*sam* Posted Mar 8, 2010, 7:45 pm	Just to let you know I'm currently working on randomised ambush spawns.. past experience tells me I need to announce such a thing before springing it on you..
Karz Master Posted Mar 8, 2010, 7:54 pm	*sam* said: past experience tells me I need to announce such a thing before springing it on you.. You know it But anyway cool! Non-linearity and emergent gameplay is always welcome!
*Urban Decay* Posted Mar 8, 2010, 8:01 pm	Does this mean there may be more of a chance to get hit by an ambush, since they will be better equipped to set themselves into an ambush pattern? Or will it just provide better spawn positioning for their ambush in the case one occurs against you?
*sam* Posted Mar 8, 2010, 8:16 pm	I wasn't planning on making it any more likely, Urban. Although right now certain maps aren't capable of it at all, so maybe it's more common than it might seem.. if you get me.
Groove Champion Posted Mar 8, 2010, 8:58 pm	cheers
*Longo* Posted Mar 8, 2010, 10:46 pm	Any spawns where the NPCs will be the ones ambushed?
*Marc5iver* marcgillespie55@gmail.com Posted Mar 8, 2010, 11:00 pm	Longo said: Any spawns where the NPCs will be the ones ambushed?  I second this!
*sam* Posted Mar 8, 2010, 11:13 pm	I dunno.. those poor NPCs get a fairly hard time of it already don't they?
*Rezeak* reecestensel@hotmail.co.uk Posted Mar 8, 2010, 11:15 pm	Well I dunno sam, they AI seemed to have smartened up recently... I had a Cutlass shadow my every move for 1,300 turns, It was impossible to trap him or turtle him anywhere!
Marrkos Posted Mar 8, 2010, 11:17 pm	*sam* said: I dunno.. those poor NPCs get a fairly hard time of it already don't they? No kidding. Now, if there was a checkbox for 'Ignore CR', which would generate an enemy with a completely random CR*....  * - I think weighting would need to generate higher CRs more often than lower CRs to reduce trivial match ups.
*Lugal* Posted Mar 8, 2010, 11:23 pm	*sam* said: I wasn't planning on making it any more likely, Urban. Although right now certain maps aren't capable of it at all, so maybe it's more common than it might seem.. if you get me. Perhaps not possible with the basic "surround the PCs" spawn pattern, but what about giving the system alternate spawn patterns based on the terrain (or randomly, which would be easier). So say it picks a spot, then decides to have the ambushers spawn 1) surrounding the PCs, or 2) in front and behind, or 3) to the left and the right, etc.
*Longo* Posted Mar 8, 2010, 11:23 pm	*sam* said: I dunno.. those poor NPCs get a fairly hard time of it already don't they? As alot of people use rear facing weapons, it might not be so bad....find yourself in an ambushing situation...but with rear facing weapons, haha
Fealty Lost Posted Mar 9, 2010, 3:16 am	That would be perfect...180 and bring the entire enemy formation under your guns in 2 turns? I'm all for it.
*Bastille* Posted Mar 9, 2010, 12:02 pm	With a good scout roll, could we get a chance to see an ambush coming, and spawn before the ambush point.
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Mar 9, 2010, 12:12 pm	then it wouldnt be an ambush Bast
FireFly Posted Mar 9, 2010, 12:17 pm	Oh yes it would still be an ambush, just a really bad one
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Mar 9, 2010, 12:20 pm	an ambush is an ambush, a realy bad one is what we get normally
FireFly Posted Mar 9, 2010, 12:41 pm	Let me rephrase that... It was an ambush, you just avoided it
*goat starer* Posted Mar 9, 2010, 12:55 pm	i would like to see a spawn on certain maps where a bunch of cars spawn head on on the road ahead of you and a smaller group spawn at from the sides at your rear. roadblock and ambush. it would also be nice to see a few proper roadblocks.... couple of knackered busses over the road at a narrow point... bunch of cars type of thing. could possibly be a sort of wasteland 'toll' where you get an option to pay or pass (linked to factions)
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Mar 9, 2010, 1:12 pm	FireFly said: Let me rephrase that... It was an ambush, you just avoided it  Let me rephrase that ...it was an ambush, that had not evolved yet  goat ... the idea of two or even three spawn points would be nice, i like the toll
Bruv Posted Mar 9, 2010, 1:56 pm	If you want to ambush NPCs then just have them visible when you are setting upat the start of an encounter. Not sure it would be more fun though. It would be good to encounter some better ambushes, it is a bit easy to just floor it and get free before they even have a chance to get to you. Maybe have some spawn positions behind buildings, or have some dropped weapons on the road. I like the blockade idea. On the down side there are some maps where two apaches in from and two behind will murder your flash in short order. Again, not really more fun.
