First of all, let's get this out of the way: this change is not going to happen. The engine doesn't support it currently, and it would ruin the current balance so much that lots of stats would need to be tweaked.
But as a thought experiment, what if I told you that a single tweak could completely change gameplay for the better (in my opinion... that I am sure will be opposed by some):
Reverse speed should be 60% of forward speed. For ALL vehicles.
Rationale wall of text:
A single change that could fix a lot of problems
17 May 2016, 17:34 PM
#1
4 
Posts: 640 | Subs: 1
17 May 2016, 17:38 PM
#2
Posts: 1281 | Subs: 3
+1 to text wall
17 May 2016, 17:40 PM
#3
Posts: 107
I don't think the game engine is capable of that.
17 May 2016, 17:51 PM
#4
Posts: 366
ur WRITER tag is justified
We choose our joys and sorrows long before we experience them
17 May 2016, 18:06 PM
#5
Posts: 393
I remember when Relic patched "Blitz" from 120% to 10% instead of 110%. 
The only reason COH2 is still around, is because it's preserved by salt.
17 May 2016, 18:16 PM
#6
4 Posts: 505
intriguing and well argued.
I would love to see a Relic response on this issue, even if only in words.
I would love to see a Relic response on this issue, even if only in words.
17 May 2016, 18:22 PM
#7
Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17
That's something I would definitely like to see. Even if it takes until CoH3 
I remember when Relic patched "Blitz" from 120% to 10% instead of 110%.
You have a great idea that improves the QoL aspects of the game? Please, drop your idea here:
https://www.coh2.org/topic/57860/some-qol-suggestions
Check out Cruzz's DPS calculator:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7gwy65JLbSRMEJ3M2ZPandMMW8/view?usp=sharing
(Download the file, open it with your browser)
https://www.coh2.org/topic/57860/some-qol-suggestions
Check out Cruzz's DPS calculator:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7gwy65JLbSRMEJ3M2ZPandMMW8/view?usp=sharing
(Download the file, open it with your browser)
17 May 2016, 18:27 PM
#8
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
My controls weren't working
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
17 May 2016, 18:31 PM
#9
Posts: 875 | Subs: 6
Yeah, the reverse move at full speed is silly and lowering it would make tank use much more skillful since getting caught out of position would actually be punishing. However, I'm pretty sure Relic have outright said that the engine is not capable of having reverse different speeds to forward.
17 May 2016, 19:16 PM
#10
Posts: 446 | Subs: 2
I don't think the game engine is capable of that.
The worst and most prevalent excuse Relic uses to deflect the most important and rational changes or additions to this game. It's dishonorable, and probably a half truth.
Dear Lord, teach me to be generous; to give and not count the cost; to fight and not heed the wounds; to work and ask for no reward, save that of knowing I am doing Your will.
Argumentation, disagreement, and debate are critical for success.
The most important type of diversity is viewpoint diversity.
Argumentation, disagreement, and debate are critical for success.
The most important type of diversity is viewpoint diversity.
17 May 2016, 19:42 PM
#11
4 Posts: 640 | Subs: 1
As someone with experience in game dev I can honestly say that making different forward and reverse speeds is not rocket science. I don't want to trivialize anyone's work, and I am sure the engine handling unit movement is not simple (see also: the pathfinding problems, 3-point turn plans and whatnot) - but make no mistake, it would have been an easy thing to code in at the beginning of the project if Relic really wanted to.
17 May 2016, 20:11 PM
#12
Posts: 141
Would you think that pseudo random distribution would make a difference for accuracy? It's OT but I have always wondered if it could help with consistency in the game.
17 May 2016, 20:14 PM
#13
Posts: 474
As someone with experience in game dev I can honestly say that making different forward and reverse speeds is not rocket science. I don't want to trivialize anyone's work, and I am sure the engine handling unit movement is not simple (see also: the pathfinding problems, 3-point turn plans and whatnot) - but make no mistake, it would have been an easy thing to code in at the beginning of the project if Relic really wanted to.
Exactly. Saying "the engine doesn't support it" is like saying "humanity has not reached the required technological level to allow this". I mean you're not an engineer from 1890 trying to realize Jules Verne's designs for traveling to the moon. The correct explanation would be "it takes us more man-hours to implement it than we're willing to dedicate to a game that is 3 years old."
