Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 07/09/2019 in all areas

  1. 5 points
    This is so wrong. This isn't TDM. This is warzone, and your objective isn't to kill and not die, your objective is to take capture points. You cannot punish people for what others are doing right, or maybe even wrong. I have had games with a negative k/d with a kill difference of maybe -7, but I came top of the team with 20k+ points. We need to stop encouraging prioritizing killing over objective in this gamemode. It's already bad enough as it is when you have stubborn teammates who go for kills instead of objectives. Collective punishment is a no.
  2. 3 points
    I just had to do it. Carry on folks!
  3. 2 points
    just a type of ticket system after all as Polak said this is the bad idea to prioritize killing over objectives. I agree that there should be a different way to win or do a comeback, but in case of one team full domintaing the other team will have even less chances to comeback
  4. 2 points
    I'm not sure I should post that... Big ty @Erzkrieger for taking the time and patience to do this with me!
  5. 1 point
    WW3 is the game where combatants supposedly belong to National/Multi-national Alliance's armies. Why don't add feature to Visuals Customization Menu where there will be pre-made "national" Uniform Loadouts. And players can simply toggle ON the switcher near the added tab "identical camo for teammates"and then they would be able to choose in Menu the uniforms for friends/foes with few pre-made sets divided in 2: East and West sides. And of course with ability to make Custom set with few restrictions like no winter camo on Smolensk for enemies. Maybe, just maybe, it even would allow to reduce the usage of RAM. I don't know should it be that pre-made uniforms should be customizable too, but it'll be good if at least camo patterns with aforementioned restrictions would be changeable. And only unforms. Would enemy have helmet/hat would be dependat on his loadout, but mb camo pattern would be decided by the players client with identical unifroms toggled ON. Only as example how it would look like.
  6. 1 point
    1. save server filters (within game session or constantly) 2. add server names to distinguish them 3. rename "server locked" in case of ending match to "match is about to end" to make the lock reason more understandable for new players (saw complaints about locked servers from newcomers who do not understand what is it) 4. server queues p.s. I know that it was suggested many times before. I`ve just suggested one more time to make sure that it will go to to-do list
  7. 1 point
    Every Monday when the ww3 weekly report is published i do a video covering it in audio form so i hope you enjoy this weeks episode!
  8. 1 point
    yeah dont fix it, but add an ability to stick C4 on yourself! That wll be a real badass shahid feature
  9. 1 point
    Was discussed half of a year ago. It was hot discussion... But no enthusiasm whatsoever. So, even though I support the idea I wouldn't upvote it just not to waste time again.
  10. 1 point
    No and no. If people wanted to exploit this they easily could. They could have someone on the other side continously letting himself be killed by his friend on the other team and thus making your team lose the game. Bad players need to learn like everybody else that if you make bad decisions; you are gonna suffer for it, and you only. Bringing on something that punishes everyone for one players actions only makes people hate those players for losing the game. Not to mention that griefers will easily make use of this to make them team lose.
  11. 1 point
    50% of matches are "one team fully dominates the other" with score like 5000-500. As long as the 1st team players are killing enemies right on the spawnzone, have more BPs to call heli, tanks, AFVs, etc making spawnraping even tougher, the 2nd team will not have even a chance to comeback. So yeah, the difference would hardly reach 100 for "so close" matches, whic are just ~5% of all battles. For other 95% it will make it even more unbalanced. from average player POV: me a dumbass sniper on the edge of the map. Before me was just a sniper who cared only personal K/D. But now me useful! Me making enemy team score less! Me smart! Me useful! Cmon, even now players think their KD matters. But if you give them at least a liiiiiiitle chance to affect teamscore by their KD, they will prioritize it for sure
  12. 1 point
    Question - What sort of effect would this have on the current "Snowball Effect" players tend to complain about in Warzone? During the free weekend, one of the more common complaints I heard was about the snowball effect in Warzone. While currently it can be challenging to come back from a full map cap, it's not impossible to do it. You & your team may bleed for it, but you only need to turn the tide once, and keep it going in that direction to maintain a chance at victory (I say a chance because you can turn the tide really late in the game and still lose.) But, As the saying goes; it's not over till the fat lady sings. With this mechanic, it makes it sound like you want the metaphorical Fat Lady to Sing while there is still 15 minutes on the clock and neither team has reached the 5000 point mark.