*Bastille* Posted Mar 9, 2010, 2:43 pm	Quote: It was an ambush, you just avoided it I love the idea of some more interesting ambushes as I have become used to most of the ambush points on the maps I travel on and can easily avoid most and reposition to my advantage, but as the ambushes get nastier it would be nice to see the scout help here. Would still make for some interesting fights. And here comes that realism increase. Ambush spotting scout skill. Allows to avoid and setup ambushes. If we hunt a squad, wouldn't we be able to ambush. Could even change the way people set up their cars... Im setting up rear gunners more now, just cause it makes it easier to run and setup. Im finding rear firing fights a little less interesting that being able to Dog fight with an Apache or Landy, just easier. Like Space Empires, Space Rogue or Moo II where you can make a whole bunch of cheap fast fighters witch can easily take out anything in the game just by exploiting the game mechanics. Quote: it would also be nice to see a few proper roadblocks.... Road blocks would be grand
LoSboccacc Posted Mar 9, 2010, 3:00 pm	with mines, spikes and pedestrian with granate launchers ok ok I'll stop giving to sam nasty ideas.
*Lugal* Posted Mar 9, 2010, 4:04 pm	Bastiel said: or Moo II where you can make a whole bunch of cheap fast fighters witch can easily take out anything in the game just by exploiting the game mechanics. Or MoOIII before they finally fixed point-defense weapons... missile boats were very very overpowered. Giving the system several spawn templates to pick from would likely be the easiest to develop (how it picked being the potential hard part).  If there was a way to somehow select the most appropriate to the terrain it could be an impressive feature.  The main problem with ambushes is that too often the ambush positioning is a liability for the NPCs.  Sometimes it's great, but sometimes it's just silly.  The 'best' ambush I ever fought was on Under a Bloody Red Sky... I was stuck in the canyon, with multiple cars at either end, and several cars up on the ridges above me.  There was even a Maelstrom that stopped behind the ridgeline and 'naded me the whole time (never did get LoS on him).  It made it a hard and exciting fight.  The 'worst' was on Forever Yellow Skies, were terrain split up the enemy that I never fought more than one at a time.  Half the enemy coudn't even get to me, and I had to go hunt them.
*goat starer* Posted Mar 9, 2010, 8:19 pm	ambushes on scattered hills are the most dangerous i think... you have a fixed narrow route.. if you have a couple of rocket cars or a beaster in front it can be very tricky... they also look the most realistic with the enemy flooding out of the canyons ahead of you and blocking your retreat.
*goat starer* Posted Mar 9, 2010, 11:41 pm	the other thing that would work really well with factions is three way battles... eg. you meet a bunch of civ traders being pursued by slavers...would make for new vehicle set ups (like using front guns)... big boosts to rep with factions...different spawns... all sorts of stuff
*Urban Decay* Posted Mar 9, 2010, 11:55 pm	That would be so nice to be able to come in on an ongoing battle and try to save your faction mates from their demise.
*Tinker* Posted Mar 10, 2010, 1:18 am	What Goat sugested
*Bastille* Posted Mar 10, 2010, 2:21 am	Yup, great idea Goat
Zephyr Posted Mar 10, 2010, 2:41 am	Yeah, I like Goat's idea. Roadblocks FTW. Also, how about this: a two-stage ambush? Say, you get the initial group of enemy vehicles spawning, but once you get, say, 20 turns into the encounter, a second group of enemy spawns somewhere else?
*goat starer* Posted Mar 10, 2010, 11:37 am	anything like that that stops maps having one 'solution' depending on your spawn point would be good.. I imagine most vets know pretty much exactly what their strategy with almost every spawn in the game. Add some variation... seperate the enemy... and you get a game which suddenly becomes MUCH more interesting. it would alos be more dangerous (which is a good thing) but might need some careful implementation or i can already hear the cries of 'foul!' as people actually lose scouts!
