TheScar
-
Posts
682 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Donations
128.00 GBP
Content Type
Articles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by TheScar
-
-
Yuz, in the haste of yesterday's events I mixed up raising and lowering in my statement.
It meant to be "less" Nyx numbers in result
I pitty the change in jet numbers, as I felt current released version was just spot on (maybe a tad over hihi) but I do acknowledge the usual Bambi won't agree with me here.
Fun thing, it divided good pilots from bad ones pretty quickly
-
11 minutes ago, Kacper said:
50% / 50%
A niech to wszyscy diabli!
addional notes :
- Nyx rewards spawn chance needs to be raised big time,its very comon getting 3 Nyx on 10 side missions (or less)
- enemy air count is on a way better level than previous versions,finally the AAjets finally got a need
-
I ve got a recording of me doing the "updated" Secure Intel #officer from last week, is there any interest from AW editing this and use it as HowToIntel example?
I say it requires some editing as it involved 2 pilot fools trying to compromise my taken effort, but once they died its a pretty nice take on that mission...
#3officers with binocs and added gear
#not intended
-
came online today,noticed the mission file got updated and being curious as usual i read the changelog ingame noticing this:
Quote- [Tweaked] Officer At Secure Intel Mission Is Now Weighed Down
Like really?
I was in assumption that there would be at least a tad of conversation about it,especially as i pointed out in my post above.
You just dumped the skill requiring for that mission down by alot imo.
I dont want to repeat myself,but this mission is with us since the very early I+A 2 times.
UNCHANGED.
It got dumped down already in I+A 3 when the "vehicle Intel only" version got added.
I m not saying it was a bad idea,i applauded the addition and still find it a good diversion from the original mission,altho its lacks some part of the "keep on your toe" feeling as its quite easier to achieve vehicle than officer intel.
And that is the point!
The possibility to have a mission that has the option to fail (if the players/team/solo rambo screw up either by lack of attention,killing the officer by a nearby explosion by a misguided missile or whatever else) is a essential addition to the generic MP missions.
Its different from get there,kill all and be rewarded.
Thats why it is the Queen of side missions and "making it easier" by weighting down the officer is a solution that i would call pittyfull.
At least i would of expected a wider exchange of arguments on this before changing and releasing it within a few days.
I mean,you realise Derp is calling for this change because he fails to come up with a solution when doing this mission solo?
Its not like there s a few more people having issues with this mission, i m quite sure you cant even name more than 10 people taking issue with this mission.
For real,i still recall a Intel mission Xwatt,Pepper and me did where i pursuited the intel cars for several km´s on foot from Skiptro to Agios Petros.
Or that one on Salt Lake where the officer was a diver and managed escaping via diving.
Thats entertainment!
Not dumping the skilllevel even more down.
No offense to your coding skills Stan,this one is not on you - but i call the decision made to change the mission a bad one.
Thats one really got me pissed off.
-
On 9/16/2019 at 11:30 PM, Stanhope said:
Well the officers position is already randomized now so he's not always behind that window or even on the bottom floor.
It doesnt really matter where the officer is actually located when you fire a AP missile pass a open window in the closed space of a HQ.
It has a spread of 4-5m depending on surface and obstacles and will most likely kill the officer with the 1st try as he s 99% not wearing any vest.
Speaking of,it may also be interesting to add him a vest,too.
Then again,just spawn the HQ with closed windows and spare the work of fiddling with the officer-gear.
Aaaaaaaand,exclude him from spawning on the roof,as that is ridicoulousy easy to take him out then.
Or,apply the code used for the engineer on factorys and step up the pain and time to complete the obj by needing to setup and send in a "BREACH"team .
I m fine with both options.
-
and how about spawning the HQ bunker with "closed" windows,that avoids "certain" people guiding a AP Titan pass it killing the officer in the process and will force up for close encounters,which benefits the added mines
Applying the factory engineer code on the HQ might be worth a thougt,too ... then its inf only and no UAV,Jet,MBT,ATspec will be able to obsolete the obj once in range.
Altho i first heard about it today while playing it seems questionable adding AP mines when the tower is crewed by CSAT forces.
Wouldnt they take damage by it too?
