SEPTEMBER 17TH PATCH NOTES
Posts: 758
Posts: 2053
Seriously people, why not just delete all winter maps? There's nothing making them different now.
This cant be a serious statment. This kind of comment is always used when mentioning a nerfed unit, except maps are completely aesthetic in terms of appearance, and should be balanced - which is more important. Lame blizzards can come much later - when/if ever relic bothers to optimize the game and such.
Maps are maps, just... No. Too silly of an outburst to take serious.
Posts: 738
Posts: 1283 | Subs: 4
Posts: 218
Here we have the classic forum snob- someone who thinks that his opinion and worldview are the only valid ones and anyone who expresses a radically different one is not serious, stupid, or a troll.
This cant be a serious statment. This kind of comment is always used when mentioning a nerfed unit, except maps are completely aesthetic in terms of appearance, and should be balanced - which is more important. Lame blizzards can come much later - when/if ever relic bothers to optimize the game and such.
Maps are not completely aesthetic, as anyone who has played the game for more than five minutes can tell you. Which map you are playing on has a vast impact on your play style- I defy anyone to tell me Steppes or Vaux plays the same as Semosky or Sittard, for example.
Cold tech is an extension of that. It adds elements to the game that differentiate maps from each other and in particular makes playing on a winter map different in a practical sense from playing on the summer version of the same map. So yes, Relic might as well delete winter versions of maps because now there is nothing separating them from the summer ones except vehicle camo. Tell me, what difference is there?
Secondly, there is the immersion factor- some of us LIKE feeling that we're watching and directing an actual WW2 battle to some extent, and blizzards were a factor that had to be dealt with IRL in winter conditions. It was good that you had to do it here as well.
"Too silly of an outburst to take seriously" thanks for perfectly encapsulating your own post. Maps are maps... AND WHICH MAP YOU ARE PLAYING ON GENERALLY AFFECTS HOW YOU PLAY DOES IT NOT?
Posts: 2272 | Subs: 1
So wait, Rifle Coy was just... removed? People paid money for content and it's just gone? Have I read that right?
the formatting of the post is bad. click the original link. its def stance what has been removed
Posts: 2053
Here we have the classic forum snob- someone who thinks that his opinion and worldview are the only valid ones and anyone who expresses a radically different one is not serious, stupid, or a troll.
Maps are not completely aesthetic, as anyone who has played the game for more than five minutes can tell you. Which map you are playing on has a vast impact on your play style- I defy anyone to tell me Steppes or Vaux plays the same as Semosky or Sittard, for example.
Cold tech is an extension of that. It adds elements to the game that differentiate maps from each other and in particular makes playing on a winter map different in a practical sense from playing on the summer version of the same map. So yes, Relic might as well delete winter versions of maps because now there is nothing separating them from the summer ones except vehicle camo. Tell me, what difference is there?
Secondly, there is the immersion factor- some of us LIKE feeling that we're watching and directing an actual WW2 battle to some extent, and blizzards were a factor that had to be dealt with IRL in winter conditions. It was good that you had to do it here as well.
"Too silly of an outburst to take seriously" thanks for perfectly encapsulating your own post. Maps are maps... AND WHICH MAP YOU ARE PLAYING ON GENERALLY AFFECTS HOW YOU PLAY DOES IT NOT?
Le sigh.
I, who could care less, being simple and practical, see the map as the game board.
I dont like outside random interruptions in my strategy game. So do many other people; current blizzards (IN HOW THEY WERE CURRENTLY IMPLEMENTED) simply said, were very terrible and slowed down the game.
I SAID maps are completely aesthetic in terms of APPEARANCE (english). A winter map looks nice. Random blizzards as they are arent as well as deep snow... BALANCE of the map matters most. Repeated again.
As for nothing seperating winter maps from summer maps, what then seperates spring and autumn maps from summer maps?... Dont answer that, but the reason winter maps exist is to simulate a winter battlefield. Repeated again to emphasize: current manifestation of blizzards simulating something much more tedious and boring than a winter battlefield.
Immersion blizzards that do VERY LITTLE could still exist. Perhaps they could return if relic reworks it. Current past blizzards sucked (but still can be used in custom matches).
I dont want to antagonzie you, but please dont antagonize me. I simple found it the oddest overstatement to remove blizzard maps on the sole reason that the removal of blizzards should warrant a removal. Now is that not more silly than removing a map for a more gameplay based reason, like the map being allied/axis biased/ really bad, such as Stalingrad?
That is why your first statement of this post is very crude; you have conducted way too poor of a basis on the proposition of removing all blizzard maps as a result. And im not a snob, just an asshole. I attack things based on their validity, not because "my opinion is better/others are inferior". The moment you start antagonizing someone else, then you become the same and no one is the better.
Posts: 107
They severely hampered performance in this already horrifically optimized game so they HAD to go.
Thats wrong. WFA winter maps(no coldtech) lag as much as the older eastern front maps.
Posts: 20
Handheld flamers do worse vs units not in cover, and they do better vs units in yellow, and significantly better vs units in green. Also they don't leave behind a dot anymore.
Thank You for the reply LemonJuice, straight and simple.