  13. 1 point
    after all, average player is stupid AF. Sorry, dont want to offend someone, but its true. I played games with ticket system (in fact we`re talking about such system to be implemented) and i can say that players cant take an eye on tickets, They cant even notice that the CP in front of them is being captured. Ticket system WONT make them play wisely, trust me. It just will make them confused why they cant respawn anymore (in case of certain amount of tickets) or make them think that K/D is much more profitable to win than playing objectives. So WZ will become just other TDM.
  14. 1 point
    What's with those "I, I, I"? It's team that will be punished for u dying, not u. And if u die too much that means u FAILED at HELPING ur team. I repeat. Human resources. They are limited too. In the case SHOULD be. And no, CQ in old BFs was working well enough so the team who was holding more points would won the 300 ticket match vs team with top10 world stats pilot-gunner gunship crew with K/D ~70-2.
  15. 1 point
    It worked perfectly fine in old BFs with 300 tickets per team. Holding points means u r lowering the enemy's tickets. Killing enemies means u r lowering the tickets. Here it will be: holding CPs means u r earning BPs. Killing enemies means u slow the enemy's team BPs earning. And if talk about ur "I have K/D lower than 1, but my BPs are higher than 20k", if amount of ur team BP loss because of ur dying exceeds the amount of ur team BPs earned by u - that means u r anchoring ur team. Pretty fair. Nobody is trying to robe u of ur earned individual BPs, but this game is about teamwork and if u r non-stop dying it should be punished. Why there is limited resource if we talk about how many armored vehicles we can call in, but there is no limit in how much human resources we can "call in"? Nobody is saying that killing the enemies should allow ur team to make the enemy's team BPs go to zero. But slowing the BPs earning for team that's dying too much is IMO the right thing. I think u should. Because nobody was saying that killing should cost more than capturing/holding CPs. But u keep exaggerating it over and over again. There was 1 match that I've won. It was Moscow, where my team was holding 1 CP and enemy was holding 1 CP and 1 was neutral. And we were leading 100 BPs. And for the last 3-4 minutes there was almost no point in fighting because the enemy team would not win no matter what they would do. That wasn't that great experience. It was close match as we've won ~ 4950-4850 but the last minutes of intense and close match were not fun. And when there is 1000-1500 gap it's starting to become "not fun" in 10-15 minutes before the match end. And it's not that rare. And than all u care about are ur BPs. For me, 2 ways to achieve victory are better than 1. And where did that come from? TS was talking about: Ur team has 3500BP. U die. Now ur team has 3495BPs. Great job! Keep doing this and u'll loose. And nothing more. AGAIN. WHERE DID THE IDEA OF PRIORITISING KILLING OVER OBJECTIVES come from? It's ur 2 idea that kills would cost more than PTFO. And it will be heavily dependant on how much teamscore would be lost when someone would die. If it's - (50-100) BPs then killing is more valuable. If it's 5-10 then PTFO has more value. 1 CP that u hold gives u 120BP per minute. 3BPs - 360. Imagine what kind of onesided spawnkillingrape it should be with 5-10BPs per kill to compare with it. Now ur death doesn't matter. U have now enough BPs to call in armor but u r near enemy base? Press suicide! Spent all ur RPG ammo, but enemy vehicle is low HP and close to u? Press suicide! Bombing run with 4 teamkills? Doesn't matter! Only the teamscore matters! I'm playing Objectives.? BOTH team kill each other. The difference in kills would hardly reach 100. It's 500BPs. WHERE do u see here prioritising kills over objectives? In YOUR 50% matches where 1 team dominates it doesn't matter what would be score - 5000-500 or 5000-0 with BP deduction. For other 50 it'll matter as the team that has more BP is not obliged to have higher kill count. AND if even the leading team has higher killcount it only means that losing team has to struggle more in playing Objectives = capturing CPs. 5-10% difference can not be called "unbalanced". Okay. Mathematics for gradeschoolers: 5 sec spawn CD for squadleader, ~ 15 secs to run from base to the open space where u can be killed by enemy. 3 kills per minute. Let it be the max 10BP per kill. 40 minutes. 1200BP. Not enough to make ur team lose. IN IDEAL SITUATION. If it is 5 BP per kill penalty it will be 600BP. I'll ask again: Explain, how u r going to ruin the match with this conditions?
