The honest thoughts of an RO:Ost vet

[OnTheGun]

Sir, maybe I am blind or disabled, but if I am watching to a building 200 m away from me and focus on that hot chick adverdisement that I can hardly identify, I never experienced artificial binoculars in my eyes. Never happened, will not happen, so I am not buying your story...

That's because you haven't got a clue. I can spell it out for you. I can do the maths for you. TWI told you why they did it. ALL first person games have similar issues.

No matter what anyone does or says, you have made up your mind, and you are WRONG.

Ever since DAY ONE, FPS games have had FAKE zoom levels. ALL OF THEM, RO INCLUDED.

It is a HARDWARE issue. The zoom is TOO LOW if the FOV is realistic. You can't have both realistic FOV AND realistic zoom on a monitor that isn't wrapped around your head. it is not physically possible. You either have the FOV too narrow or the zoom too low to be called realistic.

The fact you are complaining tells me you are one of those RO1 fans that can't fight in close. You have the same feature everyone else does. It IS realistic, and that is NOT a matter of opinion. TWI actually tested real human vision to make sure. They didn't believe guys like me either, until they PROVED IT THEMSELVES.

They learned their lesson. Why won't you?

 

[NixonsGhost]

Between the six assault slots, four squad leader slots, three elite rifleman slots, two engineers, two anti-tank soldiers, four machine-gunners, and one commander there are 22 automatic and semi-automatic weapons on each team. I'm sorry, but that is stupid

This would actually be period accurate if the Russians got extra assault classes and the Germans got extra machine gunners. The PPsh was issued in huge numbers to Russian troops, and the Germans structured their fighting style around machine gunners rather than riflemen like the US or UK forces.

 

[vyyye]

Come on. I can see properly at 200 m but what I am saying is that the picture is not getting bigger because I am focusing on it...

No, but it's much bigger in real life than it is in game without the zoom.

 

[Gaizokubanou]

Come on. I can see properly at 200 m but what I am saying is that the picture is not getting bigger because I am focusing on it...

Urgh... What he is saying is that without the shift key function, you can't see properly at 200m.

Technically it's not even a "zoom" since it brings your view to normal level. Without pressing the shift, your view is actually unrealistically pushed back with warpings on the edges, but we need that too because otherwise we would have no peripheral vision in the game.

Seriously can Tripwire Interactive sticky this because it's getting ridiculous explaining this to every other person.

 

[Kashash]

I so agree, I think it's not just bugs in RO2 that deterred people from playing but just extremely bad decisions and design have been made by the developers in the game. What a pity.

 

[Dee0342]

There as a lot of hype.
So we bought the hype and we bought the game, and now most of us players are disappointed.

 

[nebsif]

Agree with OP! I thought RO2 is gonna be one of those games that hold for years like Project Reality did for me, but I cant force myself to play it longer than I played BC2 b4 I got fed up.. and Im already gettin fed with this one, too.

Its not about bugs, its the unbalanced and repetitive gameplay and maps along with ridicilous unlocks just for the sake of unlocks and lots of full auto spam, with insane run speeds on any terrain that make it even harder for the few bolt action dudes out there.
@Devs: Learn from FH2, its allot more balanced as a whole and just as fast paced and fun as RO2 (if not more).

 

[PsychoPigeon]

There's really not that many bugs.. apart from crashing sometimes I play just fine.. stop whining just for the sake of whining.

 

[kalle]

I'm sure we will see some gameplay changes as soon as the acctual bugs has been ironed out. The bad release is understandable, remember that we are comparing RO2 to other games with much bigger budgets. It's also understandable that stuff like "too many Mkbs" and "lockdown sucks!" (it does) isn't top priority with the stat bug and performance issues people are having.

I think RO2 will be great if you give it a couple of months.

 

[Das Bose]

A few weeks ago we had the author of Island of Fire (a very very well researched book about Stalingrad) and An Infantryman in Stalingrad on our Teamspeak. He denied that there would have ever been any Mkb.42s at Stalingrad and insisted that there were MG 42s.