Well,things to investigate in the next upon days.
-
-
i m pretty certain the same side mission spawned several times after another (Secure Intel yesterday,minimum 3 times)
Considering the server was running several hours already,my money would be on the script stops working after x amount of time.
On enemy air I´d like to have a greater variety of jets and choppers with a tad higher aggressivity like Kajman,Xian and the non cluster versions of the Grinch and the Shakira.
1 jet 1 chopper < 20 players
2 jets 1 chopper < 45 players
2 jets 2 choppers > 45 players
Lets see how that woulkd turn out?
-
i disagree on changing the mission the suggest way by editing officer values (gear/stamina) and here s why :
SECURE INTEL is supposed to be tricky and is the Queen of side missions since adding it to the mission list.
It is expected to divide the weak rambos from the players cooperating or having a decent plan to this mission by adding the "capture" factor of the officer.
As,its eZ to do a vehicle intel,but the officer intel forces you to be on your toe´s all the time.
I had several (100s) of officer pursuits,either by car or on foot - and as long as you keep in the 500m range of the escaping officer its no issue.
That being said,its funny you mention you on a 3 year long intifada against that mission.
And you havnt figured out in all that time that if YOU drop parts of gear you r wearing/carrying you also run FASTER than the officer or minimum equally fast and then its just predicting his nxt movements to either overtake him with your car and block his path,then get out and make him surrender or you just run in 5m range near him and hit the GET INTEL option on the scrollwheel and VOILA .... mission done.
Astonishing.
How about you get off your high horse and ASK someone (me) for information before ranting on the forum about it in a useless way and trying to alter the mission setup.
Hmmmm ?
I do agree that the mission fails pretty lightly if the officer gets alerted to early and the escape cars run him over in maneuvering.
But thats only a 30% chance that happens and mostly only if you engage from to far to early.
Also,failure is part of the game and exitement.
Still,dont you nubcake my beloved intel mission to cater to weaklings.
Right?
Right!
Sincerly yours
The"im betta than you"Scar
-
some feedback @ 3.337
- repetetive side missions (seen yesterday 4 SECURE INTEL missions after another)
- way to less enemy air threats
- just now i m playing on fresh started server facing NO MAIN AO and only a side mission active - HC client is live - i capped a T140 in the supposed main AO and killed 3 naked unarmed CSAT crewman standing nxt to their T140,no red circle and the rest of the city is empty
-
-
-
... that accent - pretty nailed it,now on this forum too
#AWscawtish
# Yer bum´s oot the windoe
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fa621_MS3xI
-
-
we,the no_life hard workin rude addicted to drugs and hookers 18/5playing sexxy role models,welcome the effort taken and are looking forward to give this a go and see how it turns out.
I,personally also want to highlight the most contributing post in this topic done by @ansin11 as he s given this one a actual thougt and a proper read and pointed a solution.
-
-
... but quoting arguments is 23% of being german
And from my past years on AW servers i can assure some admin will get involved,but the bigger part decided to make it a non issue and give it to the guy that was first in it.
Ever since the Teddy incidents and my past topic i m left with no options other than suck it up and keep playing.
That turns out better or worse,depending on audience.
Like said,i appreciate a certain addition to the ruleset,that at least gives a foundation to move on from.
As i dont see the quoted rule of yours will fit this issue.
-
2 hours ago, Stanhope said:
How do I make a script that knows who to lock the reward for and who to allow in the reward?
there s no solution via script for this,at least it ll take to much workload for very little effort to be done
so no,you cant script a solution
2 hours ago, Stanhope said:Because as you well know having admins enforce this is impossible.
42 minutes ago, PiranhA said:tell me, did you contact a admin regarding this issue,
currently,the valid ruleset does treat this not as a violation.
Its still a "come first,get served first" policy.
I suggested this before and to me its the only option possible that doesnt take to much effort :
- add a rule : "rewards are priorized to people participating in the mission 10min after mission end / camping rewards will get you kicked"
- once such a issue happens,admins shall listen to the story,investigate if they got time for,if not delete the reward in question unless people settle the issue
I expect it easy to judge if a admin was/is online.
