I really think we need to increase the realisticality of the game. -1 reply

  • 1
  • 2

Please wait...

Auctionedllama

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

8th October 2006

0 Uploads

12 Posts

0 Threads

#1 13 years ago

Ok, well I like all these mods and everything coming out, but theres always things I don't agree with. Like how they increase everything, and decrease the price, make things overpowered, or underpowered. Heres my suggestions (I would make a mod, but am unsure how).

1. This is one of my more favorite Ideas I really want to implant. Like give everything an ammo limit. That means with artillery, they continue to fire until they run out of shells. Like give each say like, 30 shells or so. And then have ammo trucks (maybe opel blitz.. not sure) like you tell them to come, and then it cost ammunitions to refill them. But that would only be for say like, artillery, and flak 88, and anti-air. But have the infantry have the ammo be free, but have the grenades cost to refill them. Like have 3 grenades and they're free to throw, but cost to refill. Maybe also have like an ammo squad or something. And for tanks maybe have the same thing. But I think that would be amazing.

2. Also another Biggy, would be to give the Germans their own artillery, (this would be amazing) their own paradropped AT guns and men and strafing and bombing runs.

3. Also, I know that in WW2 they hade big fireteams of men instead of squads, but I think you can agree, the mods with the 12 guys in each squad is just too much. I personally love having only like 5 guys in a squad. Which makes it feel less like Rome:Total War and more like a down to earth personal RTS. I mean you can't even put 12 guys in a house most of the time.

4. Also, make all the armor more powerful. Like I hate how say, you have a tank, and say, there'll be a big group of guys, all like say 2 feet apart, like real close, and a tank will shoot and it'll hit the middle of them all, and the explosion will almost cover them all up, but only hurt/ kill one guy. I mean realistically it would wipe them all out.

5. ONE MAJOR ONE: AT GUNS. Yes, I Hate AT Guns. Realistically, they didn't have like 12 At guns at every battle. They normally were very limited, and were much harder to carry, and almost never used them as an offensive, mainly defensive and ambush. Its absolutely retarded how powerful they are, and how like sometimes, a tiger hits them dead on, and they live, or sometimes the shot bounces of there .7 mm flak shield!! Its absoultely retarded. I say downgrade the power of them, make them extremely weak to tanks, and infantry (which easily a tank could overpower one with one shot on the front). And limit to like 2-3 or something like that. And make them less manievabirle. (spelled that wrong but o well).

6. Ok one of the last, perhaps intergrate infantry with tanks. Like maybe have a small squad, like stuck with the tanks that follow them. I think that would be crafty.

7. And make the dynamite from the US guys, when you put it on a building, blow it out on 1 explosion.

8. Ok, make it possible to build those big german bunkers on first map of D-Day invasion. Like those big sea bunkers. And also make a way to build trenches. Like maybe somehow make it where you when you go to "dig" or "build" a trench it actually makes really deep and thin craters, like a crater but compact it into a walkspace. Im just looking for better ways to defend than sandbags and barbwire here!

9. Last one, I sware! But, like major here, but make it like so the tigers and pershings cant go through the tank traps! Although they're big, that be like making a semi going 15-20 miles an hour trying to go through a 2 1/2 foot thick steel wall/reinforced conncrete wall!

Well that finishes it up, I'd really be content if all you really made were the first 4 of them. They are the biggies. Just post here, I wanna see what you think, amybe add some of your own. Then amybe it might be made! Thanks




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#2 13 years ago

Yeah I like sum of those ideas, mainly 2 and 4... I mean axis have no air support to speak of at all, and while they make up for it with their Armour it would be nice to see some air units given to them, even if it was just supplies and scouting. Also tanks need to be a lot more effective against infantry, I mean its a tank... maybe some kind of moral damage so the units without armored or anti tank support decide to retreat rather then stay and fight a tank?

as for no.5 i have to disagree... AT guns are just that - AT guns, made to take out tanks. What hope would the Allies have against German Armour if they only had three downgraded at guns? If anything these guns are one of the best things about the game, the only real way an allied player can hinder a German Blitz.

I like the idea of integrating men and tanks... perhaps a button that made ur units closely follow a tank, giving them protection from enemy fire?

I also agree with 7 & 9 and the whole trenches things, if this is frontline warfare, there needs to be trenches! not sure about the big bunkers for axis though, seems like something u shouldn’t be able to just build...




Auctionedllama

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

8th October 2006

0 Uploads

12 Posts

0 Threads

#3 13 years ago

Thank you, I'm glad you agree with what I said. Although you don't like 5, remeber we are trying to make the game more realistic :). If anyone would like to make a mod with all these goodies, that would be FREAKING AMAZING!!! I would like worship you! :bows::bows:




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#4 13 years ago

Can't agree on a number of points... AT guns were very dangerous to tanks, and lessening their importance in the game would be a step away from realism. German Tiger ace Michael Wittmann hated AT guns, and counted each kill twice as high as a tank kill. I agree with making them more susceptible to armour attacks (the tiny shield would not help the crew very much), but would not reduce their damage or restrict the amount that you can get in the game. Also, trying to combine tank and infantry units is also not realistic, especially from the Allied point of view. The philosophy of armour was quite different on each side. The Allies saw tanks as support for infantry, while the Germans saw infantry as tank support. Either way, tactics for combined armour/infantry units was in its infancy (at least so far as modern doctrine is concerned). Keeping the seperate units allows for more flexibility of tactics: Tanks move forward to destroy bunker/building hardpoints and engage enemy armour. If they encounter AT guns or AT infantry, the tanks stop/withdraw until their supporting infantry can sweep the area clear. Gamewise, this requires more control by the player, such micro-management is best served with seperate units. Lastly, trenches were a major component of World War I. During World War II, warfare had evolved into a more fluid form (again, especially where the Germans were concerned). Close air support, infantry carriers and tanks combined to create a much more dynamic battlefront, where fortunes could change very quickly. There were few battles or sieges that lasted anywhere near the lengths of time involved in the first war. Tank traps, barbed wire and other obstacles were designed to slow enemy pushes (allowing more time to engage them with long range fire), or channel enemy movement into preselected paths (minefields, machine gun killzones, AT guns). To conclude, although this is an RTS game and therefore not reality, it has captured at least the flavour of Second World War combat: fluid and deadly. Artillery, tanks and aircraft combined to make the battlefield a dangerous place, especially for regular infantrymen. But bear in mind, the infantryman was still the most important component of any army, and in making the game more realistic we should not neglect this vital cog in favor of the flashier game units.




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#5 13 years ago

i think all points from both of you are awsome....maybe u could add infrantry to tanks only on german side and make it part of the blitz commander abilities tree than the "add"to squad icon will appeer in the infranty commands german paratroopers and stukas i think should be added and part of the blitz commander tree glider infrantry?? upgrades for half tracks on the american side half tracks were more widly use morter half tracks would be awsome or the priest for americans moblile artillery trenches .....i think should just be added to terrian features like trees, buildings, roads, hills, etc. tanks could wipe out complete infranty sqauds end of story light tanks?? that could be added to armor commander on the american side chafees, stuarts ?




