RO-PariserPlatz-III-ISU-152

  • Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Sidus Preclarum

FNG / Fresh Meat
Oct 30, 2006
683
0
0
41
Civitas Osismorum
I was thinking it might be a good idea to place a tank ammo depot in the sovjet tank spawn for when the ISU 152 runs out of ammo - though slow to reload the ammo is spent very rapidly and thus it has no more value in battle than as a slow moving shield. Of course this means that the ISU 152 and other tanks will have to disengage the battle, drive back to the tank spawn area and reload at the depot before rentering the fray. With the limited numbers of tanks it would be realistic to have them leave the battle in order to rearm rather than the present option of having to have to destroy them so a replacement can respawn.
well, if you want to talk "realism", ammo resuply time of an ISU apparently was of 40 minutes...
 

Atomskytten

Active member
Jul 18, 2006
467
54
28
48
well, if you want to talk "realism", ammo resuply time of an ISU apparently was of 40 minutes...

With a weight about 43 kilograms per shell a 2 minute reloading time/shell sounds about right - but since all other reloading is instantaneous I don't see the problem with the time scale - I still think that being forced to sacrifice a perfectly good armoured fighting vehicle just to get a full amo supply is a bit wastefull especially when the vehicle pool is very limited.
 

Shurek

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 21, 2006
857
13
0
www.darkesthourgame.com
With a weight about 43 kilograms per shell a 2 minute reloading time/shell sounds about right - but since all other reloading is instantaneous I don't see the problem with the time scale - I still think that being forced to sacrifice a perfectly good armoured fighting vehicle just to get a full amo supply is a bit wastefull especially when the vehicle pool is very limited.


I see you guys have been doing your research - very nice;)

It might be possible for me to code a new ammo pickup class that does not give instantaneous reloads. Also, would it be possible to spawn the pickup at a certain point once certain objectives are captured. Surely, the ammo trucks/carriers would have advanced behind the initial assault.

Perhaps I could create it such that the mapper can choose the reload delay of their choice - 30 secs, 1 min, 2min, more??? Hmmmm, let me think about this and look at the base code to see if its even possible to accomplish. Could make for some interesting strategies on this map...and others.
 

SchutzeSepp

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 23, 2006
1,540
8
0
36
it's actually a verry nice idea, it came to me yesterday also when we were forced to abandone our ISU 152 after spending all our ammo.

about the tanks being critical to victory, it's true but thats exactly why the ISU is so great. it's not a true offensive weapon, it's really a support weapon. you can have 50 ISU tanks and still lose if your infantry sucks. the infantry still does the job, the ISU can't engage infantry that is close to its own infantry. it's used to suppress the enemy reinforcements, while the infantry clears the road.
the T-34 or IS2 are alot less dependant from infantry, they have MG's and can fight seperately from infantry. wich oftenly limits CA cooperation, simply because its not neccesary
 

Shurek

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 21, 2006
857
13
0
www.darkesthourgame.com
Just looked at the AmmoResupplyVolume code. duh:p,I should have already known that they can be tied to SpawnAreas. However, now what about that time-delay trick:confused:
 

Trendkill

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 21, 2006
642
4
0
Dorset, UK
I don't know whether you're still working on the next version at the moment Schutze but after playing it quite a few times now I really do believe the Russians should have more tanks, and a lot more reinforcements.

So even if the teams aren't matched skillwise, the Russians at least have lots more men and tanks at their disposal. This is the last days of the Reich after all, the Russians should be the ones with the material advantage, and shouldn't have to worry about losses like they do at the moment. It should be the Germans who have the challenge of trying to stop the Russian onslaught, like it is in Konigsplatz.
 

Sidus Preclarum

FNG / Fresh Meat
Oct 30, 2006
683
0
0
41
Civitas Osismorum
I agree with Trendkill...
Though admitedly, unlike Kriegstadt, Parizerplatz hasn't got that "it's almost impossible to cap therefore let's grind them" of a last objective...
 

Mike_Nomad

FNG / Fresh Meat
Feb 15, 2006
5,024
1,037
0
79
Florida, USA
www.raidersmerciless.com
I don't know whether you're still working on the next version at the moment Schutze but after playing it quite a few times now I really do believe the Russians should have more tanks, and a lot more reinforcements.

