2870 replies to this topic

[Sven Co. Op]

Timer missions were made friendlier in the release version. In the less closeds they were a lot harder :o Like Think Different.

 

Really. Gonna try that mission to see for myself.

[Solais]

Well yes, I realize that some people like the current difficulty. This is why I say that there should be barely any change to the Normal and Mental difficulties, as they do not concern me. However, Easy should be turned into a difficulty for the regular folk.

It's really unfortunate that there can't be more difficulty settings due to them being hardcoded.

[WhiteDragon25]

I' d love to see a soviet advanced infantry since the allies have a lot of good infantry. I know a lot of said that assault rifles should not exist without the events of our real-world World War 2, however. With weapons like the Fedorov Avtomat ((though some call it an automatic rifle it has been argued and called an assault rifle due to its round))  we could see assault rifles being used by the soviets as this weapon was beginning production in 1915 under tsarist authorities and continue production until 1945 in the Union. So a special soviet unit with this unique weapon type could be cool.

 

Actually, I'm sure that the StG-44 would of been manufactured anyways in RAverse Germany, and may have been produced even earlier thanks to the lack of interference from Hitler. The AK-47 was derived from the StG-44's performance, and in many ways improved upon the concept and brought it into vogue with the rest of the world (in other words, the StG-44 was the world's first true assault rifle, while the AK-47 was the 'Trope Maker').

 

Oh, there's also the fact that the M16 and the AK-47 were both already in use in the RAverse, in RA1. My guess on why the Soviets in RA2 are stuck using the PPSh-41 is because of the arms limitations imposed on them by the Allies. Of course, the Soviets would get around that later when they gave Boris his prototype AKM rifle.

[X1Destroy]

I don't think so. I think conscripts do have lots of AK-47s, but it's just that they're not represented ingame for no reason. Same with GI using submachine gun of unknown origin.

Boris AK is just as they said, a "superior weapon". Nothing suggested that it was the only available AK assault rifle.

Apply the same logic for why Soviet don't have Snipers like Allied. They're not represented ingame but they do exist in the backstory.

Edited by X1Destroy, 19 January 2014 - 07:29 PM.

[WhiteDragon25]

I don't think so. I think conscripts do have lots of AK-47s, but it's just that they're not represented ingame for no reason. Same with GI using submachine gun of unknown origin.

Boris AK is just as they said, a "superior weapon". Nothing suggested that it was the only available AK assault rifle.

Apply the same logic for why Soviet don't have Snipers like Allied. They're not represented ingame but they do exist in the backstory.

 

I think the GI's submachine gun/machine pistol was an Uzi or MAC-11, if I recall the original RA2 fluff. Why use those instead of, say, a H&K MP5, I have no idea (or hell, why not give them an M16/G36/G3/FAMAS/SA-80/whatever NATO-used rifle...).

 

As for the AK-series assault rifle, they should be represented a bit more, at least so it doesn't feel like Boris is the only one using it. Same with the Dragunov that Morales uses (though, oddly enough, his cameo shows an M16-type rifle instead of the Dragunov he is supposedly using...).

[X1Destroy]

Well, if I can make new SHP infantry animations........I would also like to change that.

GIs using SMG is understandable as they have to carry that heavy MG around. But conscripts should at least use AK-47, as they're expendable anyway.

 

Edited by X1Destroy, 20 January 2014 - 08:10 AM.

[LusiGoosi]

Well if the change in world war 2 did not change normal infantry firearms that much, while most soviet allied nations would have ak-47 such as china which used the type 56 until recently or many which used the AKM during the 70s and into the 80's both using the 7.62mm round.  The soviet union however by the late 70 and early 80's had moved on to the AK-74. which reflected soviet union policy of being ahead of her neighbors and more over having her army more advanced weapons then the local republics of the union which had reserves and securities with the older tech. Even more then invasion by allies or war on a world scale the soviets union wanted to ensure her neighbors were of no threat technologically. Now why one generation of technology makes little difference it makes some. For that matter it was not always generational many soviet techs were given out on a 5 year basis, after 5 years it was okay to give it out even if it was still what you were using as by numbers it would take them forever to catch up.  

 

another reason why soviet Russia and the other republics tried to maintain a smell tech edge was well after two great wars the population of Russia was way down and casualties were more frowned upon then in other nation such as the PRC and yes while they were conscripted training was higher.  

 

So yeah AK-47s still make sense as X1 destroy says. Though I'd like to see some variance between the nations in at least basic infantry. Allies included.

[X1Destroy]

Fanfiction anyone?

 

[Sven Co. Op]

Already on it, right after my medic school fanfiction.

[LusiGoosi]

Me too, I'm on my second chapter. Though still more diverse infantry selections is always cool

[mevitar]

Why add subfaction-specific basic infantry if the only difference would be the voices and the gfx? That's pretty much pointless.

[X1Destroy]

^Every faction have a unique MBT, so why not? Just change theirs stats or give them more ability like usual.
There is no rule that dictated that basic infantry have to use the same stats regardless of which faction they belonged to.

Edited by X1Destroy, 20 January 2014 - 12:40 PM.

[Jargalhurts]

^Every faction have a unique MBT, so why not? Just change theirs stats or give them more ability like usual.
There is no rule that dictated that basic infantry have to use the same stats regardless of which faction they belonged to.

Adding subfaction-specific basic infantry is troublesome. For example, let's say you replaced the G.I with Rangers for US. If you sell a US building, G.Is would come out, no Rangers. Besides, subfaction specific infantry adds hardly no strategic opportunity or difference to the subfaction, unless you decide to give them some big imba ability what not. Every subfaction has a unique MBT is because those are designed to suit the subfaction's playstyle and they are much more useful than basic infantry.

 

Adding subfaction specific basic infantry for the sake of aesthetic purposes is not worth the time spent on the cameos and the SHP coloring and all that. It's just a pointless waste of time with infinitesimal results.

 

The staff would rather have you people think of a new suggestion that is meant to actually serve as a faction's valuable strategic asset or a neat feature to the game.

Edited by Jargalhurts, 20 January 2014 - 01:39 PM.

[X1Destroy]

For example, let's say you replaced the G.I with Rangers for US. If you sell a US building, G.Is would come out, no Rangers.

Not an important factor IMO. At least gameplay wise.

]Besides, subfaction specific infantry adds hardly no strategic opportunity or difference to the subfaction, unless you decide to give them some big imba ability what not.Every subfaction has a unique MBT is because those are designed to suit the subfaction's playstyle and they are much more useful than basic infantry.

I once had the thought that adding unique MBT is pretty redundant back when I saw the renders as in the end they're just a tier 1 mobile anti armor gun with a turret that will be forgotten once people got to late game unless you gave them the abilities they're having now. The same logic can be apllied to basic infantry, and that's a fact. Both of them are important and have theirs uses. You made an amphibious tank to make a difference, you can make an amphibious basic infantry as well. Yeah, like that.

Adding subfaction specific basic infantry for the sake of aesthetic purposes is not worth the time spent on the cameos and the SHP coloring and all that. It's just a pointless waste of time with infinitesimal results.

Well, I didn't ask for just aesthetic purposes, but also gameplay reasons as well.

The staff would rather have you people think of a new suggestion that is meant to actually serve as a faction's valuable strategic asset or a neat feature to the game.

After all these are but thoughts and only a handful of them would become reality. There's no reason for people to think only about that. Besides, they might do it by themselves if they won't come true anyway.
 

[Speeder]

Subfaction specific basic infantry isn't going to happen.

[lovalmidas]

Subfaction specific basic infantry isn't going to happen.

But subfaction non-basic infantry may happen.

Also, note that every "Basic Tank" have some kind of uniqueness to them: decreases infantry firepower, fires faster over time, amphibious, spawns Desperate Drivers, available by paradrop too, EMP resistance, ammo logic, heals other tanks when destroyed, limited-IFV logic. Match the abilities if you will.

A direct copy of another unit with changed stats though is less appealing, but might become reality; see Stryker/Archon and Flaktrack/Tsivil. So I won't say those kind of units are a definite no-no.

IMO, one of the best ways to add units is to cover up for the subfaction/faction's weaknesses while preserving their personality. China could do with a weak anti-infantry artillery, for example. United States could do with more area effect weapons, for another example. (No, I don't wanna hear stuff like "but the weakness is their personality" or assorted 'character-flaw' arguments. We are not Otacons. )

Edited by lovalmidas, 21 January 2014 - 12:07 PM.

[Tyhednus]

 

Subfaction specific basic infantry isn't going to happen.

But subfaction non-basic infantry may happen.

Also, note that every "Basic Tank" have some kind of uniqueness to them: decreases infantry firepower, fires faster over time, amphibious, spawns Desperate Drivers, available by paradrop too, EMP resistance, ammo logic, heals other tanks when destroyed, limited-IFV logic. Match the abilities if you will.

A direct copy of another unit with changed stats though is less appealing, but might become reality; see Stryker/Archon and Flaktrack/Tsivil. So I won't say those kind of units are a definite no-no.

IMO, one of the best ways to add units is to cover up for the subfaction/faction's weaknesses while preserving their personality. China could do with a weak anti-infantry artillery, for example. United States could do with more area effect weapons, for another example. (No, I don't wanna hear stuff like "but the weakness is their personality" or assorted 'character-flaw' arguments. We are not Otacons. )

 

Or something more durable for Scorpion Cell.

[GhostNemesis]

What if make guard tower become buildable as a stealth unit detector structure?

[AngelFaux]

What if make guard tower become buildable as a stealth unit detector structure?

 

No. Just. No.

There are so many things you can do to detect stealth units already.

[GhostNemesis]

 

What if make guard tower become buildable as a stealth unit detector structure?

 

No. Just. No.

There are so many things you can do to detect stealth units already.

 

But I think the stealth detector structure can do more than unit in defense aspect,it is only my feeling(I won't tell you about I like their model )