  16. 1 point
    no winter camo on Smolensk/Berlin, no forest camo for Polarny, no other camos for other maps, choose what camo will be available for new maps and so on. IMO it will be too much complicated system to support
  17. 1 point
    Ohh I see what you pointing out at, I think with the customisation we have free hand to use what we want not getting us limited to fractions. I don't think this will change but let's see I will definitely forward this to the designers to find out some more about it.
  18. 1 point
    it shouldnt. Otherwise you can make "bright and very noticable uniform" for enemies. Too noticable
  19. 1 point
    No thanks, I do not want to be punished personaly just because my other teammates have never played an FPS game in their life before. Collective punishment has no place in an online game. If they're getting steamrolled they need to figure out how to play better themselves, not through some poorly thought out punishment system. Just because you are bad at a game should not mean your team has to suffer from one players poor decisions.
  20. 1 point
    Well can we make the tandem a one shot on it? It's goddamn hard to hit a chopper which is moving and then you actually manage to do it!!!..... and it does 75 damage...
  21. 1 point
    Hmm. It may be either a menu purchase bug (an odd one), or the drum mags for both of those guns are actualy seperate items due to some miniscule model difference between the two and their purchase is not paired together (as it should have been since it's the same item IRL). We'll take a look at this. Thanks for the info!
  22. 1 point
    Hey there, this time it's just a tiny patch to celebrate 4th of July with our community! Update 0.6.7 Patch Notes [CONTENT] Added Military & Veteran Gamers patch, Added Military & Veteran Gamers weapon emblem, Added 4th of July M4 MWS skin, Added 4th of July MCS skin.
  23. 1 point
    Nah, it really depends on the type of game you are playing; If you don't want realism go play CoD or something, cuz WW3, Insurgency, Squad, Arma, etc. are way more realistic than running around aimlessly without any tactical planning beforehand. Realistic stuff like weapon jamming would hurt the game, especially multiplayer, but Realistic ballistics doesn't hurt a game at all, just makes it harder to hit your targets at 100+ meters. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In my opinion, RPGs should be taken slowly; calculate the distance and estimate the arc of the projectile (which SHOULD be different when using Tandem rounds, because those are heavier) and then shoot. Right now you can hit a tank @ 200 meters and still hit it without raising your crosshair even 1 cm above the target. The skills gap just isn't there in this game, RPGs are almost guaranteed to hit.
  24. 1 point
    There's always the possibility of adjusting weight for select weapons/weapon classes based on feedback. We'll take a look at this thread in depth and see what occurs, keep in mind the current weights are still an early iteration. There's going to be an attachment balance pass soon-ish so we can slip in a couple of weight tweaks as well. The current idea is that attachments will be more differentiated in their weight impact, and some of them will be more crucial than others. We could, in theory, make barrel length the defining factor in a weapon, with short barrels heavily impacting medium-long range performance but being light enough to be viable as a lightweight/secondary option for a different gun. So you could take an AR as a secondary for a SR but it would have to be a heavily cut-down version. This is a tight situation we're in because we want to give the freedom of customization but such freedom is only as interesting as the dilemmas it faces you with. We'll try to work something out.
  25. 1 point
    Isn't that the same in almost any game? Using a higher magnification scope you have to compensate for recoil more because it's mostly a visual thing.
  26. 0 points
    для начала попробуй отключить касперского
This leaderboard is set to Warsaw/GMT+01:00
×
×
  • Create New...