(Review Completed) [SP] Abandoned Armies

[macguba]

It doesn't matter how the guards in 3 are armed.   They still spot each other which is what screws things up.    THobson is right that units that are setCaptive true still attract enemy guard groups, which is indeed a flaw in the game.

>npc details

you're on the money, Mr Mac.

I've missed something.   npc?


Oh, and mikero is right:  don't try to make all of your loons characters, it's too much to absorb.   Ruslan obviously, Irina, the deserter and one or two others.   The medic is just the medic and you need a couple of others for cannon fodder.

[macguba]

Like the single ruined car at La Riviere.     Found a large squad on the road outside Cancon but a couple got away.   Didn't there used to be a scene in Cancon?   The bus is good though.

Going away for w/e, more next week.

[Mikero]

>I've missed something, npc?

Thought I'd talk the talk, and walk the walk, of the big boys. non player character(s)

You're on the money. This is the place where, if author doesn't feel he's built enough interest into some of them, interesting 'bios' (hmmm, let's try that again, interesting, CV's there you are), this is where it can all happen. More, and more, immersion.

[Mikero]

Trinite:

would it be 'ok' to have a separate group of armed civilians? People who are surviving because they are the intermediaries, the traders, between the armies. Would they not spark a war. And, would my group be able to be attacked by them and vice versa.

If they're singles, not groups, then the occaisional death of one of them, an execution by north or south, would not cause an all out fragfest. Am i right?

[THobson]

If they really are civilians and armed, they will not attack the player's team, but they will attack each of the other armies.  If they are soldiers that just look like civis then we are back where we started.

So you like the script to re-order the team

[Mikero]

So you like the script to re-order the team  

Your mother is an Australian.

[THobson]

 ;D


Have a good weekend mac.

Well have a good weekend all

[Planck]

Ok, I'll wait for the next version to play.   ;D

Abrams
---------

I have never really had a lot of problems dealing with these beasts.

If it is stopped on guard I usually sneak up behind it and plant a satchel.  Now often one stachel does not always do the necessary damage, so I usually follow this immediately after the satchel with a LAW or RPG aimed at the turret, depending on what I have at the time.

If it isn't destroyed after that, but only badly damaged, chances are that the crew is dead or badly injured.
If it is badly damaged the crew usually get out anyway if any of them are still alive.

If it isn't on guard, but patrolling, I use mines or satchels and wait for it to return.


Planck

[THobson]

But your patience would make a meditating Tibetan monk seem like a man in a hurry

[Mikero]

@Planck

Like you, I've not had problems with the blunt end of a Godzilla, more or less same experience as you viz 1 satchel and etc.

It's the pointy end I've not encountered before. If four AT guys cannot destroy the thing, something is amiss. Correction, I used a user/temp and syncronised a hit, all, hold fire, and blam, turret disabled, (but not destroyed)

I have same experience as Thob that if I drive the things (any mission) 3 rockets will see me cooked. Again, might be wrong perception here, on recollection, the tank becomes undriveable, not destroyed. Not sure on this.

So, in the washup, it isn't a question of cheating, perhaps not even unfairness, it's a lack of balance. We dont as a squad have the capacity to take them on. I think most would agree with that, and I'm not interested if a lone rambella tells me she can. We, cannot. (you did not say that btw, you aint no rambo)

The answer, which is no answer at all, is to give the player easy access to  tanks of her own, that would alter the game too much (my view)

Removing the Abrahms isn't an answer either. Pehaps and maybe, what we need is sandbagged godzillas that can be got at,  they use too much fuel eg, with mobile fia T72's to put back the patrol aspect.

Or, just 'learn' to avoid them.

Or supply squad with really big bad firecrackers AT / Gustavs in abundance.

The nice thing about all this is it's Thobson's hell, not mine

<slap>

[THobson]

The nice thing about all this is it's Thobson's hell, not mine

I admire your tolerance for my pain. ;D

Or, just 'learn' to avoid them.

In this mission that has to be the answer.  These are two big bad armies and you are small group of misfits.  You will - realistically - run (or hide) like hell from armour.   That is assuming you can 'hide like hell'.

[Mikero]

Les Spectres de La Trinite

The reason why Trinite only has ghosts is because it has (false) radiation signs surrounding it.

This will stop the player entering, first off, which will be a better outcome when she learns that they are false in Houdan, and therefore pulling her away, back, from Chapoi with the enticement of goodies.

It's the Russian who lets the player know as part of his convoy speech. Only a few members of each army know this 'secret' to prevent raids occuring on the convoys by the others. It is, after all a secret to the player too.

The reason why the Russian knows so much is because he was a convoy driver, which explains why he knows the routes, and why he's squeamish about shooting things. He's not a frontline soldier.

BTW, the statement that the convoys dont' stop here is highly misleading. It is irrelevant to the player, since they dont stop anywhere else either. We are conditioned to getting onfo from these cutscenes. It's a plausible reason why the Russian is here, but doesn't work.

[Mikero]

Godzilla

>just learn to avoid them.

which, is the plausible reason and puts 'balance' back into the mission. Any other outcome is either unfair, or cheating.

The way you phrase it re the tremendous odds to begin with, is the (now) obvious bit.

However, contrast this: Faced with a handgun, you know all about the impossible odds, and take account.

Faced with four Laws, you are not. The obviousness isn't there.

(opinion) You need to use your classic understatements, probably more than once, to re-inforce the 'idea' into the player, that the odds are immensely out of whack. What we choose to do from then on, saves you from screams from us.

Neither Pilot nor I will go near them again, in fact, we would both take steps to keep well out of their way. It's the last bit, you should build into the storyline. Opinion only.

[THobson]

Fragorl:
I thought I had fixed the bug you found but when I was testing it yesterday I saw it too, just after Anropov was dead (I did it by radio control ;D).  I now understand what was happening and have completely re-written that part of the code it is now much simpler.  It will not happen again.  

Did you get any further after that.  The bug does not effect gameplay, it was part of the code used to sort out the vehicles if they got into a mess and by that stage of the game this is not really relevant.

mikero:  
While I was fixing the bug mentioned above I spotted why you acquired a second jeep at the mountain lodge.  It will not happen again.  Storyline ideas - please keep them coming, but please also understand that the next version may not have them all there.  I have lost count of the stories I have thrown away because I could not make them fit.  One was that Chapoi had a compound of ‘comfort women' that broke out when Stamenov's army was weak, grabbed any available weapons and started to blast the surviving soldiers.  I also spent some time looking for civilian units that looked like children or old people to add more poignancy to the piles of dead bodies.

Bye the way I was not joking about the bicycle at Le Port.  I have spent many hours cycling round that part of the island in the dark.  At the time it seemed like a good idea to get the player into contact with some of the road traffic before (s)he had a clue about what it was all about.  I only fully abandoned the idea when I decided that the dawn looked so wonderful I had to have the player travelling east during the early part of the mission.


Henderson:
Checking back I see I have not responded directly to your posts.  I apologise, the last few days has been hectic.  I am particularly interested in the views of people who played v1.00 on the fog (not the poor visibility caused by the rain) in v1.10.  I think I have toned it down too much.

SEAL:
Interesting.  Guys carrying flags can only have come from a vehicle, if it was red/yellow then it must have been one of Stamenov's lot.  Survivors from the jeep patrol perhaps?

If you had fighting at the lodge then you are likely to get more.  In my last run through I was spotted in the open and got pinned down by some infantry.  Their chopper was circling overhead and I knew that every second I stayed there bought their reinforcements closer - quite tense and annoying in a realistic way, how could I have been so stupid to get seen in the open.  Eventually an Abrams and a Vulcan turned up.  Fortunately they had previously been in some contact with the northrons because the gun of the Abrams was out of action.

After any contact I find it best just to run.

mikero - again.  The turret is my preferred target for any attack on a serious tank.  You might just knock out the gun or kill the gunner.  Unfortunately you can't tell the AI to do this.

[Planck]

Regarding the fog in version 1.0.

Whether the fog was there or not didn't stop me from going where I wanted to go, the only difference it made was to force me to be more careful when it was foggy.

Whether the fog reduces the visibility for AI or not I cannot say, but it seemed to do so and even if it didn't it did impart a level of security.....false or not.

During the times the fog had lifted it was easier to see any enemy but it also meant you had to make sure you had scanned the area well before moving.

So, in essence, your tactics had to change depending on whether fog was present and also on how much fog was present.  Getting disoriented was always a possibility too, as it would be in real life.

I didn't get disoriented, but then I know this island well personally.
I even have a version of this island where I have 'fixed' some of the glitches, like false signs and vegetation in buildings.....etc etc.  I call this island Similia, because it is 'similar' to Malden.

I would have left the fog the way it was or maybe only very slightly reduced the frequency of fog......only very slightly mind, the fog adds a lot of atmosphere to the experience.

BTW
I will definitely be playing the next version and now that I have 2 eyes again it might be even better than last time.


Planck