*sam* Posted Mar 10, 2010, 11:41 am	goat starer said: anything like that that stops maps having one 'solution' depending on your spawn point would be good.. I imagine most vets know pretty much exactly what their strategy with almost every spawn in the game. Add some variation... seperate the enemy... and you get a game which suddenly becomes MUCH more interesting. it would alos be more dangerous (which is a good thing) but might need some careful implementation or i can already hear the cries of 'foul!' as people actually lose scouts! I agree with all of this goat... :-) I'm trying to be as cautious as possible with spawn distances, to start with. Plus I will introduce the new approach on a per-map basis, starting with some of the more open maps.
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Mar 10, 2010, 12:00 pm	some good ideas coming up here .... 3 days without client .... its beginning to hurt
*goat starer* Posted Mar 10, 2010, 12:39 pm	*sam* said: starting with some of the more open maps. sam.. some of the most open maps are currently the hardest... i would introduce it on the ones with lots of 'options' eg. scattered grounds, spooky forest, the gates maps in somerset and badlands...
*Wolfsbane* Posted Mar 10, 2010, 12:43 pm	Yeah, ambushes on open maps scare me. It's one of the reasons I use scouts in GW and SS, but not further south.
*sam* Posted Mar 10, 2010, 1:25 pm	OK, fair enough. I was kind of coming at it from another angle.. it will be much harder to get it to work correctly on more difficult maps such as Once Upon a Town..
*goat starer* Posted Mar 10, 2010, 1:39 pm	sam.. maps like scattered hills, once upon a town etc are already good maps with the current ambush set up.. they would also be ideal fro the roadblock idea. i would have thought that starting the enemy in 2 points on once upon a town would be a great idea... at the moment it is an ambush map for the players... wait in the buildings and hit them as they come round the corner.. but you cant ambush an enemy that is coming from 2 places. just start the enemy in two groups one ahead.. one behind... perhaps lower teh CR of the opposition a bit.
FireFly Posted Mar 10, 2010, 1:46 pm	Now now sam, once upon a town isn't hard, this is one of the ways I would do it... On second thought, not enough bandit cars, but you get the picture  Need any help designing some really evil ambushes sam? I'm your man  Edit: Goat, we seem to think pretty alike
*sam* Posted Mar 10, 2010, 1:57 pm	Quote: Now now sam, once upon a town isn't hard, this is one of the ways I would do it... Not hard for a human, no. Would you like to write an algorithm to automate this sort of calc..?    -- also don't forget the gardens in OUAT.. Quote: Need any help designing some really evil ambushes sam? I'm your man I think you're missing the point maybe.. these are to be automatically calculated, not manually designed.
*Wolfsbane* Posted Mar 10, 2010, 1:58 pm	Yes. What language would you like it in?
FireFly Posted Mar 10, 2010, 2:01 pm	Yeah, I know, Pretty silly of me, still, thats how I would imagine an ambush on that map... very very devastating... Still, I can see why you would like more random ambushes, but I will still say that having "set" ambushes are much better for maps like that.
*Lugal* Posted Mar 10, 2010, 4:07 pm	*sam* said: Quote: Now now sam, once upon a town isn't hard, this is one of the ways I would do it... Not hard for a human, no. Would you like to write an algorithm to automate this sort of calc..?    That's the point that makes this hard.  It's very easy for us to look at a map and pick where to place the cars.  But to have the system automagically place cars in a logical and effective distribution that is appropriate to the terrain, while still allowing for it to pick the encounter locations... that's the trick. If it's not done just right, all you get is variety in silly spawns, rather than an actual improvement.
4saken Posted Mar 11, 2010, 1:46 am	*Lugal* said: If it's not done just right, all you get is variety in silly spawns, rather than an actual improvement. Yeah I am not sure how you're going to be able to generate random ambushes that are effective. Randomness usually always means car spawning in foolish areas as the terrain is the deciding factor. I think best way may be to have several ambush spawn ideas per map section akin to what FF made. But we need some easy way to set this up that's programmed in somehow (for instance pulling up a map in something like TAC and setting spawn circles). Then you could have players come up with nasty spawns (and submit them for approval). Given time, an ambush could be a terrifying thing.