Posts: 1283 | Subs: 4
the formatting of the post is bad. click the original link. its def stance what has been removed
Right! Thank you for the clarification.
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
snip
To put it simple on how blizzard should had been:
-Less random. Both appearance and duration. RNG is not neccesarily bad BUT huge disparity of result is.
-No deaths by freeze, just combat performance debuffs.
-Firepits cost no mp, but do have a huge cooldown (2-3mins each). Remove xp gain from destroying them.
-Heavy snow should be able to be clear by either flames, vehicles or explosives. They reappear with each blizzard.
-Ice gets more resistant during blizzard, allowing for sneaky flanks without such a huge risk.
Posts: 218
I can agree with all these, except for the "no troops dying". It takes so long for your troops to get to fatal levels of cold that you really deserve it if you let it happen.
To put it simple on how blizzard should had been:
-Less random. Both appearance and duration. RNG is not neccesarily bad BUT huge disparity of result is.
-No deaths by freeze, just combat performance debuffs.
-Firepits cost no mp, but do have a huge cooldown (2-3mins each). Remove xp gain from destroying them.
-Heavy snow should be able to be clear by either flames, vehicles or explosives. They reappear with each blizzard.
-Ice gets more resistant during blizzard, allowing for sneaky flanks without such a huge risk.
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
I can agree with all these, except for the "no troops dying". It takes so long for your troops to get to fatal levels of cold that you really deserve it if you let it happen.
Retreat on big maps and you are gonna lose models to it.
Fatality slows down the game too much which makes it undesirable for most players. It doesn't add a layer of strategic depth, it just makes the game "annoying".
I'll only agree to blizzards been fatal IF you are hiding/moving through deep snow. AND if that is the case, deep snow should offer some kinda of strategic opportunity (cloak with ambush bonus for example) to offset it annoyance.
Posts: 4928
To put it simple on how blizzard should had been:
-Less random. Both appearance and duration. RNG is not neccesarily bad BUT huge disparity of result is.
-Firepits cost no mp, but do have a huge cooldown (2-3mins each). Remove xp gain from destroying them.
-Heavy snow should be able to be clear by either flames, vehicles or explosives. They reappear with each blizzard.
-Ice gets more resistant during blizzard, allowing for sneaky flanks without such a huge risk.
Would be interesting if they added universal Vet bonuses that effected how troops act in snow.
Vet 1: Troops can move full speed through high snow.
Vet 2: Instead of dying from cold, troops get debuffs.
Vet 3: Troops have full vision during blizzards.
Posts: 721
But
Removing Cold Tech = wrong decision due to brat-players' whining (WRONG I TELL YA )
Half brought back ML-20 to meh. Needs area of impact rewind too and then ok sure. :/
I don't understand flames at all anymore.
Usually brits build more than one emplacement at the same site. So the two rockets stuka hit buffing dmg 50% I don't know...
will the cost of the new volks nade be 30 muni while the molotov costs 15?
Fuel tech cost is 15 I think, not the price for hurling liquor bottles at the enemy.
Increased range for heavies.
Jesus Christ
5 more range for 1 at a time slow moving tank. It's a fair change.
The Tiger II is a fortress around which your attack hinges. It is the most skilless version of a tank in the game, and this only stresses that point. Since it cannot chase and it has insanely high damage it just sits still and destroys all within its range.
If the plan is to buff the Tiger, what is the purpose of that?
Do you ever play wehr? What you write is nonsense. Nobody has been scared of the Tiger for quite some time. This change was good.
A raging blizzard SHOULD have drastic effects.
And it's never getting put back in. The playerbase is vocal enough against it that cold tech is gone for good now.
Seriously people, why not just delete all winter maps? There's nothing making them different now.
Damn right. Terrible decision. They should've expanded on it, not remove it. Making ice harder during blizzards and stuff. Rostov is perfect for that. Oh, I forgot, they removed a charisma and different map like Rostov as well.
Posts: 42
Didn't expect this amount of changes...
Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1
Would be interesting if they added universal Vet bonuses that effected how troops act in snow.
Vet 1: Troops can move full speed through high snow.
Vet 2: Instead of dying from cold, troops get debuffs.
Vet 3: Troops have full vision during blizzards.
I dunno, I'd really have to say being able to eventually downright invalidate the features with time like that would devoid the point of implementing it at all. As well, then anyone who doesn't like winter will just go "Blizzards at the beginning of the game suck", eh?
Posts: 218
Not necessarily. That would greatly reward players who kept their units alive in winter maps.
I dunno, I'd really have to say being able to eventually downright invalidate the features with time like that would devoid the point of implementing it at all. As well, then anyone who doesn't like winter will just go "Blizzards at the beginning of the game suck", eh?
The point is, there's so many better things they could have done than just remove them entirely.
Posts: 1891
Livestreams
871 | |||||
35 | |||||
22 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.597215.735+12
- 3.34957.860+14
- 4.1103614.642+4
- 5.305114.728+1
- 6.916405.693-2
- 7.273108.717+24
- 8.721440.621+3
- 9.1041674.607-2
- 10.17146.788+1
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
8 posts in the last week
37 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Coh2_Amateur
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM