WiC Modern Warfare Mod release candidate 1

[weemadando]

OK. What the fuck did these guys do.

Suddenly my 1900 point Patriot System isn't a single launcher anymore. It's now EIGHT launcher trailers with a radar site included.

I buy an artillery piece and I get 3.

But when I buy a Terminal Air Defense System I still only get one.

WHAT THE HELL.

[Stofsk]

Perhaps they are suffering from moditis, that regrettable condition wherein mod makers cannot cease modifying their modification, and thus continually upset the balance previous iterations achieved.

[weemadando]

Perhaps they are suffering from moditis, that regrettable condition wherein mod makers cannot cease modifying their modification, and thus continually upset the balance previous iterations achieved.

I wonder if they've started releasing PDS style fanfics that they call manuals.

[Stofsk]

That's the terminal stage of moditis. At that point the symptoms become irreversible and the only treatment is to cauterise the area of infection, to prevent its spread.

[Stark]

Since the guy is clearly more interested in simulating frequency-agile fire control networks than making a mod, why would anyone be surprised?

[weemadando]

I bought two patriot systems in my opening deployment assuming it would be minimal coverage. Turns out I could generate blanket coverage on the map so Russian choppers instadied.

And I got enough points in a few short minutes for triple nuke.

[CaptHawkeye]

I thought the mod was amazing a few months ago but lately it seems like the dev team has been going too simhard. I don't even care that most of the stuff going on is automatic, the problem is the scale of the gameplay now doesn't fit in the technical limitations of the engine. They're totally obsessive about AA networking but really neglect other aspects of the game too much.

That and they removed the M-60 tank.

[Stark]

The vanilla map sizes have been a problem for a long time. I thought they'd released new maps for the mod, that are large enough to not cover the whole map with one silo?

[CaptHawkeye]

A problem I have personally is that they never solved the problem of infantry role viability in WiC. To go off on a tangent here much fun as I thought they were infantry in WiC were ultimately too much of a pain to keep alive because they were just too damn vulnerable to everything. It wasn't that someone couldn't be *good* with infantry or top scorer many times over...

it was just that you can't do that as easily with infantry as you could with any other role. Case in point, how often do infantry end up fighting other infantry in WiC? Not counting snipers, i'm talking about rifle squads who were arguably designed to fight other infantry units at heart and rarely get to do so. Really because most people found infantry too much effort to play. Infantry weren't the only units that got brutalized by WiC's so-so balancing. How often did we ever see people roll medium tanks or AA? Everyone just rolled heavy units for every role because while you *can* be good with medium or light or multi role units, it was just so much easier to be good with the heavy ones.

MW Mod didn't really solve this problem for any role other than Air so I lost interest.

[Stark]

I used medium tanks all the time, because unless you're fighting heavy tanks, heavy tanks are arguably a waste. Medium tanks do similar damage, but are inferior agaisnt really heavy armour, and lack the HEAT (which is useless against tanks anyway). The medium anti-infantry shot is also captain cheese.

Medium AA sucked because it was some combination of too short-ranged, too inaccurate, too weak, and too easy to destroy.

[CaptHawkeye]

I'll be fair for Armour the use of non-heavy units was actually pretty easy as long as armour realized it's job wasn't to uselessly sit around trying plink enemy tanks. But what about APCs and IFVs? By logic they should have been everywhere, and they would have been if infantry were more frequently encountered.

Now i'm not talking about the retards who got their riflemen blob wiped out by a mortar barrage. They deserved what they got. What I am saying is that even if you don't play like an asshole, you still have to try so hard to keep up with everyone else *and* not die. For one thing enabling vehicles to run over infantry was insane. Since it meant that any vehicle in the game basically had super infantry killing power.

I suppose the big problem was increasing the staying power of infantry without ever making blob spam tactics viable for them. Or at least making them more convenient to use. I always thought it would be a better idea to allow every role to have infantry squads but only the infantry role itself would get the best quality/most flexible ones. Like armour would get "Mechanized Riflemen Squad" or air would get "Airborne Rifle Squad" or support would get "Engineers/Demolitions" etc.

[Stark]

Yeah, infantry required a lot more focus and actual 'playing' to be successful. Tank guys can literally just drive their dudes and let them automatically kill everyone, but infantry requires use of cover, ambush, overwatch, and shit. On the other hand, infantry was the most self-sufficient role, and arguably one of the best at kiling choppers.

I think the later patches tried to nerf chopper guns vs infantry, but choppers just force-fire rockets at them anyway.

[CaptHawkeye]

See I think infantry should never be difficult to kill but they should be difficult to annihilate. Even when using horrific amounts of TA on them, the best thing to finish off an infantry squad with should be another infantry squad.

An infantry squad should be able to survive the effects of most TA types even out in the open, but hear me out, casualties would mean the squad would have less firepower, could lose its stinger/RPG guy, etc. I would still allow for open re-enforcing. But once a re enforcing infantry popped smoke for new units, I would set the game so every enemy on the map could see said unit re enforcing (because of the smoke) unless they're in cover. If this wasn't enough you might also be able to add a firepower or defense penalty to re-enforcing in cover or in the open.

What i'm saying is, I would increase the survivability of infantry while allowing them to keep their high short range firepower but only if they're close to undamaged. Once they start incurring casualties they lose combat effectiveness quickly though they can still accomplish objectives like capping points.

[Artemas]

yeah, i sort of feel you on the infantry thing, but i think the real problem is that in the open, there is zero cover. no ditches, no hummocks to hide behind, no stone walls, etc. of course, wic was never designed for infantry to take advantage of those features anyway, so maybe this isnt the right game to put in a cover system. but being able to take cover in a ditch in the middle of a field would help alot. there will always be lots of other open spaces to die in, but pinning down, or forcing infantry out of their positions achieves the same thing: making infantry more survivable, without necessarily making them more effective. it should be possible given the pretty detailed ballistics system, as guys in craters can already hide a bit. the other thing is that infantry are far too valuable to try to use as scouts in the open, or as anti-infantry guys, unless they're specialized.

i also totally agree on having standard infantry (maybe with lessened anti tank/helicopter capabilities) available to all the roles. nearly the only infantry on infantry combat that occurs in the game is snipers against other guys. i also think more infantry types for the infantry role would help, but in other ways.

i also have wondered what it would be like to have a heavy AA unit that prevented air TA from being used effectively withing a certain radius. capable of being overpowered by enough strikes?