Jump to content

Photo

Dev Update - Jan 13, 2017


  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1
Con

Con
  • 4,020 posts

15972439_1828524100718190_34140599284997

 

Hey everyone, 

 

Just a quick update to let you all know where we are at. We took a short short break over the Christmas period and were back straight after New Years. 

 

Firstly, just want to say thankyou to everyone who participated in the closed beta before the break, it was hugely helpful. Extra thanks goes out to the people who completed our survey. Lots of useful information that came out of it. 

 

So here's what we've been up to since we got back. Hard to believe it's only been 10 days.

 

Emote System

This is in and fully functional. It allows you to pick from 6 pre-defined phrases and sends the message to the opponent. Don't like them? You can mute them with a single click. We're working on getting voices in to accompany the text. 

 

 

New Maps

The above map, is still a WIP and is unnamed. I've been putting together maps with different concepts and lengths, they're doing a good job at changing up how the game feels from map to map. We'll have 3 new maps in addition to Alpine at the launch of Early Access. Eventually we'd like to get the rotation up to about 9 in total.

 

 

Revised Matchmaking

For the closed beta, we went with a really simple matchmaking system that only looked at your last few matches. For full release, we're looking at a much more complex lifetime MMR and strength based on your overall playing experience and capacity. New players especially will be segregated for a time until we feel they're ready to be thrown in with the sharks :)

 

 

Tutorial

We're working on a basic training type tutorial that runs you through some of the fundamentals of Warfare Online. Deployment, using cover, using supports. We know that some people were confused right off the bat, hopefully this helps. 

 

 

More Voice Acting

Our Russians were silent during closed beta, because we were still gathering actors to take the roles. We've been back and forth on this for months. We tried some American actors early on and weren't happy with the result. Then we tried Russian actors and weren't happy with the result. We now have a mix of talented Americans and Brits taking on the roles and they're turning out great. 

 

 

Early Access, when?

Can't say right now, but it will be this quarter. Probably sooner than you think!



#2
geras

geras
  • 23 posts

That's some great news, thanks for sharing!

I hope that early access really comes sooner rather than later :)

 

How often do you guys plan to post development updates?


  • 0

#3
MW3ProPiper

MW3ProPiper
  • 792 posts

So I'm assuming you can make a certain platoon setup for each individual map, and assign them that way so you can play each map with their appropriate platoon.

 

Is matchmaking going to allow you to enter these combinations in instead of just choosing the map/platoon you'd like to use?


  • 0

#4
Con

Con
  • 4,020 posts

So I'm assuming you can make a certain platoon setup for each individual map, and assign them that way so you can play each map with their appropriate platoon.

 

Is matchmaking going to allow you to enter these combinations in instead of just choosing the map/platoon you'd like to use?

 

You assume wrong. :)

 

The maps will be randomised and you'll need to make sure your platoon is flexible enough to work in each environment. This is to stop the sort of min-maxing that you're imagining.



#5
MW3ProPiper

MW3ProPiper
  • 792 posts

Ah, so that's how the game will be played (different from the envisioned specialization).

 

Guess I can't overspec now.


  • 0

#6
Con

Con
  • 4,020 posts

Ah, so that's how the game will be played (different from the envisioned specialization).

 

Guess I can't overspec now.

 

That's the idea. Min / Maxing just leads to a stale and boring meta where everyone is playing the same platoon. The maps are the proverbial spanner in the works.



#7
Glock59

Glock59
  • 71 posts

Any chance that the nation specific units will be implemented?


  • 0

#8
Con

Con
  • 4,020 posts

Any chance that the nation specific units will be implemented?

 

No, we're a long way from more units / nations at this point. There is lots to do with what we have already. 

 

Adding new units isn't simple, it's a lot of work, even if they have similar equipment and abilities. 



#9
Zero Spiral

Zero Spiral
  • 77 posts

The Russians Army in game would speak Russians or English in Russian accent?


  • 0

#10
Zingman

Zingman
  • 3,133 posts

I would guess Command and Conquer style (i.e. mostly English with a few Russian words thrown in for more "obvious" phrases.


  • 0

#11
MarkoMiladinko

MarkoMiladinko
  • 14 posts

Hi artists could you please tell me the sistem reqs for the game it looks like it needs high end pc.And i don t have one...And is game coming in january or februery?
 


  • 0

#12
Con

Con
  • 4,020 posts

The Russians Army in game would speak Russians or English in Russian accent?

 

English speakers with Russian accents. We've tried really hard to make sure our actors aren't doing caricatures though. 



#13
KwoonTheNope

KwoonTheNope
  • 37 posts

You assume wrong. :)

 

The maps will be randomised and you'll need to make sure your platoon is flexible enough to work in each environment. This is to stop the sort of min-maxing that you're imagining.

 

Any plans for dynamic RNG elements in the maps for a "be prepared for anything" situation?

 

As in aesthetic (such as weather changes) and mechanical RNG (maybe no. of cover available?).


  • 0

#14
MW3ProPiper

MW3ProPiper
  • 792 posts

That's the idea. Min / Maxing just leads to a stale and boring meta where everyone is playing the same platoon. The maps are the proverbial spanner in the works.

Alright, I have another question for you, about Op cards.

 

Do you intend operation cards to provide significant benefit and significant drawback that tailors your playstyle due to the benefit/drawback? (example would be having a card that reduces infantry timers and increases vehicle, designed for infantry based plats?).

 

And of course, the cards with minor benefits are cancelled out by opportunity cost.

 

----

 

Or do you intend for operation cards to be almost pure benefit, like High Spirits or Rifles Ready to Go, where they are powerful cards that while providing less benefit than specialized cards, are only balanced out by sheer opportunity cost?


  • 0

#15
Con

Con
  • 4,020 posts

Alright, I have another question for you, about Op cards.

 

Do you intend operation cards to provide significant benefit and significant drawback that tailors your playstyle due to the benefit/drawback? (example would be having a card that reduces infantry timers and increases vehicle, designed for infantry based plats?).

 

And of course, the cards with minor benefits are cancelled out by opportunity cost.

 

----

 

Or do you intend for operation cards to be almost pure benefit, like High Spirits or Rifles Ready to Go, where they are powerful cards that while providing less benefit than specialized cards, are only balanced out by sheer opportunity cost?

 

Good question. Anything that provides a straight benefit will be balanced in a way that the fact it's taking up a slot will be the downside.

 

As for the two you mentioned, High Spirits and Rifles, they're both on the table for balancing. I want there to be meaningful downsides to pretty much everything in the game. To the point where you can counterbalance some of them, but that will just bring you back to even rather than tipping you over the edge. It's just kind of tricky with about 700 moving parts :P



#16
MW3ProPiper

MW3ProPiper
  • 792 posts

Good question. Anything that provides a straight benefit will be balanced in a way that the fact it's taking up a slot will be the downside.

 

As for the two you mentioned, High Spirits and Rifles, they're both on the table for balancing. I want there to be meaningful downsides to pretty much everything in the game. To the point where you can counterbalance some of them, but that will just bring you back to even rather than tipping you over the edge. It's just kind of tricky with about 700 moving parts :P

Noticing that already.

 

My MG teams, once entrenched, they can do some good defensive work.

 

But rifle squads specialized in range, whilst having a high deploy time, are shredding my MGs (albeit slowly due to the stacked cover bonus i have on them) due to the outrange.


  • 0

#17
Con

Con
  • 4,020 posts

Noticing that already.

 

My MG teams, once entrenched, they can do some good defensive work.

 

But rifle squads specialized in range, whilst having a high deploy time, are shredding my MGs (albeit slowly due to the stacked cover bonus i have on them) due to the outrange.

 

Range increases will likely be seeing a serious nerf (probably in the form of an accuracy / aim time hit), we're seeing the same problems arising that we had with DZ. 

 

MG's have had their movement speed dropped in our latest internal build too, it makes them feel a lot more defensive. 



#18
MW3ProPiper

MW3ProPiper
  • 792 posts

Range increases will likely be seeing a serious nerf (probably in the form of an accuracy / aim time hit), we're seeing the same problems arising that we had with DZ.

MG's have had their movement speed dropped in our latest internal build too, it makes them feel a lot more defensive.

How about adding the mechanic of returning fire?

A unit with low range can still engage an enemy outside its "effective" range if it is being fired upon, but an enemy has to enter its effective range before firing if the enemy does not shoot first.

This way, we don't have the awkward situation of being just awkwardly outranged by
a tiny amount and the outranged units don't do anything.

As for the range nerfs, the amount that the snipers were nerfed makes them not worth it to run since they are just so slow to aim now.

Edited by MW3ProPiper, 20 January 2017 - 12:59 PM.

  • 0