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#6 13 years ago

ok, by your post and historical reallity: 1.hm, problem is that battleground here represent small scale conflict, so no need for tanks to have fuel, howitzers and flaks have enough ammo around them etc. 2.if u give to the germans Luttwaffe units, than u ll need to tripple it or even more those to allies, cause Alies had supremacy in the sky that ve been giving them advantage on almoust every battlefield. Most of german paratroopers - fallschirm (Heer's) and fallschirmjager (waffen SS), were from 1944 involved in anti-partisans operations and mostly as infrantry. Gorings idiotic usage of aviation and Hitlers idiotic usage of very precuse rocket fuel (making V2 insted anti-aircraft rockets), made that situation. 3. true speaking for gameplay, but common squads were bigger than 6, also there werent types as in the game (all riflemen etc), they had mixed soldiers and different doctrine and tactics. 4. yes, tanks should be more powerfull but to cost more than to make. This will give more on infrantry to infrantry combat, as it was in ww2. Big tanks battles were really rare thing and every tank was expansive to lost like that. Hm, if not count crazy Russians and US big production of ,in start terrable, shermans. To use words from 1 WW2 US veteran: "we needed at least 4 shermans to took out 1 Tiger, but thing was that we had 50000 of them" :) 5. At guns were powerfull weapons. On russian front 1 at gunner, acording to 1 of books from ww2 by Willy Heinrich if i remember right, took out more than 10 russians tanks in 1 battle. Ofc, its not armour that protected AT guns, but position and low profile. Solution maybe would be nice to put two stences for AT guns: 1 in movement mode or temorary stationary, that is very vurnable to the tanks fire, and 2nd "fortress" mode, where AT would be unmoveable for some time, but has much more protection from any dmg. 6. Its up to Relic...they could put option for follow, why they didnt - dont ask us :) 7. hm, well same than for any flamethrower+1 nade 8. small scale battle m8, germans didnt build Atlantics line for 1 day, those big bunkers were really good, but it took "some" time to build it. Trenches- same thing. There are few types of trenches (at least are in my countries army): for laying position (smallest 1s, maybe 40cm high), for crouching position (around 1 meter), than standing, than those u talking about etc. All of them take some time to build up. First 2 could be done very fast or at least fast enough for some small combat, but all others are really only for some stabile frontline. 9. never thought about it rly. dunno if they could done that :) Anyway, this isnt flaming m8, or something like that, just u said in topics name realistic point of view, so, here are some infos why some things cant be done. Ofc, theres always some "golden" middle btwn reallity and game style, and you are right, CoH is much more toward game action style.




falcon951

Don't yell at me!!!

50 XP

21st October 2005

0 Uploads

56 Posts

0 Threads

#7 13 years ago
Auctionedllama;33268441. This is one of my more favorite Ideas I really want to implant. Like give everything an ammo limit. That means with artillery, they continue to fire until they run out of shells. Like give each say like, 30 shells or so. And then have ammo trucks (maybe opel blitz.. not sure) like you tell them to come, and then it cost ammunitions to refill them. But that would only be for say like, artillery, and flak 88, and anti-air. But have the infantry have the ammo be free, but have the grenades cost to refill them. Like have 3 grenades and they're free to throw, but cost to refill. Maybe also have like an ammo squad or something. And for tanks maybe have the same thing. But I think that would be amazing.

I want to play CoH not Blitzkreig.




eyeballs767

Now known as: Callum Jman

50 XP

3rd January 2007

0 Uploads

142 Posts

0 Threads

#8 13 years ago

well i thought that was quite a good idea




Aurex

I don't spend enough time here

50 XP

25th December 2006

0 Uploads

21 Posts

0 Threads

#9 13 years ago

In order to make the game completely realisitc, we would need to assemble a team of engineers and have them build a tank garage. Then time them. Then, hire a team of mechanics to assemble the tanks. Then time them. Then, we would have to convert real time into game time by correlating how long it takes to build a tank, compared to the same tank in game, and find the median. That would be ideally how fast a tank could be produced.

Reapeat for every unit, every armament and every bunker. That would make the game completely and totally realisitc. It would also cost somewhere around the cost of World War II. ... I think I suddenly prefer the game how it is.




deltaleader

hell tonic clan's bitch!!!!

50 XP

7th February 2006

0 Uploads

220 Posts

0 Threads

#10 13 years ago

if you want to build trenches, have axis air support, ammo carriers your playing the wrong game, play blitzkrieg




  • 1
  • 2