Forged Alliance Forever Forged Alliance Forever Forums 2013-04-15T19:23:07+02:00 /feed.php?f=2&t=3422 2013-04-15T19:23:07+02:00 2013-04-15T19:23:07+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3422&p=38453#p38453 <![CDATA[Re: What if land units could shoot at realistic range?]]> Statistics: Posted by ttsolo — 15 Apr 2013, 19:23


]]>
2013-04-15T16:50:23+02:00 2013-04-15T16:50:23+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3422&p=38424#p38424 <![CDATA[Re: What if land units could shoot at realistic range?]]>
Sounds like an interesting proposal, would be a totally different game that will have to be rebalanced on all sides to make it playable.

But we do have a current balance, I rather keep realism out of the harmony that this game has going on for it, it is what makes it fun.

If we talk bout realism, we need to revise all the technology that even makes the concept of ACUs, full automatization and wireless transmission over long distances possible.

Statistics: Posted by Julia-358 — 15 Apr 2013, 16:50


]]>
2013-04-15T03:53:38+02:00 2013-04-15T03:53:38+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3422&p=38363#p38363 <![CDATA[Re: What if land units could shoot at realistic range?]]>
ttsolo wrote:
have you tried Wargame : European escalation ? It's a good game, orientated more like a simulation.


I care not one bit if Supreme Commander units behave "realistically" or not, because nothing is SupCom is grounded in realism. With Wargame, however, I get greatly annoyed when I see stuff that is blatantly unrealistic, because it is a game that at least makes a decent shot at realism.

Statistics: Posted by Pathogenic — 15 Apr 2013, 03:53


]]>
2013-04-15T02:58:20+02:00 2013-04-15T02:58:20+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3422&p=38359#p38359 <![CDATA[Re: What if land units could shoot at realistic range?]]>
MushrooMars wrote:
I'm gonna need a little help with this one. Is it possible to make a unit *not* knock down trees?

Because it looks a little ridiculous with little tiny Flares tearing up forests as they run through them at 10 KPH.

Also, is it possible to change the shape of unit formations?


I actually like how they knock down trees. When you think about it, even the smallest units in the game are massive (the light assault bots are just as tall as the trees, if not taller most of the time).

For unit formations, once you have them in formation by holding down the right mouse button, you can left click to change the formation. Or are you talking about something else?

Statistics: Posted by EasyCo — 15 Apr 2013, 02:58


]]>
2013-04-14T23:58:28+02:00 2013-04-14T23:58:28+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3422&p=38346#p38346 <![CDATA[Re: What if land units could shoot at realistic range?]]> Statistics: Posted by ttsolo — 14 Apr 2013, 23:58


]]>
2013-04-14T00:45:55+02:00 2013-04-14T00:45:55+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3422&p=38234#p38234 <![CDATA[Re: What if land units could shoot at realistic range?]]>
MushrooMars wrote:
I know. I'll be sure to give planes countermeasures and dodging skillz, and give the SAMs a low rate of fire as a result.


My point was, that is not necessary. You can keep SAM range roughly where it is and still keep everything plausible.

Statistics: Posted by Badsearcher — 14 Apr 2013, 00:45


]]>
2013-03-31T22:29:42+02:00 2013-03-31T22:29:42+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3422&p=36441#p36441 <![CDATA[Re: What if land units could shoot at realistic range?]]>
Because it looks a little ridiculous with little tiny Flares tearing up forests as they run through them at 10 KPH.

Also, is it possible to change the shape of unit formations?

Statistics: Posted by MushrooMars — 31 Mar 2013, 22:29


]]>
2013-03-31T16:59:08+02:00 2013-03-31T16:59:08+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3422&p=36386#p36386 <![CDATA[Re: What if land units could shoot at realistic range?]]>
Also, what should be the RoF of SAMs? And should they cost energy/mass to reload? So many questions.

Statistics: Posted by MushrooMars — 31 Mar 2013, 16:59


]]>
2013-03-28T18:37:11+02:00 2013-03-28T18:37:11+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3422&p=36039#p36039 <![CDATA[Re: What if land units could shoot at realistic range?]]>
For example, in the Ethiopian-Eritrean War both sides had jets with long range missile with a maximum range well over 100 kilometers. The difference was that Ethiopian jets were piloted by mercenaries and the Eritreans by people who were willing to risk their lives. The Eritreans were a lot more successful because the mercenaries would fire their missiles as soon as they were in range and then fly back which gave the Eritrean pilots the maximum amount of time to deploy countermeasures and outmaneuver the missiles. Then they would fly in closer and fire their own missiles which would leave the enemy pilots with less time to counter the missiles.

So my whole point is that for various weapons there's a difference between maximum range and maximum effective range, especially when it comes to targetting fast moving things that we can presume would have countermeasures in the 37th century.

Statistics: Posted by Badsearcher — 28 Mar 2013, 18:37


]]>
2013-03-28T15:34:15+02:00 2013-03-28T15:34:15+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3422&p=36021#p36021 <![CDATA[Re: What if land units could shoot at realistic range?]]>
I plan on turning the T3 Mobile Arty into long-range Tank Destroyers.

Also, SupCom may not be exactly suited for these ranges. The smallest, most basic SAM missile I could find has a maximum range of 20km. I downsized it to 5km for the Tactical Sam, and set it to 40km for the Strategic SAM.

Statistics: Posted by MushrooMars — 28 Mar 2013, 15:34


]]>
2013-03-28T12:56:18+02:00 2013-03-28T12:56:18+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3422&p=35991#p35991 <![CDATA[Re: What if land units could shoot at realistic range?]]> Statistics: Posted by da_monstr — 28 Mar 2013, 12:56


]]>
2013-03-27T18:16:06+02:00 2013-03-27T18:16:06+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3422&p=35900#p35900 <![CDATA[Re: What if land units could shoot at realistic range?]]>
Badsearcher wrote:
Maybe it would be a bit of a cop out but you could justify giving limits to laser weaponry as being explained as tracking or mechanical limits.


If anything, lasers are more accurate than any form of ballistic weapon. The mechanical limitations of servo motors or other parts of weapons also existent in conventional weapons. If you want realistic weaponry, that's something you just have to accept.

Statistics: Posted by Plasma_Wolf — 27 Mar 2013, 18:16


]]>
2013-03-27T16:36:49+02:00 2013-03-27T16:36:49+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3422&p=35884#p35884 <![CDATA[Re: What if land units could shoot at realistic range?]]> Statistics: Posted by Pathogenic — 27 Mar 2013, 16:36


]]>
2013-03-27T15:19:09+02:00 2013-03-27T15:19:09+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3422&p=35871#p35871 <![CDATA[Re: What if land units could shoot at realistic range?]]>
WoT doesn't have naval battles, long-range tank battles, realistic simulation, aircraft, hovercraft, or infantry. At least, that's what I got from looking at a small trailer of it.

Statistics: Posted by MushrooMars — 27 Mar 2013, 15:19


]]>
2013-03-27T07:45:18+02:00 2013-03-27T07:45:18+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=3422&p=35821#p35821 <![CDATA[Re: What if land units could shoot at realistic range?]]>
You know, this is a tricky thing that might add a bit of strategy but perhaps make air overpowered when attacked mass because now when you destroy a mature mass extractor it doesn't just cost more resources but time as well.

Statistics: Posted by Badsearcher — 27 Mar 2013, 07:45


]]>