If not,flag players in question to be watched over a certain amount of time if they repeat that behaviour,then judge or rejudge.
Does make sense to me.
-
... and its regular players doing it and if you tell em about it you get shamed.
I opend a topic on exactly this issue 1,5years ago (and its been locked due to reasons no one understands) raising a discussion about a addition to the ruleset adding a guideline for this issue.
Yea,i do know it can be tough to enforce or overlook but at the current situation i m quite unhappy about it and the only reason stopping me is a 3rd (forever) ban of my account.
Also,in b4 I+A4 will solve this bullshit.
As currently I+A3 is the actual mission imo i expect a solution to this issue.
And dont come at me when im bitching about doing a endless amount of side missions to get 1 MBT that then gets taken by the first respawning player.
And its called legit currently,thats the best part of it.
They not even asking,a few days ago this 1 guy comes ,walks to rewards,jumps in Rhino while im finishing side > a MBT gets rewarded and he instanly dumps the Rhino,jumps in the MBT and is off.
Like,really?
Here s just 1 example of what i m talking about:
And those two are just the tip of the iceberg.
DO SOMETHING !
-
-
-
i dont recall i called for a removal,but the chance or hence necessity of such rewards is def debatable and therefor the % of such rewards needs to be tweaked.
so,what you use a tractor for,might care to voice your opinion on having that one please
And about MBTs,jets and UAVtools there s a sure higher amount of people having any of those than currently people that have bought CONTACT.
There may be a higher count here on the forums,but ingame ... its a different call.
-
so,version 3.3.33 is live on EU1# currently ...
And this is what i got for a first side mission reward :
funny,cause i remember talking to Mr.Xwatt about the past added side rewards that are useless like the Nyx Recon for example,the Hunter minigun and all those damn Offroads SPGwhatever thing - so i was on the safe side there wouldnt be more
uselessfun rewards but then ...Also,that thing requires CONTACT DLC - which in general should disqualify that thing as side reward as it blocks out a great portion of the audience,right?
goddamn ****** ******** ******!
And ima quote Gordon Ramsay here :
QuoteThis soufflé has sunk so badly James Cameron wants to make a film about it.”
Get it?
Because James Cameron filmed The Titanic
-
I discovered about 3 weeks ago that Xeno published a updated/new version of his DOMINATION 4 mission over at BI forums.
As EU2# is in general alot of time empty,how about hosting the origin mission I+A was based on there ?
I m (yet) not sure how Xeno views customisations of his mission,but that isnt a priority issue.
Here´s the features :
QuoteYour goal is it to free randomly picked targets from all enemy forces.
Resolving side missions will get you better vehicles (tanks, helicopters, planes).Game mode: MP, Coop 1-40 players (50 in the TvT version)
Addon's required: None
Sides: Blufor, Opfor
Features: Custom made revive, AI, Ranked version, extDB3 support and many more- Randomly picked main targets
- Many side missions
- Custom made revive
- Dynamic weather
- Many parameters can be changed by an admin in the server lobby (enable AI version or ranked version for example)
- Ammo boxes can be loaded into some vehicles (Ammo point at base)
- Uses MHQs for respawn (once deployed)
- Teleport from one deployed MHQ to another
- Vehicles can be lifted by the lift chopper (MHQs for examples)
- Some wrecks can be lifted by the wreck lift chopper and can get repaired at the wreck point at base
- Uses BIS Virtual Arsenal for ammo boxes
- Parajump from main targets (once cleared)
- Engineers can repair and refuel damaged vehicles (needs Toolkit)
- Engineers can load static weapons into engineer trucks
- Artillery operators can mark artillery targets with a laser designator and can call in artillery strikes
- Team leaders of Alpha, Charlie and Echo can also mark artillery targets and they can call in air drops
- Mission dialog to change viewdistance, gras, etc.
- Squad management dialog
- Save player stats and mission progress to a SQL database (if extDB3 is configured)
- Support for ACE (if it is running on the server)
- Supports dedicated servers and hosted environments
- and lots of features more...
So,how you gentlemen vouch ?
YEY or NEY ?
Invade & Annex 3 Version History And Feedback Thread
in Invade & Annex
Posted
www.nooooooooooooooooo.com