German preview, Misshots Back, No Directional Amor

[Malevolence 6]

Alright. The link here shows some German preview in regards to the topic of miss shots, and directional armor.

 

Tried Google Translate and it's still a little gibberish.

 

Link translated.

 

A thread from the official forums posted by a member called T3V3NT3N posted this:

 

... we wont have directional armor except the nod walker with the shild

 

missshots: if a enemy unit is moving you have a 25% percent chance of not hitting it(it sucks its random make it always or not at all )

 

directional armor reason: (translated from german site): In CNC4 there are too big armis to micro individual units so that they face the right direction(WTF did the defs never heard of a futere they have in every new cnc game wich is formation move ????????? press alt a then a and formation move = win ). and what we saw in the screens we have that army sizes (around 10 units per fraction) in ra3 so i dont get the point of it ?

 

they descriped the battle they were playing against them as:

 

always move and just drive near your enemys to get the power ups when they die lol

 

and Feasel said they are l33d (wow how bad is this guy in the game)

 

link:http://www.gamestar.de/preview/strategie/echtzeit/1957645/command_conquer_4.html

 

PS: sry if i am late with this info but i didnt found anything about it

 

 

What do you guys think?

[Luk3us 63]

Epic amounts of fail on both parts.

[Malevolence 6]

What makes you say that?

[Luk3us 63]

1) Directional armour gives a bonus to players who think when attacking. As opposed to noobs who just QQ everything and use attack move.

 

2) Chance in games against another opponent is always a terrible thing, especially in the RTS sense. If I have 5 tanks, and he has 5 tanks then the person with the best tactical sense should win the battle. Not the guy that got "lucky".

[Nmenth 291]

Directional armor is realistic, but perhaps not as much as they've made it out to be. I don't know what the numbers are for the C&C games that had them, but it was too high whatever it was.

 

If they want an accuracy penalty against moving tanks (which is apparently what this signifies), I think a random decrease in damage would be better. Like if a normal round hits for 100% damage versus a stationary tank, on the moving tank, it will randomly hit from 75-100% damage.

 

I wouldn't call this 'epic amounts of fail', but I think they have the wrong idea concerning these points.

Edited July 25, 2009 by Nmenth

[Malevolence 6]

1) Directional armour gives a bonus to players who think when attacking. As opposed to noobs who just QQ everything and use attack move.

 

2) Chance in games against another opponent is always a terrible thing, especially in the RTS sense. If I have 5 tanks, and he has 5 tanks then the person with the best tactical sense should win the battle. Not the guy that got "lucky".

 

At least this time round you explained yourself clearly instead of saying "Epic amounts of fail on both parts."

 

I have to agree on your points, it is better if EALA dev team keep the directional armor and improve on that, thus enhancing realism in a way. Kinda disappointed that they are removing it.

[Luk3us 63]

Apparently that was a miss quote. The unit that is effected is the one firing, not hte being fired on. So that isn't bad actually. It will reward people who stop and fire, as opposed to epic QQ ATTACK MOVE DIE tactics.

[Gben 20]

Getting the balance right is hard, but I prefer random acts in games.

Maybe instead of a miss it should be a random chance at 'lucky shot' for extra damage.

 

I especially believe there should be penalties for shooting while moving...

[Luk3us 63]

Random acts only add to people's frustrations imo.

[EA_2POC 0]

"missshots: if a enemy unit is moving you have a 25% percent chance of not hitting it(it sucks its random make it always or not at all )"

 

This is actually incorrect information.

 

Jeremy Feasel had this to say:

http://www.gamereplays.org/community/index...howtopic=516602

 

"Slight correction: the units they are referring to have a chance to miss when moving themselves. This strongly rewards players for using stop-micromanagement/having a high APM. Getting the powerups is the "low APM" micromanagement option. Every unit has multiple levels of micromanagement that the user can choose to utilize."

[Wildshield 0]

cool. sounds like a great ingame forethought. I hope they test it out with a lucky shot, deadly shot and plain old miss shot. Lucky could have been added damaged to the target. Deadly could be a direct engine hit or driver hit. where the tank would blow up from the shot to being out of comission until repairs/new driver/engineer comes along. the missing target could have terrian effects, dust/smoke from the earth being hit, bouncing along the ground.

but attacking and defending should have pro's and con's. Defending makes you a great shot for the deadly shots, but a sitting duck for oncoming attacks. Attacking loses the chance to hit but more of a chance for random mass damage.

[Gben 20]

(Waves to 2POC)

 

No Luk3us I think a small degree of random is good that influences but doesn't change the result is good. As long as it's not a game breaker event.

The explanation of a miss-shots as a penalty for moving while firing seems reasonable example.

[Malevolence 6]

"missshots: if a enemy unit is moving you have a 25% percent chance of not hitting it(it sucks its random make it always or not at all )"

 

This is actually incorrect information.

 

Jeremy Feasel had this to say:

http://www.gamereplays.org/community/index...howtopic=516602

 

"Slight correction: the units they are referring to have a chance to miss when moving themselves. This strongly rewards players for using stop-micromanagement/having a high APM. Getting the powerups is the "low APM" micromanagement option. Every unit has multiple levels of micromanagement that the user can choose to utilize."

 

Thanks for the clarification, 2POC!

[Mighty BOB! 5]

TD/RA1TS' miss shots were the best. They weren't a random chance, they were a miss if the unit moved out of the way of the shell while it was following its trajectory. However the shell could still clip a slow unit's backside or cause some splash damage. I'm still for a bit of random though. However you'd think that by 2062 it would be hard to actually miss a shot from a moving target to a moving target considering any modern-day MBT like the Abrams, Challenger, or Leopard can hit a moving target while moving themselves.

[Gben 20]

Nah... build better guns... build better shields... build better guns... build better shields.

Why not some sort of target-jamming technology....

[Mighty BOB! 5]

Okay well they might have armor or shields that negate the damage of a hit, but it's still gonna hit something. I'm just talking about the gun tracking systems, because we already have gyroscopically stabilized turrets that compensate for your own tank's movements and the enemy tank's movements.