So every time they insist the Mkb 42 is accurate a little piece of me dies

Everytime you whine about things like the mkb42 a little part of me smiles

I just play the game and have a blast. If I cared about history I'd do a phd and maybe have a change of career.

TWI like realism as much as the next man but they seem to have had enough of the whiny rivet counting and I'm with them 100%

RO2 is fun, and for me it improves with every patch, regardless of the colour of a guns bolt or the inclusion of my favourite ww2 weapon, the mkb42.

Edit: Personally I'm glad they didn't just copy ROOST! Yes this game needs a few tweaks, as did ROOST, so hopefully everything will be fine in a little more time.

These have been the honest thoughts of an RO vet. As you can see, we are not all the same

 

[nebsif]

There's really not that many bugs.. apart from crashing sometimes I play just fine.. stop whining just for the sake of whining.

no1's whining about bugs..

 

[FoulOleRon]

Tripwire are a business. They need to make money. RO is not a money-maker as it's far too niche for most people (though personally I enjoyed it a lot). RO2 in it's current state is a different beast and it'll take mods to bring back the RO feeling that you guys are missing. Tripwire have made the game moddable for precisely this reason. They don't have the resources to keep their original niche fanbase totally happy and also attract a bunch of new consumers so they made the game that they wanted to make and enjoyed playing. Yes there's been problems post-launch but they'll get those resolved in due course. To get the game that you guys want you'll just have to wait for the mods which surely will come.

 

[Nagels]

Honest thoughts well presented from the OP.
I would say give things time, there is a spinal strength in the game that will be utilised soon.

Things are different and new to us Roost junkies, some good- some frustrating.

All will balance out at some stage be it from mods or dev input and then we'll see the true potential realised.

 

[Leto Atreides]

I so agree, I think it's not just bugs in RO2 that deterred people from playing but just extremely bad decisions and design have been made by the developers in the game. What a pity.

Indeed, this is why I have very little hope for RO2 now. At lot of problems are conscious decisions from Tripwire.

They've pulled a George Lucas on the RO fans but making changes nobody ever asked for and sticking with them no matter how much we protest. I mean, why isn't there an option to switch the language to Russian and German only? It's right there in the game, it's not like they have to hire people to record the lines. Yet they insist on making us hear our team speak english with accents.

It sucks that RO fans will have to come up with mods in order to bring essential and no-brainer fixes to the mess that RO2 currently is.

 

[Trikipum]

Come on. I can see properly at 200 m but what I am saying is that the picture is not getting bigger because I am focusing on it...

Its that hard to understand that view comes zoomed out by default? and what you do when you "zoom it" its just correcting that "zoom out?".

 

[Trikipum]

Tripwire are a business. They need to make money. RO is not a money-maker as it's far too niche for most people (though personally I enjoyed it a lot). RO2 in it's current state is a different beast and it'll take mods to bring back the RO feeling that you guys are missing. Tripwire have made the game moddable for precisely this reason. They don't have the resources to keep their original niche fanbase totally happy and also attract a bunch of new consumers so they made the game that they wanted to make and enjoyed playing. Yes there's been problems post-launch but they'll get those resolved in due course. To get the game that you guys want you'll just have to wait for the mods which surely will come.

This is silly, they just had to add another "realism" mode with more sway and less sprint and few tweaks, tell me how hard is that?.

 

[Rrralphster]

I don't think you guys want to play in Stalingrad.

The reason why I say you don't want to play inStalingrad is because the way TWI depicts the battles is as true to reality as it gets (besides the Mkb(h) and the box magazines and no single-shot selector for the PPsH).

The loadouts are spot on (amount of SMG's/semi's).
The engagement ranges are spot on.

Russian doctrine in Stalingrad forced these kind of engagements.

