A HUGE idea list extravaganza!
- Thread starter bayonet boy
- Start date
I would like to see an addition.
Points for all live crewmembers in tanks that you destroy. The AI should count as well.
Now you only get points for actual players inside the tank.
5 points for killing a PZIV (with full crew)
4 points for killing a T-34 (with full crew)
Infantry blowing up tanks got special awards (Iron cross, dunno if the Russians got awards for that)
Points for all live crewmembers in tanks that you destroy. The AI should count as well.
Now you only get points for actual players inside the tank.
5 points for killing a PZIV (with full crew)
4 points for killing a T-34 (with full crew)
Infantry blowing up tanks got special awards (Iron cross, dunno if the Russians got awards for that)
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Flame thrower tanks exploding is a very hollywood thing. They're highly pressurized, what happens when a bullet hits them is they release the propellant out of the tank at a high speed. If anything the user is pushed forward a bit or knocked to the ground for the few seconds it takes for the tank to empty.
It's actually very hard to light that fuel, which is why they use magnesium igniters which can burn at 3100
Last edited:
Upvote
0
the flamethrower.
I didn't read everything about the flamer which u wrote but I would write some about it myself. maybe it just will be mere quoting of what you said since we both some sort of trying to promote it
I know that the flamer was used alot during the ww2 so thats why I think it should be added.
I also think that the flamer should have the ability to destroy tanks. since gasoline can be egnited between -4 to 60celcius but it is self egniting on about 210 to 260 celcius ofc this differs on the type of fuel you use.
at work we used about 14secounds to make a diesel can egnite by fireing flames on the barrel (not directly on the fluid) but ofcourse we maybe used some better gas mixes and such as they had at the time but but.
so I suggest to maybe add a own hp bar for the flamer. so you have to spray a person for 1secound and some afterburn to die. even if he has low health
and for the tank i suggest there have to be a "heatbar" a flamer use like 10-15 secounds of contiously spray do destroy the tank. and if you stop spraying the tank the tank will cool of and the "heatbar" would cool down again.
I didn't read everything about the flamer which u wrote but I would write some about it myself. maybe it just will be mere quoting of what you said since we both some sort of trying to promote it
I know that the flamer was used alot during the ww2 so thats why I think it should be added.
I also think that the flamer should have the ability to destroy tanks. since gasoline can be egnited between -4 to 60celcius but it is self egniting on about 210 to 260 celcius ofc this differs on the type of fuel you use.
at work we used about 14secounds to make a diesel can egnite by fireing flames on the barrel (not directly on the fluid) but ofcourse we maybe used some better gas mixes and such as they had at the time but but.
so I suggest to maybe add a own hp bar for the flamer. so you have to spray a person for 1secound and some afterburn to die. even if he has low health
and for the tank i suggest there have to be a "heatbar" a flamer use like 10-15 secounds of contiously spray do destroy the tank. and if you stop spraying the tank the tank will cool of and the "heatbar" would cool down again.
Upvote
0
I think it is already in - when you die you see a guy runing around and he is your squad leader. Problem is that when you die there is some time that needs to pass for you to be able to spawn. If you select squad leader and he dies a few seconds before that/if he is in the area you can't spawn (that needs to be explained a bit) then you spawn in spawn point 1. We need to be able to mark at least two spawn points - the first for squad leader and the second for specific spawn point (1 or 2).bayonet boy said:
Rather pointless. Why block ALL communication if there are some people on your side who know how to communicate? We need mute option for SPECIFIC individuals to be fixed. Fixing kick votes also can solve this issue.bayonet boy said:
I would add punish option too. To be able to kill someone who TKed you on purpose. That or certain limit of TKs possible to be made per each round. A guy who kills his own teammates constantly should be punished in more convincing manner than just -points.bayonet boy said:
Other than that your list is great.
Upvote
0
@Everyone: thanks for the kind words, I think the wall of text puts most people off though... But hopefully a Dev will see it
Oh really? I usually get someone random, maybe my squad leader dies a lot... I think it won't let you spawn if your squad leader is being shot at too. If you click on a spawn before clicking squad leader, then it spawns you there if he is dead (I think...). You're right though, it does need to be a lot more user friendly.
That's a fair argument -- Certainly, this game is heavily team based and needs communication. However, not all situations can be fixed by muting individually; sometimes an overall muting based on the server is actually what's needed. People can still read text as well and see where commanders are ordering attacks.
Not in all servers though, but it would be nice to have the option for those occasional servers that are hopeless.
AFIK there is a server configurable TK limit currently, as there was in RO1. Most servers seem to have it quite high though, and because the servers currently give you points for killing others there appears to be no punishment for them.
I'm not sure that a "punish via death" option would be beneficial to the team. Sometimes the person being killed is actually the moron, not taking into account his surroundings, running into a room after watching someone throw a grenade / satchel in there. Running through friendly fire without looking around him. It could also result in abuse and overall be detrimental to the team.
An example of this would be, a greifer running through a prone machine gunner in order to make the MGer TK him -- Then clicking "punish with death" effectively getting a clean TK for himself.
Oh really? I usually get someone random, maybe my squad leader dies a lot...
I think it won't let you spawn if your squad leader is being shot at too. If you click on a spawn before clicking squad leader, then it spawns you there if he is dead (I think...). You're right though, it does need to be a lot more user friendly.That's a fair argument -- Certainly, this game is heavily team based and needs communication. However, not all situations can be fixed by muting individually; sometimes an overall muting based on the server is actually what's needed. People can still read text as well and see where commanders are ordering attacks.
- Sometimes a whole server is talking in a different language (there's low ping German / Russian 64 player servers that I frequent all the time).
- Sometimes a whole server is full of more than just 1 - 2 immature people. Or people having a totally off topic conversation, or argument -- Which is fine, but I don't have the time to find and mute them all or I’ll end up dying A LOT in game.
- Some people use Ventrillo / Teamspeak to talk to friends and clan mates. Or listen to music / audiobooks / the radio while they play.
- Sometimes people giving "tacticLOL" commands / orders aren't actually worth listening to. The armchair general clan leader, Jackass-Joe taking a break from eating cheatos in his mothers basement to splurge over voice chat with his clan mates obvious or retarded commands based on his extensive knowledge of watching the band of brothers DVD box set 4 times.
Not in all servers though, but it would be nice to have the option for those occasional servers that are hopeless.
AFIK there is a server configurable TK limit currently, as there was in RO1. Most servers seem to have it quite high though, and because the servers currently give you points for killing others there appears to be no punishment for them.
I'm not sure that a "punish via death" option would be beneficial to the team. Sometimes the person being killed is actually the moron, not taking into account his surroundings, running into a room after watching someone throw a grenade / satchel in there. Running through friendly fire without looking around him. It could also result in abuse and overall be detrimental to the team.
An example of this would be, a greifer running through a prone machine gunner in order to make the MGer TK him -- Then clicking "punish with death" effectively getting a clean TK for himself.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
When you're in spawn select menu - yes. When you accept your spawn point and "move on" - it is some random guy.bayonet boy said:
Right. It's a valid point. Objection withdrawn.bayonet boy said:
Upvote
0
I would like a server option for switching sides after every Territories round. No changes to the maps- as in, if you were Russians defending on Spartanovka you are now Germans attacking on Spartanovka. The winner is determined by whoever got farther/finished faster attacking.
I would prefer this to the current system, which requires the players to take it on faith that the maps are balanced. Who cares if one team won two straight rounds as the attackers? How would we have done as the attackers? We'll never know...
Secondly, I have a basic idea about how Territories (as well as Countdown, single-player) could be improved to be less "anticlimactic." In territories the battles are decided by the attackers having more men on the point than the defenders- and that's fine. After all, the defenders haven't lost the battle after losing one point- they can always recapture it.
Except when they can't recapture it. As in, it's one of a group of points that move the battle forward for the attackers (like the east and west bridge for Apartments) or it's the final point on the map. In these cases, especially the last one, I believe it's unfair to say that the attackers have "taken the point" without having cleared out the defenders entirely. Maybe not entirely- maybe when the point is taken the defenders that are standing on the point are "flagged" for "sudden death". If they leave the point, it is just like entering a protected area except they are unflagged instead of killed. Barring that, the attackers effectively have to kill every defender who was on the point when the point was taken.
This eliminates the ability of the attackers to "draw out" the defenders by simply having more men on the point than them, forcing them to attack. It eliminates the ability of attackers to take a point without killing anybody. It eliminates the anticlimax that occurs at the end of a round, as the defenders control the top floor but the attackers control the bottom floor with a slightly greater number of men... and suddenly the round ends, attackers win. I beg to differ.
The last point of every map is the one that really needs this concept implemented, as you could also cut off the defenders' reinforcements as soon as the point enters sudden death. I'm not as sure how the mechanic would work with points that become "protected."
I know that the mechanics of territory are considered written-in-stone by some, and there wouldn't really be any way to implement an idea this drastic server-to-server (a "sudden death" server option would be awesome, but I doubt it). It would also take some rebalancing in terms of reinforcements and lockdown timers, I'm sure. But I think it would drastically improve the mechanics of the game.
I would prefer this to the current system, which requires the players to take it on faith that the maps are balanced. Who cares if one team won two straight rounds as the attackers? How would we have done as the attackers? We'll never know...
Secondly, I have a basic idea about how Territories (as well as Countdown, single-player) could be improved to be less "anticlimactic." In territories the battles are decided by the attackers having more men on the point than the defenders- and that's fine. After all, the defenders haven't lost the battle after losing one point- they can always recapture it.
Except when they can't recapture it. As in, it's one of a group of points that move the battle forward for the attackers (like the east and west bridge for Apartments) or it's the final point on the map. In these cases, especially the last one, I believe it's unfair to say that the attackers have "taken the point" without having cleared out the defenders entirely. Maybe not entirely- maybe when the point is taken the defenders that are standing on the point are "flagged" for "sudden death". If they leave the point, it is just like entering a protected area except they are unflagged instead of killed. Barring that, the attackers effectively have to kill every defender who was on the point when the point was taken.
This eliminates the ability of the attackers to "draw out" the defenders by simply having more men on the point than them, forcing them to attack. It eliminates the ability of attackers to take a point without killing anybody. It eliminates the anticlimax that occurs at the end of a round, as the defenders control the top floor but the attackers control the bottom floor with a slightly greater number of men... and suddenly the round ends, attackers win. I beg to differ.
The last point of every map is the one that really needs this concept implemented, as you could also cut off the defenders' reinforcements as soon as the point enters sudden death. I'm not as sure how the mechanic would work with points that become "protected."
I know that the mechanics of territory are considered written-in-stone by some, and there wouldn't really be any way to implement an idea this drastic server-to-server (a "sudden death" server option would be awesome, but I doubt it). It would also take some rebalancing in terms of reinforcements and lockdown timers, I'm sure. But I think it would drastically improve the mechanics of the game.
Upvote
0
This is my opinion for a wishlist, I will start by making a short summary of the things I want and I think should be in RO2 in a future update:
- Static MG42
- Melee Weapons (Knives, Spades)
- Geballte Ladung Stielhandgranate
- Wheeled Vehicles
- Stalingrad city map and Volga crossing map
- Maybe new gamemode, AAS (Which is already featured in campaign)
- Static MG emplacements
Static MG42:
(MG42 on Lafette tripod)
The MG42 on the Lafette tripod instead of the static MG34. Even though the MG42 had not been made into many copies yet, it was used a little during Stalingrad. This also to adds more variation between the Axis MG`s, the allies have Maxim as static and DP28 as portable while the Axis currently have MG34 as both static and portable.
Melee Weapons:
(Soviet shovel/spade)
(German shovel/spade)
Lets start with the spade/shovel. The Red Army infantry actually sharpened their edge of their shovels so it could be used as a knife/sword to be both an entrenchment tool and an effective melee weapon.
(German Heer knife)
(Soviet fighting knife)
Sharp and effective in melee fights. Not really much to say about them.
Melee weapons should be issued all infantry. They should take a slot so you have to equip it, then attack instead of just press a button to attack.
Geballte Ladung Stielhandgranate:
This would be something interesting for the maps with tanks on them? Issued to assault troopers or/and engineers, give me your thoughts!
Wheeled vehicles:
In RO: Ostfront 41-45 i remember there were some wheeled vehicles/light transport. The K
- Static MG42
- Melee Weapons (Knives, Spades)
- Geballte Ladung Stielhandgranate
- Wheeled Vehicles
- Stalingrad city map and Volga crossing map
- Maybe new gamemode, AAS (Which is already featured in campaign)
- Static MG emplacements
Static MG42:
The MG42 on the Lafette tripod instead of the static MG34. Even though the MG42 had not been made into many copies yet, it was used a little during Stalingrad. This also to adds more variation between the Axis MG`s, the allies have Maxim as static and DP28 as portable while the Axis currently have MG34 as both static and portable.
Melee Weapons:
Lets start with the spade/shovel. The Red Army infantry actually sharpened their edge of their shovels so it could be used as a knife/sword to be both an entrenchment tool and an effective melee weapon.
Sharp and effective in melee fights. Not really much to say about them.
Melee weapons should be issued all infantry. They should take a slot so you have to equip it, then attack instead of just press a button to attack.
Geballte Ladung Stielhandgranate:
This would be something interesting for the maps with tanks on them? Issued to assault troopers or/and engineers, give me your thoughts!
Wheeled vehicles:
In RO: Ostfront 41-45 i remember there were some wheeled vehicles/light transport. The K
Upvote
0
What you are describing is an issue you have with how the game is SUPPOSED to work. Drawing time down by having more players in a zone is called teamwork, and capping without killing is probably more skillful as a team because players are actually getting to the zones.
Random switches and forcing players to move around and kill each other would be a detriment this RO2, too run'n'gun style, arbitrary and done a million times in other games. If you want to know how you would have done on the other side, choose the other team when that map comes up next and get on VOIP and communicate and make it happen.
Upvote
0
maybe instead of having funky colors use the team colors thats it. like for instace if russains talk red if germans talk blue green. simple nothing more needs to change.
i take that back actually i don't like alot of these ideas. like some but not all and i don't feel like going thru each one.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Flamethrower tanks actually don't explode very often at all. Sure, I wouldn't want to be next to a guy with one on when he got shot but that's more because it means I'm probably gonna get shot too than because I'm worried that his tanks will explode.
Upvote
0
