What happened to blizzards?
Posts: 317
I agree that they are more annoying than fun in their current iteration, but I wouldve prefered a change in the blizzard-mechanics instead of just getting rid of blizzards alltogether in newer maps.
There were countless suggestions on how to improve blizzards and make them an interesting gameplay element. But well, other stuff seems to be more important...I just think it had great potential
Posts: 2115 | Subs: 1
Posts: 1617
I don't recall soviets getting magical cold resistance that the Germans don't.
In fact, only OKW get that upgrade.
It's not about cold resistance.
Just the fact that soviets could sneak up to the german lines and wreack havoc. Blizzards helped the soviets to get up close and break the german forces. I lost countless games and won more thanks to blizzards.
Posts: 85
Posts: 1355
Posts: 322
People will complain about games they lose because of the blizzard, but people complain about everything, so whatever.
Posts: 1617
Repeated blizzards are boring but in general they are a great idea, IMO. There should be one raging blizzard per match, landing late-game as measured by the VP counter, possibly with stronger effects than the current one. Timing the blizzard with the VPs will increase urgency, as the arrival of the storm heralds the oncoming final assault, whether it be done in haste ahead of the weather or meticulously executed under the cover of snow.
People will complain about games they lose because of the blizzard, but people complain about everything, so whatever.
Sorry to tell you that balance applies to maps as well. Every game needs balanced maps, I hope you know why.
Posts: 322
edit - Great, since you do veto them I'm not sure why you would condescendingly dismiss ideas about improving a mechanic that you don't currently like.
Posts: 1617
If you're implying that certain factions have an intrinsic advantage that's no doubt something worth taking into account. But you realise they're still in the game at the moment? Sounds like you must veto all the blizzard maps because you think they're terribly unbalanced.
Yep, blizzard maps are a pain in the ass and I hate when the games defeats me, not my opponent, that's why they should be changed/removed. It's frustrating to fight on a map where your opponent has the upper hand from the start. Apart from that not only the blizzard maps, I veto those maps that are against my played faction.
Stalingrad (Ty for removing that map) - Why would I play on that map with Ostheer?
Semois - One of the worst map for USF, I avoid it
Minks - Very Axis favored IMO and has limited flanking routes, why would I fight on this map?
PS; the veto system not always works.
Posts: 89 | Subs: 1
tl;dr if you hate blizzard maps just veto them. Problem solved.
Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4
Posts: 1384
Infantry don't freeze to death that fast, and you can always just build a firepit. I really enjoyed how reduced visibility made attacking the enemy easier (Suddenly emplacements became less effective), transports and garrisons became more important for visibility and warmth, deepsnow and ice added depth to pathing your units around the map intelligently etc etc.
Seems to me like none of you who hate them bothered to actually adapt to them properly and just ran your units around with their heads cut off through the snow.
Posts: 317
Posts: 3052 | Subs: 15
And even if i didnt lag,all the deep snow,ICE RNG,freezing to death, and just overall BS that comes from being in a blizzard would make me veto them.
Theyre fine,and cool,in a custom game. Not in any
competetive sense.
Posts: 1620 | Subs: 2
Posts: 3552 | Subs: 2
L
2
P
If all you do in a blizzard is sit around trying to keep warm not freezing to death then you deserve to get attacked by someone who uses it
I know that people don't like RNG, and they don't being restricted in their movements (hence also the hate for mud), but if you are unable to deal with adverse conditions then you might not be as good as you think you are.
Posts: 889 | Subs: 1
I don't often say this, but if you cannot cope with a blizzard, then:
L
2
P
I'm sure most people cope with it just fine, that doesn't make it fun, and it doesn't mean its compelling game play. I could tolerate the mechanic if it only reduced vision, and perhaps didn't reduce it as much as it does now.
Posts: 172
Now Minsk pocket and that river crossing map stays vetoed out. No exception. Semois is the only map I tolerate though, not by much.
Maps like Moscow outskirts are classics though. But OKW (German brits) ruined that.
Posts: 505
Blizzards are mint (not performance wise, granted) they promote a different kind of gameplay and tactics to the norm. They demand another level of micro on top of the normal game (but not an unfathomable amount as has been hinted at in this thread). Performance issues aside, I think they should be brought back. They give a player who is willing to micro and prepare for them a chance to really strike out against players who see them as something to be simply (excuse the pun) weathered.
Personally, I'm more concerned about map design and imbalance in that area than with blizzards (hell.. at least blizzards don't last an entire game)...
here's to you, Double OKW on Road to Kharkov!
Posts: 1216
I think that they should have a milder form of blizzard though. It would still have the mechanic but of course the effects are lowered.
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.589215.733+4
- 4.1099614.642-1
- 5.280162.633+8
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.271108.715+22
- 9.721440.621+3
- 10.1041674.607-2
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
donofsandiego
6 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, starkindustries
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM