I suddenly thought of how to improve the player's combat enthusiasm

Suggestions
12

i think there’s little time for this, i wish i could do all these things in my regular games, sadly playing objectives is way too foreground, it feels like doing anything apart from rushing the cap is ineffective for me

these things must be set up in advance, because once i’d be done building barbed wire trenches the cap would be already lost and putting hedgehogs in the streets would get me killed most of the time because enemy is already rushing, it’s super hard to make these under fire

personally i think this game should slow down a little
i love how this game tries to convince you it’s tactical game same time having faster game pace than other well known arcade shooters

13

great job great job
keep going

14

The thing is that playing solo will usually just play like cod, as many teammates don’t seem capable of holding an objective for any reasonable amount of time. HOWEVER, if you can get at least one teammate that can buy you time, you can move back to the next objective *(if you know where it will go).
This way, when you do get pushed back, the whole team has a much higher chance of holding it effectively.

Personally I usually try to focus on putting up a rally to get people to bypass the “build area”.
I set up my Radio Operator squad with at least one engineer, and AT mines across the whole group. This way, I can go set up tank traps (which can be subtle, as the less likely it looks like a trap, the more likely they will drive right through.) and still be able to call in artillery to help the team in the process.

Then grab a shovel (especially when melee perk increases dig speed), trench 2 wide x 6-7 long/ wire structure. Put it pretty much in the open where they are likely to try to run across. Keep it away from buildings where they could get cover and turn to destroy it. This wire alone is enough usually to buy some time if you get pushed back.

After that, you can go about setting up sandbags and such, switch squads to engineers or MG squad to build nests (all of mine are equipped with AP mines as well so I can immediately lay mines in key locations).

*The suggestion I keep making about letting defenders know where all objectives will be is key for this. All are necessary because some areas just need more time to set up, so going back even 2 objectives is not unheard of. I know a lot of people would say I’m wasting my time and not helping my team, yet if they get there and my team is then able to bleed massive amounts of tickets, its worth it.
To Note: not many players have the strategic mindset to set defenses in advance, so I really don’t foresee entire teams running back to set up defenses, but at least enough to make the game winnable from that location.

To again circle back to the original topic, “Player’s combat enthusiasm”, getting beaten back from a couple objectives can break their morale a bit, but seeing a fully fortified objective, from which they hold a significantly higher chance of winning, (from what I have seen and heard), brings back a LOT of enthusiasm.

15

More emphasis on individual gameplay over final group results would certainly be good. The current system provides incentive for all sorts of behaviors destructive to the game.

Awards are pretty bad as well, however. Arguably even worse than the win bonus because they result in even fewer players getting “full” reward.

16

I agree that everyone should be rewarded for sticking with the battle to the end. With the winners only marginally getting better rewards, if at all.

Although, this may result in some people joining a fight and just sitting AFK to farm.

17

in addition to the fact that this will cause players to just farm instead of playing objective i’ve already fielded a lot better suggestion quite a time ago (Victory conditions rework) idk why it didnt blow up… it was tought out so well

1 Like
18

Because “well thought out” does not “blow up” generally speakiong. To get a huge response in current year you have to go for emotions and fit the short attention span.

I’d say that’s one of the main reasons why it’s nearly impossible to use public opinion for improving games (or anything remotely complicated really). The loudest, most energetic and consilidated opinions tend to be received from someone else. Usually from dubious sources and through dubious means, as it often goes with received opinions.

2 Likes
19

I hear that alot, “there’s not time to set up a rally. must rush the objective.”

While rushing the objective is important, if you don’t take it in your one push, you have to go all the way back to starter spawn. Any enemy you have cleared off the objective in your push will be back before you (especially if they have rallys). You will have achieved next to nothing

it takes 6 seconds for an engineer with the right perks to put down a rally (you wont acheive anything better in that 6 seconds). And you can even order one of your bots to do it. And that will shave off Sooooooo much more time reinforcing the points. instead of having to run 200 meters to objective, you only have to run 60 meters (properly places rally). and if there is More than 1 rally this close it doesn’t get clogged up waiting to become available and you can reinforce much faster.

And if your team is continuously running into a brick wall, Its well worth taking a 3 minute detour to a flank around the battle, to set up a rally to change the angle of attack (matter of leverage). Brought back so many games from the brink of defeat by doing this.

Engineer class is the ultimate strategy class and I love the whole establish your supply/logistics it brings to the game

I think War heroes getting full xp even when losing isn’t such a bad thing.

20

okay, but wouldnt making defenders know where next objective will be a bit OP? after all, it means that teams that wont spend time fortifying next objective will be at a disatvantage if we balance the game for fortified objectives

21

That is a good suggestion as long as no battle heroes awards would be removed from being able to be gained by old players.

Maybe if you are like less than level 10 in campaign you could be eligible to earn a special set of battle heroes awards for noobs. Perhaps their rewards could be slightly less than the normal ones incase there’s few new playes in a match ig?

There’s probably some better way It could be implemented but I like your base idea there. Def has some potential to retain new players if they feel they can progress faster you know?

1 Like
22

well i do know that, i always put down rally and fortify it little bit and maybe ammo/medic boxes but that’s it, i was talking about more complex structures such as hedgehochs, barbed wire trenches or even AT mines

23

The game is already balanced around this… perhaps even to where those that set up fortifications are still at a disadvantage due to the enemies’ capability of deconstructing structures without a cost.

