent used any.

If your teammate is forcing your units out of cover, how about you tell him to stop doing it.

There is your answer. Simple solution. Problem solved.

That confirms that you should play more this game.

As to "despective" language. I havent used any.

Jump back to quoted post12 Dec 2013, 16:32 PMNullist

Greeb, no offence, but I dont give a shit about a model or two moving out of cover during a blizzard.

Maybe in Finland this is a proper way to start a reply, but for the rest of the world isn't.

You might have missed the "no offence" part. And that I dont give a shit about it, has nothing to do with you, nor is it offensive to you.

It merely means I dont give a shit about it.

And as I stated, kindly and in the effort of helping you with your problem, I suggested you tell your teammates to not force your units out of cover.

Sorry if that offended you.

We'll, I will stop feeding you then.

I understand why GR mods banned you.

From a design perspective starvation doesn't fit into the setting of the game. That sort of attrition would be better reflected over a long period of time, whereas the CoH series focuses on specific battles that in the real world would last a few hours or maybe days.

We don't have the larger meta game where starvation would make sense.

In another context a game like FIFA or NHL has players age and retire (in career modes) but they don't do that in the middle of the football/hockey match.

Freezing to death however can happen in a much briefer time than starvation, or other attrition effects like mechanical failures or tanks running out of gas.

I was being sarcastic, but you are right. It's just one of many things that can sound realistic but don't really work.

A buddy of mine plays FIFA, and he was surprised to find he bought the game and couldn't play with a particular celebrity soccer player because in real life he was injured, and thus the game emulated that (it can be changed, but doe sit by default). I was flabbergasted

I have never been critical of deep snow (or mud for that matter) in its current implementation: I've said in the past that it could be more, but it is fine the way it is now. The key, imho, is that map designers need to be very, very careful where they put it. A lot of maps have it everywhere.

I'm sure a lot of players enjoy their current implementation, so its a personal opinion of mine.