(Read the pdf I posted in the history forums, written by an unbiased American... David R. Stone, Kansas State University)


Biggest difference with other battles is that Stalingrad was defended from the inside.

"After the German invasion of the Soviet Union, the first year of fighting
provided the Soviets with little concrete experience of fighting in cities. The Soviets did conduct several tenacious and inspiring city defensive operations in 1941 and early 1942, but those were clearly defense of cities, not defense in cities.
As a result, the gap in Soviet doctrine was matched by a gap in Soviet experience. Odessa, for example, held out against besieging Romanian and German forces for almost two and a half months, until the
steady reduction of the city

 

[6S.Manu]

Yup, RO2 is going on my shelf until some mods come out (unfortunately).

Already done for me... After I saw a guy with 90 kills on Spartanovka claiming that it was because he was a XXX level with the XXX buffs, then I started to play Falcon 4 BMS.

I'm going to work with mods, since RO2 is not what I wanted as RO sequel.

 

[Holy.Death]

Okay, now that that's out of the way. The gameplay is really really disappointing. Between the six assault slots, four squad leader slots, three elite rifleman slots, two engineers, two anti-tank soldiers, four machine-gunners, and one commander there are 22 automatic and semi-automatic weapons on each team. I'm sorry, but that is stupid (I left out the marksman's G41 because the ZF41 is DEPRESSINGLY useless).

I have to agree on that one. I usually try to take slot from first squad, even if all that's left are simple riflemen slots. Not everyone does that. They simply refuse to be ordinary soldiers and take "better" weapons. Such approach is wrong.

When you couple the automatic weapons with the fact that the maps are unbelievably unbalanced the game pretty much comes across as broken. I stopped playing Axis because it was just too easy, but Allies is frustratingly hard.

I think that many people needs to learn things first. Remember that there are options new players how no idea they exist and no tutorial covers them. If your team knows what it's doing then you progress and if not then you are in a world of hurt.

I've often seen commanders untook as well as squad leaders. And they have smokes to protect advance as well as placing artillery on fortified positions to soften the defenders. People try to take automatic weapons on big maps and can't reach to the enemy because people needs to learn how to play as a team first.

People have problems doing that for a number of reasons that needs to be fixed; squad leaders should communicate with commander and squad via VOIP which is broken still (tried that last night), chat box is small, often obscured by other messages and not necessarily look there. No one uses "Z" key to spot tanks or infantry, especially squad leaders. When artillery warning comes in I still see people runing right there, even when you see marker via "T" key.

Not only is the unlock system bafflingly useless (and in many cases annoying.. why can't I take my bayonet off? OR THAT DAMN DOUBLE MP-40 MAG?!), it's also broken to hell.

I don't care much for unlock system. I use any weapon I have and find them pretty good. All of them. Even basic rifle can do good if you're competent marksman. I see people saying that weapon X is worse than weapon Y, but I am fine playing both of them on both sides.

I see here Red Orchestra veterans... fighting themselves. I have problem to take seriously people saying that Red Orchestra 2 is less realistic because it has zoom which ain't zoom. People saying that certain weapons are better or worse (even if they are realistic) and making it balance issue. Same goes for distances you can shoot people from. It looks to me like some veterans has been used to Red Orchestra 1, believed it to be real combat simulation when OTHER VETERANS are... telling them that Red Orchestra 1 wasn't realistic...

Please, sort out that internal strife before saying you were veteran of the Red Orchestra 1, because right now veterans seem to contradict each other on these very forums and that makes such statement worthless.

 

[Verluste]

In my opinion, they (TWI) made an arcade version of ROOST with still some elements from ROOST surviving.

The bad coding with the tanking, the lack of details in balance (hordes of Mkb42's...seriously???) and weapons (YOU CANT EVEN FIX OR UNFIX YOUR BAYONET?!!!!!!) all make it a rushed game that tends towards arcade gameplay.

Even the tanking in ROOST was far more realistic and better coded than in HOS.

Couldnt TWI let the coding do by the DH team?