From our experience, CURRENTLY if a defending team attempts to hold an objective with no fortifications up, they are going to lose that point. Trying to put down fortifications on an ACTIVE objective tends to lead to bad defenses, and again, usually going to lose the point.
What is frustrating though, is about 75% of the time that I set up a location in advance, it goes to the other location. If this is done intentionally, I don’t know, but it sure feels like it.

I really don’t think so. As I said, most players don’t care about fortifying.

  • Between 1-3 players at most will.

  • Currently, attackers have tons of options to break through defenses. From breaking things down by hand for no cost (which I truly think needs to be changed), a multitude of explosive ordinance, and even making use of tanks to break through fortified lines of wire and sandbags. It would give them more reason to leave the greyzone.

  • All too often, when an objective falls, the defenders are left stranded at the old objective, and by the time they die, they can’t spawn directly on the new objective, leaving a MASSIVE gap in defending forces. Being able to set up a solid defense can buy defenders time to get into an area to fight, without the objective already being half way captured.

  • With things like flamethrowers being in the game, the only way to really stop them is through the use of defenses. All it takes is one open window and one flamethrower (or even WP/ molotovs), and the defending team is cooked. It would provide a much higher chance of survival against a squad type that many players run 2 squads of, therefore is constantly coming at the objective.

  • Please note that the highest number of deserting players that I see is always games where DEFENSE is a factor. Either Defense on invasion, destruction, assault, or confrontation as a whole. It’s because in its current state, its really just not fun going into a game that you are forced to hold objectives without having a chance to really give yourself an advantage through fortifying. Player Enthusiasm drops significantly just being on defense.

24

try to place rally points all around the capture points, one on left flank, one on right flank and one on rear, its very strong and i’ve won many games without losing a single point by placing rally on side not on rear.

but if this becomes a thing, they will, just prepare for AP landmines covering entire point.

this is a lot

dude… you know how hard would it be for attackers to attack a fortified point without being able to deconstruct fortifications? it already slows me down a lot when going through such defences

how was the point lost if defenders are there? and cant they just run back?

no, its not the only way; snipers, machinegunners and engineers with mg nests will make short work of them if positioned properly and ordinary troopers stand a chance too if they are armed with grenades

bots should pay more attention when flametrooper is detected.

i tought its on the team i fight against lmfao

you are just not doing it properly, i stopped an entire enemy team with only a mg nest, one barbed wire and a landmine from taking even the first point… i ended up with ~60 kills and 0 deaths

i imagine that with “fortifying” you mean placing sandbags and barbed wires literary everywhere… try a diffrent approach - time is a valuable resource

1 Like
25

Can I just say if you stopped an entire team with a single MG nest and a land mine, they were certainly doing ALOT wrong.

26

HE shells, bombs, TNT mines, using a tank to flatten them, etc. There are actually a lot of options out there.

Its usually lost in these situations because the point is much larger than it should be, allowing attackers to cluster up outside without actually getting into the building. When you try to come around the corner to clear them out, you get snapshotted into oblivion.
As far as running back, not really. They either are trying to fight the incoming enemies or die just outside of the time that you can spawn directly on the next objective, forcing them to spawn behind the next objective. We have also been frequently running into attackers that are lined up at our greyzone and the second the objective changes, they are making a mad sprint for it, often getting there before we even can.

The higher tier flamethrowers have ridiculous range and the fire burns through walls right now (as a bug), meaning if they basically point it at a building and pull the trigger, especially if it goes through a window, the whole building gets cleared out. The ONLY way we have been able to deal with them is getting barbwire out front to slow them down so we can pick them off.

Yeah that’s what happens when you play against solid bots. When you play against actually players, its very different.

No, not everywhere. I set trenches for my wire so that its harder to destroy and harder to avoid.
Czech hedgehogs and AT mines at key locations to take out tanks before they are a major issue.
Sandbags with shooting platforms in windows and an ammo box next to them.
MG nests with sandbags on the sides (depending on location) to give it more resilience.
MG nests watching over the area with trenched wire to quickly clean up advancing forces there.
AP mines on hard to cover flanks.

I know exactly what I am doing, and can do it efficiently, IF I know where it is going to go next.

27

it could simply be too easy to exploit barbed wires if people couldnt destroy them manually… it still takes a relatively lot of time though

28

There. Spot on!
By rewarding players for their battle performance, rather than for battle outcome, would give players no reason to quit matches and no reason to complain about team Ballance.

The player progression should be based on individual performance and not on the team win/loose
most of player frustration comes from team balance.
Limiting matches to weapon type as in war thunder, will make weapons on the battlefield be on same level but it will not make all players be on same level at all.
I can just equip my squadrons with mosins and knifes, and dedicate my time to sending new players bitch on this forum about balance just the same.
If you’re taking the game in a direction where I will be using winter uniform in a Pacific island or short sleeve and shorts in the Russian winter, at least make it as an optional campaign .

Even war thunder has an option for semi realistic historical battles.

29

Still allow engineers to take them down. Most people have at least one engineer in a squad, this gives them more reason to protect that soldier.

30

and if engineer gets taken out? most squads will only have 1 and you can stop an entire offensive by killing some engineers…

imagine soldiers going like “oh, right, im not an engineer, i guess i cannot knock down this pile of sandbags” or “darn, im gonna need advanced combat engineer training to cut this barbed wire…”

1 Like
31

Considering that most soldiers didn’t actually carry the tools with them to do so, they wouldn’t be able to cut wire, take down czech hedgehogs, etc. As far as sandbags go, have you ever actually tried to push over a wall of sandbags? There is a reason they are used not just for combat, but also to protect in cases of hurricanes and tornados. A soldier isn’t going to be able to just “push them over”.