So even if the teams aren't matched skillwise, the Russians at least have lots more men and tanks at their disposal. This is the last days of the Reich after all, the Russians should be the ones with the material advantage, and shouldn't have to worry about losses like they do at the moment. It should be the Germans who have the challenge of trying to stop the Russian onslaught, like it is in Konigsplatz.

But then, the outcome of the map and game is pretty much pre-determined. :(

The maps should never be intentionally biased. This is a game. Not a history lesson. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Placebo Cyanide

Trendkill

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 21, 2006
642
4
0
Dorset, UK
But then, the outcome of the map and game is pretty much pre-determined. :(

The maps should never be intentionally biased. This is a game. Not a history lesson. ;)
But compared to older versions when Russian won a lot more, this one is a lot less fun to play. It actually felt rewarding if you won on the German team (like it does on Konigsplatz), now it just feels like an empty victory because half the time the map is over at the Brandenburg Tor.

Konigsplatz has it pretty much spot on where it is possible to win as the Germans you just have to work hard, which is much more fun than evenly matched teams deciding who wins in the middle capzone. It used to be that the Last Defence Pockets was where the last German reinforcements would try to run out the clock and win by timeout (one of the msot intense moments in RO), now you rarely see fighting around there.
 

SchutzeSepp

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 23, 2006
1,540
8
0
36
im not doing any major overhauls anymore to it, i have a polished version ready with some changes and details. but when it will be released is not in my hands, as i am waiting for new "stuff" to add.
i know some things can get better, but i still feel its a pretty good map as it is now. the team that puts up the best effort wins.
to get back that desperate "fight to the end" feeling i think there should be enterable buildings where the 2 teams clash at the final objective.
on the other hand, i don't think more tanks will help the allies much. from personal experience i know there are more then enough tanks for good tankers. if tanks were not limited, i know that myself i would be less carefull with them and take stupid risks.
the guys who waste all their tanks in the first 5 minutes, don't help the team anyway unfortunately.
i have put up signs at the tankspawn that tell how many time each tank respawns, hope that might help a little, and there will be invisible walls that block tanks that would get too close to the next objectives.
 

Sidus Preclarum

FNG / Fresh Meat
Oct 30, 2006
683
0
0
41
Civitas Osismorum
on the other hand, i don't think more tanks will help the allies much. from personal experience i know there are more then enough tanks for good tankers.

I've played this map a few times where you were in, and, well, the only times we had good tankers, were the times YOU were a tanker :p
Somewhat related : about a week ago, I took the tanker class in the second round, despite not deeming myself a very good combined armes tankers, because the guys we got for the first round were nothing short of atrocious. Well, I managed to keep my JS2 alive till we capped the Tor (can't say that much about the guys crewing the ISU :rolleyes: ). Then, out of the blue, my tank explodes. Team satchel'd . "wtf" qoth I "oh, I was the german tanker in the 3 panthers you destroyed, you have annoyed me, so I switched teams to get you". ****** :rolleyes:

i have put up signs at the tankspawn that tell how many time each tank respawns, hope that might help a little, and there will be invisible walls that block tanks that would get too close to the next objectives.

that's a nice idea...
 

Trendkill

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 21, 2006
642
4
0
Dorset, UK
I've played this map a few times where you were in, and, well, the only times we had good tankers, were the times YOU were a tanker :p
I agree, limiting tanks to try and enforce better play sounds like a good idea, in practice it really isn't. One idiot who managed to nab a tanker spot has the potential to mess up the whole game for the Russians (intentionally or not). Plus, Germans have A LOT of anti-tank capabilities even if the Russians do have competent tankers.

I only ask that Russians get a few more tanks and more reinforcements to try and bring it back to how I remember the gameplay was in the older versions. Winning against all odds can be very fun, losing at the last objective with 10 seconds left to go can also be very fun, these scenarios came up a lot in the older version.

This is all coming from a player who plays primarily on the defense, so I'm craving for a challenge for the Germans in Pariserplatz, just like Kriegstadt is a challenge for the Russians (as well as the Germans if the Russians are very good).
 
Last edited:

Mike_Nomad

FNG / Fresh Meat
Feb 15, 2006
5,024
1,037
0
79
Florida, USA
www.raidersmerciless.com
I agree, limiting tanks to try and enforce better play sounds like a good idea, in practice it really isn't. ....<snip>

I agree... messing with the map's balance and playability is atrocious!

I only ask that Russians get a few more tanks and more reinforcements to try and bring it back to how I remember the gameplay was in the older versions. Winning against all odds can be very fun, losing at the last objective with 10 seconds left to go can also be very fun, these scenarios came up a lot in the older version.

"Winning aganst all odds" is a very selfish manner in which to view a gameplay scenario that's totally atypical. A scenario which you may enjoy but the odds are many others most definitely will not. Balanced gameplay is the key to a map's long lasting success. Unfortunately, you're saying the same thing as you stated previoiusly but in a different way. In so many words, ("Bias the map in favor of the russians..."). Nonsense! A well balanced map will enjoy many more hours of gameplay than any biased and mostly predetermined outcome map. In fact, such maps usually fall by the wayside quickly.

This is all coming from a player who plays primarily on the defense, so I'm craving for a challenge for the Germans in Pariserplatz, just like Kriegstadt is a challenge for the Russians (as well as the Germans if the Russians are very good).

Cool!! Then choose to play in a server that has the Germans heavily outnumbered by the russians. You'll quickly get your challenge. ;)

Biased maps truly suck. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Placebo Cyanide

Trendkill

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 21, 2006
642
4
0
Dorset, UK
I agree... messing with the map's balance and playability is atrocious!

"Winning aganst all odds" is a very selfish manner in which to view a gameplay scenario that's totally atypical. A scenario which you may enjoy but the odds are many others most definitely will not. Balanced gameplay is the key to a map's long lasting success. Unfortunately, you're saying the same thing as you stated previoiusly but in a different way. In so many words, ("Bias the map in favor of the russians..."). Nonsense! A well balanced map will enjoy many more hours of gameplay than any biased and mostly predetermined outcome map. In fact, such maps usually fall by the wayside quickly.

Cool!! Then choose to play in a server that has the Germans heavily outnumbered by the russians. You'll quickly get your challenge. ;)

Biased maps truly suck. :)
But now players know that most of the time Russians stand little chance there's not gonna be a server where the Germans are outnumbered. I know I keep bringing it up but Konigsplatz, the map Pariserplatz carries on from is still a fun map for both teams despite reinforcements being in favour of the Russians.

As you say balanced gameplay is the key to success in a map, but gameplay doesn't mean tanks or reinforcements. Look at Kriegstadt, one of the most popular custom maps ever, the Germans have no where near as many reinforcements as the Russians, but what they lack in reinforcements they make up for in good defensive positions and AT capabilites. In Pariserplatz, the Germans also have a lot of AT capabilities, as well as some fairly good choke points (Brandenburg Tor being the most obvious) to try and stop the Russians, but the reinforcements aren't balanced for the Russians to have to deal with these obstacles.

Of course there's exceptions when teams differ skillwise but I'm just looking at the outcome of most public server games I've played.
 

EvilHobo

Grizzled Veteran
Dec 22, 2005
2,613
192
63
Germany, NRW
Balance is to be achieved using a variety of means. In the case of Kriegstadt, the Germans have fewer reinforcements (they are at an approximate 3:1 disadvantage), but they have strong defensive positions to wear the Russians out. To counter this, the Russians have twice the automatic weapons that the Germans do to assist in room-to-room fighting, they have tanks to negate the MGs which will cut down Russian infantry, and they respawn three times more frequently than the Germans (in Beta 3, this will be changed to four times as frequent for Beta 4). To counter the threat of Russian armor, the Germans have an array of anti-tank weapons as their disposal.

Essentially what you thus end up having is a situation where the Russians are capable of putting an immense amount of pressure on the Germans, but both sides have plenty of positions or materials to negate the other side may have, at which point it comes down to a matter of individual skill. I feel that once it comes down to skill, wherein the better team wins, then you can tell that a map is balanced.

My balance philosophy is most derived from Starcraft, wherein balance is achieved via a combination of unique units, each with their advantages and counters, and victory is achieved via how well the players manage to utilize these factors. I'm not a fan of the 1:1 balance scenarios, but more the thinking man's balance.

Anyway, the map is Sepp's, and it is his place to decide the course of action he wants to pursue in regard to map balance.
 

Mike_Nomad

FNG / Fresh Meat
Feb 15, 2006
5,024
1,037
0
79
Florida, USA
www.raidersmerciless.com
This thread is about:

RO-PariserPlatz-III-ISU-152

What you do with your map is your business.

Playability and Balance in this thread is being discussed for RO-PariserPlatz-III-ISU-152 .... I stand on what I said. This is a GAME not a HISTORY LESSON.

Balance and playability are all important for any game/map to be a resounding success. That is a very basic and unavoidable fact. All the banter in the world will not change that fact.
 

SchutzeSepp

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 23, 2006
1,540
8
0
36
but IS the map unbalanced or what? evertytime i played the results were varied, maybe i never get a good image of the average gameplay on the map. because i always tend to commandeer the whole team, telling others what to do and getting mad at those who don't do the right thing. and usually it works.
Pariserplatz is one of the few maps out there, where everysingle soldier counts.
there is no way the allies will cap the gate if all their soldiers arent concentrating on it, there is no way allies will win without good arty and smoke, not to mention tanks.
same for the germans, every soldier counts, a good mg'er can stop the entire soviet advance, or a simple soldier in the right spot can pin down the enemy.
you wont win with more tanks, if the tankers can't hold their tank alive for more than 1 minute anyway.
why go changing the only map out there that tries to give each soldier a true responsability? wouldn't it be better if all the maps were like that?
 

LogisticEarth

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 24, 2007
831
132
0
Pennsylvania, USA
Sepp, I think part of the issue is that the Germans have SO much AT capability and the russians have so few tanks, that that aspect of it is one-sided. The russians get, what, a total of 14 tanks spawns? The germans have several AT guns, multiple AT halftracks, a few Panthers, and a whole assload of unlimited panzerfausts.

The problem is that, even with good tankers, a good German team will be able to deprive the Russians of tanks very quickly, which kind of hurts the pacing of the map. The last few caps suffer from this I think.

I agree with the limited spawns of the IS-2 and especially the ISU-152 (although that could use a ammo depot to reload, ha). But I think a few more T-34 spawns towards the end would help alot. This would allow you to place those AT guns near the Unter de Linden in a more rational position. Right now think there's a couple of guns who's field of fire substantially blocked, I assume to gimp them so they don't rape the limited Russian tanks. In reality, nobody with half a brain would place a gun like that. :p

Otherwise though the map plays very well. It's just that the unlimited nature of German AT capabilities (with abundant panzerfausts) doesn't pair well with the very limited number of tank spawns.
 
Last edited:

Trendkill

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 21, 2006
642
4
0
Dorset, UK
This thread is about:

RO-PariserPlatz-III-ISU-152

What you do with your map is your business.

Playability and Balance in this thread is being discussed for RO-PariserPlatz-III-ISU-152 .... I stand on what I said. This is a GAME not a HISTORY LESSON.

Balance and playability are all important for any game/map to be a resounding success. That is a very basic and unavoidable fact. All the banter in the world will not change that fact.
Exactly, I made my point about how I feel the balance is tipped in the Germans favour due to their AT capabilities and defensive positions, but you seem to have ignored me.

Of course it's Schutzes map, but since I've been a fan of the map from the early versions, and since there is a thread about it in the forums, I see no reason why I can't suggest what I'd like to see, whether Schutze takes it on board or not.

And of course the game is not a history lesson, but many players will agree that when a map that tries to be accurate it can add a lot to the experience of playing it.


Now Schutze, I know you're trying to force responsibility on players, but we all know it won't work on every player, especially if they don't mind losing. Attack is much harder than defense most of time, especially when the defenders have got a lot AT weapons and good terrain to work with. I just think to balance the average Russian team against (mainly) the Germans' AT weapons would be to give them more reinforcements/tanks to work with, that or reduce the AT capablities of the Germans.
 
Last edited:

SchutzeSepp

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 23, 2006
1,540
8
0
36
Well i do think i have already reduced the number of AT-guns and pakwagens for the next version, and increased the allied reinforcements so they never get out anymore (never thought it would happen!)
im specially waiting for the StuG 3G to replace some of the panthers, and only give them 1 panther and 2 StuG's.
im still not eager to mess with allied tanks, i have made textures and sign already that warn tankers of the limited respawns.
maybe if i have time i will rework the last capzone a bit, to intensify it.