Lord Foul Posted Mar 11, 2010, 3:05 am	FireFly said: Yeah, I know, Pretty silly of me, still, thats how I would imagine an ambush on that map... very very devastating... Still, I can see why you would like more random ambushes, but I will still say that having "set" ambushes are much better for maps like that. Sure an ambush like that would be "devastating", but having bandits teleport 80m behind you out of thin air is silly.  They would need to be going very fast to catch up to you and you would see them coming. Would you stay at 30mph going down a highway if multiple bandits were fast approaching from the rear? Anyone can make devastating ambushes, but they need to be made in a realistic fashion while at the same time not put the player in a no win situation.
*Urban Decay* Posted Mar 11, 2010, 3:53 am	Well, considering that you can reach an escape distance, you could have an easy looking spawn near you in ambush formation, set as a distraction. Meanwhile 350m or 500m away, on turn 2, the real strike force spawns and comes barreling in after you. From any number of different directions, not always all in a group. That would be quite the surprise ambush. If you didn't notice it happened, or didn't see where they happened to spawn off in the distance, you might set up somewhere while the rest are coming in from the side or behind you.
*Dark Tempest* Posted Mar 11, 2010, 4:17 am	Now there's an idea I really like! The original ambush would have a very weak CR, something low enough to be very easy but still high enough to be something that a very good scout roll would come up with. Then on some turn after the start, the remainder of the NPC's spawn at a suitable distance barreling down on the player squad and bring the CR up to a horrible scout roll result. This would be the result of a completely botched roll on a 5 mile scout with a 12 skill scouting ganger. Very rare, but very scary for the players it happens to. It would keep us on our toes for those scouts that seem too easy.
Stingray191 Posted Mar 11, 2010, 4:56 am	Bugger. Looks like I'm redesigning my travel groups. Which I guess is the idea and a good thing. Now where did I put that Tank Gun I bought on impulse end up? :] And what happens when you put a TG and a ATG on the same car? :] Yes Yes - a joke as old as Car Wars.
*Bastille* Posted Mar 11, 2010, 8:30 am	Put it in a Sub Compact!
*sam* Posted Mar 11, 2010, 8:39 am	4saken said: *Lugal* said: If it's not done just right, all you get is variety in silly spawns, rather than an actual improvement. Yeah I am not sure how you're going to be able to generate random ambushes that are effective. Randomness usually always means car spawning in foolish areas as the terrain is the deciding factor. I think best way may be to have several ambush spawn ideas per map section akin to what FF made. But we need some easy way to set this up that's programmed in somehow (for instance pulling up a map in something like TAC and setting spawn circles). Then you could have players come up with nasty spawns (and submit them for approval). Given time, an ambush could be a terrifying thing. Yes, the idea of player-submitted spawns had occurred to me, and is a nice idea. In terms of automating this stuff, a few key rules can help a lot in keeping the spawns reasonable.. e.g. there has to be LOS from a spawn point to the player squad, the spawn point has to be on higher ground, etc.
Serephe Posted Mar 11, 2010, 8:42 am	But... but... that might make it HARD!
FireFly Posted Mar 11, 2010, 10:56 am	*sam* said: 4saken said: *Lugal* said: If it's not done just right, all you get is variety in silly spawns, rather than an actual improvement. Yeah I am not sure how you're going to be able to generate random ambushes that are effective. Randomness usually always means car spawning in foolish areas as the terrain is the deciding factor. I think best way may be to have several ambush spawn ideas per map section akin to what FF made. But we need some easy way to set this up that's programmed in somehow (for instance pulling up a map in something like TAC and setting spawn circles). Then you could have players come up with nasty spawns (and submit them for approval). Given time, an ambush could be a terrifying thing. Yes, the idea of player-submitted spawns had occurred to me, and is a nice idea. In terms of automating this stuff, a few key rules can help a lot in keeping the spawns reasonable.. e.g. there has to be LOS from a spawn point to the player squad, the spawn point has to be on higher ground, etc. Actually, I'd say that having Los to the target isnt a requirement, for example, there is no worse pain in this game than having a CGL car spawn behind a hill, actually, if you can without to much effort, you should program it so that cars like maelstroms get unique positions, also, if los is a requirement, cars will just spawn on the edge of the "Higher ground" and thereby probably reach the bottom before the fight commences, unless you can have the AI hold position on those hills, it might just serve to give us free topshots. I never assumed programing it would be easy, my head is just a bucket of ideas, so to say, but couldn't it be possible to somehow save a Tac vehicle setup, and use the code from that save to make the ambushes easier to code in? I don't know how this works, but that, from my limited knowledge, seems possible... Or maybe tac templates dont save the right way, if so, maybe that could be changed... Again, I'm not good with code...
Fealty Lost Posted Mar 11, 2010, 11:53 pm	I have this to say about the new 'ambushes.' Suck, suck, suckity suck suckass suckity#### suckitydumbass suckity ambush idea. I actually had this massive commentary...but deleted it. Why bother.... I guess I do 2-3 vehicle scouts now, just like everyone else. Thanks for that.
*Burden* Posted Mar 12, 2010, 12:02 am	I agree with DA... These ambushes would be awesome, but they shouldn't happen this way every single time you're ambushed. A perfectly executed, 35-70 meters away ambush should almost never happen. Say, when your scout does a horrible roll. It'd keep everyone on their toes.
Zephyr Posted Mar 12, 2010, 12:06 am	Well sure... a "good scout roll" should allow the players to ambush the NPCs; a bad scout roll results in the opposite.  I believe we're talking about the results of a bad scout roll in this thread....
Stingray191 Posted Mar 12, 2010, 4:13 am	Event number DA?
Serephe Posted Mar 12, 2010, 4:36 am	Damon, you said yourself you don't even use a scout... and while your encounter was a pretty dangerous spawn, it didn't help that you drove straight into the enemy cars, rather than turning your apaches to let them slip through -- and on top of that, you spawned your van out of protection of any of your vehicles, so of course it'd get shot up. You lost ONE vehicle. I've seen you get your carrier vans shot up before. It was no different this time. Honestly, that ambush isn't as bad as a lot of the ambushes I had to deal with BEFORE the system was changed. *Burden* said: I agree with DA... These ambushes would be awesome, but they shouldn't happen this way every single time you're ambushed. A perfectly executed, 35-70 meters away ambush should almost never happen. Say, when your scout does a horrible roll. It'd keep everyone on their toes. Burden, it doesn't happen every single time. I had an ambush today that was far tamer. Honestly, any time anything remotely different is added people whinge about it... you'd think they just wanted to fight AI that dives off cliffs to give them free loot so that they can go out and watch more AI dive off cliffs...
Marrkos Posted Mar 12, 2010, 4:53 am	*Serephe* said: Honestly, any time anything remotely different is added people whinge about it Welcome to the vast network of tubes and pipes that is the Interwebs.
*Tinker* Posted Mar 12, 2010, 9:17 am	[quote]Sure an ambush like that would be "devastating", but having bandits teleport 80m behind you out of thin air is silly. They would need to be going very fast to catch up to you and you would see them coming. Would you stay at 30mph going down a highway if multiple bandits were fast approaching from the rear? Anyone can make devastating ambushes, but they need to be made in a realistic fashion while at the same time not put the player in a no win situation. [/quote] Why is it that we drive a 30 mph and get an ambush like Damon where they spawn 30-70 m off your front and back? To roll play it we could say that the scout roll is not only about detecting them, but also engaging them But to help out the role-play (starting the scout at 30 mph is kind of silly) in such extreme examples. What if if they can spawn so close we can all start at varying faster speeds? i.e. 30-70 mph?, also like Urban's idea of a 2nd wave coming towards you at high speed too. The part about starting at 70 mph with them almost touching your bumper can be explained as a failed initial tactical deployment err: on retrospect having a head-on collision at 70 mph could piss off a buch of people
*sam* Posted Mar 12, 2010, 9:25 am	*Tinker* said: Why is it that we drive a 30 mph and get an ambush like Damon where they spawn 30-70 m off your front and back? We drive at 30mph at all times, right now. This is the average travel speed which, as you know, incorporates scouting ahead and behind and avoiding any armour damage during your travel, on generally poor roads. