Talk about how to include the tanks gameplay

[ATAG_Bliss]

Originally Posted by Ailantd

I see a big problem here if the final goal of this new feature is to bring arcade tank fans to the game to made more cash:

For this goal they need arcade tank players want to come to CoD. But if they go for the arcade game as it looks, then they need to offer more than competitors arcade tank games... I only can think about World of Tanks right now. And I really can´t see how this can compete with WoT for the arcade player. Landscape is more suitable for arcade players in WoT than CoD, because size, close up graphics being a lot better, and landscape offering a lot of arcadish planned environment to hide and so on, which are not in CoD. In WoT you have a complete upgradable tank system very suitable to arcade players. WoT tanks 3D models are far superior than CoD ones ( even superior than exterior CoD air crafts ). And I cant´t think about an arcade player that want to ride a tank 20 Km ( 100km anyone? ) to the battle and then being killed by an airplane with no place to hide and no way to defense. Not to mention WoT is free. So I can´t see a lot of arcade tank players buying CoD for the tanks as they already have their bed very well done. And not a lot of people who likes aircraft sims are going to buy CoD, or SoW, or BoM or whatever for the arcade tank game play. So if they go for the arcade market... I´m not sure they are going to succeed in generating a lot more cash without mayor changes to the game play and close up graphics.

But truly tank sim is a niche which is not properly filled today at the level CoD does for air crafts. It´s true there is not a big market there for this, but at least they would be offering something that WoT does not in a better way and WoT people would like to try it. Problem here is the resources that an approach like this would need, for all tank interiors and exterior updated models, and so on... So I think one way would be to build the tools and let all drivable tank vehicles to be build for third party with SDK with a MG control about quality.

Just my thought.

Anyway as they say that they have not very clear how to implement all this new feature in game I suggest we start to offer and discussing ideas for them about how they could do it from market, game play and available resources realistically point of view. Something useful could come from that... if we avoid the "I want to cross all te country by foot, kill the guards and steal the enemy plane to get home again... " We can open a new threat for this.

And I´m doing it.

Please, stay on topic. This is about how tank gameplay can works well, not about if it need to be integrated or not.
_______

We must be playing completely different games, because WoT models are far less detailed than IL2COD, same goes for the terrain, (all of which can be built in the FMB - embankments, roads, bridges, towns, etc.,etc.,etc.)

WoT is based upon a money making system. Sure the game is free, but when you hop in your tier 5 tank and get into matches with tier IX's/X's you are only there to be fodder.

In WoT you are limited to the amount of players, you are limited to the maps, you are limited to basically everything that WoT or their service is providing. All you do is play on their servers and roll the dice.

With IL2COD, you can create any sort of mission you want on any piece of map that's in the game. You can make the scenario as big or as small as you want. And then to top it off, you can respawn and not have to pay some abysmal credit repair charge to fix your tank after matchmaker raped you time and time again.

When this comes to fruition, there's no way I'll ever play WoT again. No more stupid icons, repair kits that magically fix your tracks in 1 second, camo netting that makes you invisible, radar, etc.,etc., I could go on forever. But WoT really sucks as any sort of a tank game. With IL2COD the options/scenarios, or well, any aspect of it can be user created.

When some tankers get their hands on an SDK and then realize that they'll have the tools to create w/e they want, in w/e environment they want, on their own server, in their own missions (from arcade to archaic ) I think this portion of the game will explode on it's own. It's not like you have to have a server up that uses airplanes. I predict plenty of "ground only" servers popping up.

This will be awesome. But again, this won't be handed to anyone on a silver platter. Missions will have to be made, scenarios designed etc., but I'm sure there's more than a few people out there, like me, drooling at the mouth, anxious to get my hands on it.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by ATAG_Bliss

We must be playing completely different games, because WoT models are far less detailed than IL2COD, same goes for the terrain, (all of which can be built in the FMB - embankments, roads, bridges, towns, etc.,etc.,etc.)

WoT is based upon a money making system. Sure the game is free, but when you hop in your tier 5 tank and get into matches with tier IX's/X's you are only there to be fodder.

In WoT you are limited to the amount of players, you are limited to the maps, you are limited to basically everything that WoT or their service is providing. All you do is play on their servers and roll the dice.

With IL2COD, you can create any sort of mission you want on any piece of map that's in the game. You can make the scenario as big or as small as you want. And then to top it off, you can respawn and not have to pay some abysmal credit repair charge to fix your tank after matchmaker raped you time and time again.

When this comes to fruition, there's no way I'll ever play WoT again. No more stupid icons, repair kits that magically fix your tracks in 1 second, camo netting that makes you invisible, radar, etc.,etc., I could go on forever. But WoT really sucks as any sort of a tank game. With IL2COD the options/scenarios, or well, any aspect of it can be user created.

When some tankers get their hands on an SDK and then realize that they'll have the tools to create w/e they want, in w/e environment they want, on their own server, in their own missions (from arcade to archaic ) I think this portion of the game will explode on it's own. It's not like you have to have a server up that uses airplanes. I predict plenty of "ground only" servers popping up.

This will be awesome. But again, this won't be handed to anyone on a silver platter. Missions will have to be made, scenarios designed etc., but I'm sure there's more than a few people out there, like me, drooling at the mouth, anxious to get my hands on it.

+1

[ATAG_MajorBorris]

Well played Bliss.

Its about gameplay, and added content that gives mission builders strategic and tactical options makes "gameplay" more varied and interesting for the players(which in turn could fire up the builders creative juices).

I doubt this could ever replace Steel Beasts as a tank sim but it sure will be cool for the missions in CoD.

[addman]

Originally Posted by ATAG_Bliss

We must be playing completely different games, because WoT models are far less detailed than IL2COD, same goes for the terrain, (all of which can be built in the FMB - embankments, roads, bridges, towns, etc.,etc.,etc.)

WoT is based upon a money making system. Sure the game is free, but when you hop in your tier 5 tank and get into matches with tier IX's/X's you are only there to be fodder.

In WoT you are limited to the amount of players, you are limited to the maps, you are limited to basically everything that WoT or their service is providing. All you do is play on their servers and roll the dice.

With IL2COD, you can create any sort of mission you want on any piece of map that's in the game. You can make the scenario as big or as small as you want. And then to top it off, you can respawn and not have to pay some abysmal credit repair charge to fix your tank after matchmaker raped you time and time again.

When this comes to fruition, there's no way I'll ever play WoT again. No more stupid icons, repair kits that magically fix your tracks in 1 second, camo netting that makes you invisible, radar, etc.,etc., I could go on forever. But WoT really sucks as any sort of a tank game. With IL2COD the options/scenarios, or well, any aspect of it can be user created.

When some tankers get their hands on an SDK and then realize that they'll have the tools to create w/e they want, in w/e environment they want, on their own server, in their own missions (from arcade to archaic ) I think this portion of the game will explode on it's own. It's not like you have to have a server up that uses airplanes. I predict plenty of "ground only" servers popping up.

This will be awesome. But again, this won't be handed to anyone on a silver platter. Missions will have to be made, scenarios designed etc., but I'm sure there's more than a few people out there, like me, drooling at the mouth, anxious to get my hands on it.

+1, the possibilities for dynamic online battles are mind boggling.

[csThor]

If realism and historical accuracy is your goal then not at all. For starters who's fluid in tank tactics 1939-45 style? Hardly anyone. Would players stick to these tactics? Nope. Can historical strengths and weaknesses be depicted? Nope.

The thing is any kind of human involvement in the ground war will end in some kind of brawl, inevitable leading to a stalemate of some kind. Quite honestly I'd prefer more FMB control over the ground AI (like telling artillery which area to shell and when, telling tanks when to advance in which formation at what speed etc etc).

[David Hayward]

Adding more ways for people to be involved in Cod/BoM/IL2 battles is awesome.

How about if we try assuming that they'll get it right and wait to start complaining until they actually screw it up.

[SlipBall]

Originally Posted by csThor

If realism and historical accuracy is your goal then not at all. For starters who's fluid in tank tactics 1939-45 style? Hardly anyone. Would players stick to these tactics? Nope. Can historical strengths and weaknesses be depicted? Nope.

The thing is any kind of human involvement in the ground war will end in some kind of brawl, inevitable leading to a stalemate of some kind. Quite honestly I'd prefer more FMB control over the ground AI (like telling artillery which area to shell and when, telling tanks when to advance in which formation at what speed etc etc).

What's the difference? look how people fly...certainly tactics are ignored by most...hey Bub, fill the tank!...oh, and check the oil

[JG52Uther]

I still think the original title Storm Of War was more apt. This was never just a flight sim. I can't believe that anyone who has been here for any length of time, and has followed this thing since the beginning, would think anything different.
David, your post made me lol and is spot on.

[ATAG_Bliss]

I think it's quite clear many people didn't pay attention to the updates at all. It's was fairly obvious more than 2 years ago about the vehicles, just not to the extent. And I'm sure they have many more surprises up their sleeves. Gotta love the ambition.

[badfinger]

Originally Posted by ATAG_Bliss

I think it's quite clear many people didn't pay attention to the updates at all. It's was fairly obvious more than 2 years ago about the vehicles, just not to the extent. And I'm sure they have many more surprises up their sleeves. Gotta love the ambition.

Being one of those that did pay attention to the updates, I remember several things that were fairly obvious more than 2 years ago, and I still haven't seen some of them.

The weekly updates still seem to me to be bones thrown to the pack to keep them happy. Mind you, I like CoD as it is, and fly it 3-4 times a week. I just want weekly updates that talk about what is coming next month, not next year, or in the next sequel.

binky9