Spring: 1944 "Operation Koltso" Public Release!

[TheFatController]

One initial thing i've noticed is that the starting seconds ie. while building your first units seem to lack interactivity (to a lesser extent for Russia), it would probably draw people in more (the ADD crowd) if you had a few weak non-engineer combat units spawn with your commander for people to play with while they get established.

[Pxtl]

Good thought. Remember how WarCraft 2 had an option to start with a single peon? Nobody liked that much.

[imbaczek]

important things to do:
- fix maps
- make dsd-type maps not as boring as they're now - include a 'take and hold' gametype so you don't have to break through hopeless defenses (steal from evorts if you must)

[smoth]

too much talk, not enough pictures for those of us at work who have to loose our good evening hours picking up groceries.

[Otherside]

[IllvilJa]

When I see those pictures taken from ground level...

FPS MODE!!

(Still downloading and (re)compiling and stuff, X-windows and Mesa GL drivers are a bit bitchy to get working with proper hardware acceleration once you upgrade one of Mesa, intel driver, libdrm or the X-server. But I will get there...)

[Argh]

Played a 4-player FFA. Got spanked by Regret, after we were skirmishing for a bit- I wasted resources on stuff he didn't, and it was decisive. The other two guys tried to porc around their bases and got utterly smashed, so I don't feel bad.

Stuff I learned:

1. SMG teams seem completely, totally useless thus far. They get stunned, can't advance fast enough to actually close. I can see the theory... the actuality is that they simply aren't worth building.

2. I watched multiple Shermans get wasted by rifleman teams with nothing more than hand-grenades, and their cal-50 seems to be for show. Why build Panzerfausts? I mean... eh... more realism here might be good.

3. Building mortar guys seems great... 'cept they miss so often, and don't have enough range to do speculative fire like you would IRL. So far as I could tell, they were a complete waste of points. A 50% increase in range might make them viable for probing fire. Maybe.

4. Fixed limits on how many factories I can build is lame. Spam strats should be possible, imo.

If that's a serious issue, then defensive arms need rebalanced so that they work a lot more like RL. I don't really see any problem with machineguns that actually make it suicidal to advance without artillery prep- that's realistic and would be fun. But I think it's problematic that you're basically forced to tier up, and at the first tier, you might as well just spam riflemen. The machineguns don't have enough range or firepower to do the job, you can always flank them.

5. The "morale" code just seems to slow down gameplay, and I'd rather have a manual option to prone my guys out for defensive fighting, that made them a lot more effective... like IRL.

6. The GER HQ's machinegun is just for show. Doesn't seem to kill worth a darn.

7. Tanks are so decisive, in terms of wrecking your buildings, there is no point in grinding for flags. Just kill the base- if you flank, gg. Specially since I can't very well have lots and lots of factories, so I can't very well disperse my production.

8. Tanks move around like Zippers, practically ignoring terrain. They don't feel right.

[Otherside]

SMG teams are really map dependant (helps if u can transport rush them in close) but once they are close range they massacre everything that comes in there way they are useful in the right situations.

Anti tank infantry are more useful than riflemen vs tanks + + u shouldnt rush your tanks into enemy but shoot from afar (if not your asking for nades)

[imbaczek]

yeah, smgs are good ambushers when enemies approach over the hilltop or from around a cliff, otherwise die rather quickly.

[Nemo]

I appreciate the feedback Argh, but I can only respectfully disagree on most of your points.

1) As stated, SMG squads are very terrain dependent. You may find that a SMG team does a rather better job of defending a hilltop than riflemen do. Or that they're wickedly effective in ambush conditions, or in conjunction with APCs.

2) Nade damage vs tanks is indeed higher than 'realism' would dictate. However, Spring has a really hard time modeling stuff like infantry swarming a tank and jamming nades down the hatch, or firing into viewports, ect. Tanks are not fortresses when swarmed with inf, and the nades are there to discourage unsupported armor usage. I think you'll find that attacking enemy armor with just grenadiers is rather hard (while AT troops generally do it quite well).

3). Sorry, just untrue. Mortars are, if anything, too cost effective. Their inaccuracy is balanced by the fact that they build in 3s, and by their very large suppression radius.

4) The only limit is on barracks. I do not believe the computer exists that can run Spring with more than 3 barracks a player churning out inf at full speed in a larger game. While we could balance around this by raising infantry buildtimes, knocking down their numbers, or whatever, I (and the rest of the team) are happy with where they are. Find your advantage somewhere else in the game (better use of infantry, armor, guns, sneaky infantry, vehicle flanks, ect). That the limit progresses the game at a certain point doesn't bother me in the slightest.

If MGs seem too weak to you, people are likely using them without support. In the proper conditions, they are very nasty tools. I guess you'll just have to take my word on that - play against a competent British player to find out how evil MGs can be.

5) The suppression code is arguably -way- more realistic than a button. From a design standpoint, asking users to babysit that much is not part of our vision - this is NOT (I'll say it a thousand times) trying to be Company of Heroes. People don't dive under fire because they were ordered to - they do it because they were scared. The corresponding armor bonus gives infantry far more survivability, while the ability to inflict movement penalties with specific weapons creates much more depth in the infantry game.

6) Try cracking a German bunker on an infantry map, let me know how it goes.

7) Yes. That decisiveness is very intentional. The emphasis on flags depends entirely on the map - maps with a bazillion spots obviously don't have a strong emphasis on capping, while maps with fewer flags (ie, all of the 1944_* maps) and higher output per flag, they're still rather important.

8) Can you be more specific on the tank movement?

[lurker]

5) The suppression code is arguably -way- more realistic than a button. From a design standpoint, asking users to babysit that much is not part of our vision - this is NOT (I'll say it a thousand times) trying to be Company of Heroes. People don't dive under fire because they were ordered to - they do it because they were scared. The corresponding armor bonus gives infantry far more survivability, while the ability to inflict movement penalties with specific weapons creates much more depth in the infantry game.

It's definitely realistic to have them hunker down under fire, but it would be nice if you could order them to get down at times, too. (If you can I've forgotten.)

[1v0ry_k1ng]

argh protip: play the game more than once before posting

[Google_Frog]

Don't limit barracks numbers. What if one side has less players(because some of their teammates have been defeated) on it and lose because they are limited to having less barracks.

[smoth]

It sounds like they have to man. Maybe it be possible to do a lua unit limit boost if a player ends up in a 2v1 situation?

[FLOZi]

Really it depends on the players. Journier will beat pretty much anyone in a 2 v 1, bar perhaps Nemo and Spiked themselves.

[TheFatController]

Some feedback on the vehicle deaths


I think you could improve the effect by cutting out the type FIRE from the pieces and using a mixture of FALL and SHATTER combined with good death explosion effects.

[Gota]

A very nice mod.
Small stuff:
1)maybe Make all troops be in groups and not singles and allow a few groups to group into one and ungroup into basic groups again.Why?
It will be easier to differentiate between them even if your zoomed in and don't see the icons,it will be easier to micro them and arrange your forces and "specify" "armies" in certain zones...
Units can be built as some default groups that can be regrouped into individuals as well.


2)maybe add stamina?Troops are not robots,they cant run and fight forever.
Allow for resting times for forces and the bigger the group the slower it loses stamina(this will make controlling tired and fresh troops easier since entire armies will get tired at around the same time and depends on the way stamina is made it might add another strategic aspect;Reserve troops.)
Stamina will also make moving soldiers by transport trucks even more important.
Stamina should always go down unless a soldier is resting(is idle and near a supply truck with thethings it needs).
Idle troops or troops being transported should have their stamina go down very slowly but still go down.
If an individual in losing stamina faster cause he is being shot or is shooting while the rest of the group isn't active the individuals stamina should start dropping lower if his stamina goes under the group's average stamina.

3)Wars are mostly about supply lines(supplies need to be carried by trucks).
Add necessities like food/drink for troops to be used in resting times to regain full stamina.

Id also suggest slowing troop movement and raising hp of all units.
In real combat there is cover and entrenchment which delays death and casualties.
In spring there isn't any so it might be a good idea to artificially create this effect which will definitely make it feel more real.

About los.
I'm not completely sure how LOS for most of your unit's works but maybe a unit should have a LOS in the shape of a cone expanding towards the place the unit is looking?
you need to have a LOS GADGET to make sure players notice how important LOS is.
When LOS arches are limited and los is always visible players will tend to use LOS advantage more(a decrease in unit speed and an increase in unit hp will also provide more opportunities for tactical movement and not just constant forward spam).

[overkill]

Good ideas, They really are Fantastic. the s44 team should try them Out!

[Ironfire]

the player just lacks feedback of whats going on

[lurker]

Id also suggest slowing troop movement and raising hp of all units.
In real combat there is cover and entrenchment which delays death and casualties.
In spring there isn't any so it might be a good idea to artificially create this effect which will definitely make it feel more real.

Have you considered the possibility that they already did this?