17 May 2016, 21:28 PM
#14
Posts: 446 | Subs: 2
The correct explanation would be "it takes us more man-hours to implement it than we're willing to dedicate to a game that is 3 years old."
Of course, with all the PR filtering, you'd never hear a game developer say this in a million years.
Not saying that it never happens. I mean, just last stream Kyle finally gave me a definite, cut to the quick answer on custom hotkeys with "Yeah, it's not gonna happen, Jaedrik." But it took them how long to say this for how long we've been asking and getting "it might be something we're looking into maybe and it sounds interesting maybe but we're not sure how to implement it."
So they give BS explanation to give the fanbois ammunition to feel better.
URGH, JUST LET US LOAD OUR OWN .SGAs AND SET UP PRIVATE SERVERS.
Dear Lord, teach me to be generous; to give and not count the cost; to fight and not heed the wounds; to work and ask for no reward, save that of knowing I am doing Your will.
Argumentation, disagreement, and debate are critical for success.
The most important type of diversity is viewpoint diversity.
Argumentation, disagreement, and debate are critical for success.
The most important type of diversity is viewpoint diversity.
17 May 2016, 23:26 PM
#15
Posts: 247
I like it. As you've said it's too late for such a change (especially after allied TD buffs) but a solid idea nonetheless.
I think this issue is also why snares play such a big role.
I think this issue is also why snares play such a big role.
17 May 2016, 23:49 PM
#16
Posts: 414
Overall, tanks should be a bit faster. If OP's suggestion was implemented, the speed, sight, range, armour and cost became closer to their real performance, the performance disparities between the tanks would be more pronounced. Playing with tanks would be much more dynamic.
Over committing a tiger would easily be dealt with by a medium rushing behind it.
T34 could be produced at a rate against tigers 3-4 to 1.
And 4v4s would feel like kursk.
Over committing a tiger would easily be dealt with by a medium rushing behind it.
T34 could be produced at a rate against tigers 3-4 to 1.
And 4v4s would feel like kursk.
18 May 2016, 00:11 AM
#17
Posts: 656
And yes, I do realize that vehicles designed to be frontal medium killers able to reverse instead of getting caught, such as Panthers, StuGs and Su76, would be greatly affected by this change. Again, I am not arguing for this change to be implemented as is, additional tweaks would need to be made to make it work, and it's not gonna happen anyway.
You mentioned this in your original post but I don't think it is getting enough attention. To put it into perspective reducing reverse speed to 66% would be akin to giving every tank a permanent blitzkreig buff when attacking a reversing tank. Changing reverse speed would mean every vehicle designed to reverse instead of slug it out to have to be redesigned. A Jackson that can't reverse away from a P4 is going to flat out loose since it has less health and does less DPS. Even getting the first shot in from 60 range isn't going to save it. The only way to make these vehicles viable again would be to amp up their range, their dps, and/or their health to some pretty crazy levels to ensure they're killing their targets frontally before they can be rushed down.
18 May 2016, 00:16 AM
#18
Posts: 1216
I always took reverse speed as being less than forward, seeing as how often my vehicles often don't escape danger fast enough ;/
18 May 2016, 00:33 AM
#19
Posts: 276
Would you think that pseudo random distribution would make a difference for accuracy? It's OT but I have always wondered if it could help with consistency in the game.
Oh yes please. Lesser RNG the better. Also all the cool kids have been doing it for a long time now, Dota 2 is an example.
I am not responsible for anything I say.
18 May 2016, 00:39 AM
#20
7 Posts: 1664
+1 absolutely, but there are two other changes already in Mirage_Fla's mod that would improve this game even more:
1) VP's and CP's no longer affect vehicle pathing.
2) Remove 1.25% received accuracy from all support weapons.
1) VP's and CP's no longer affect vehicle pathing.
2) Remove 1.25% received accuracy from all support weapons.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
13 | ||
 |
|
|
0 | ||
 |
|
|
311 | ||
 |
|
|
160 | ||
 |
|
|
6 | ||
|
|
|
|
3 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 |
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
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1231
Board Info
458 users are online:
458 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49062
Welcome our newest member, Mclatc16
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Mclatc16
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM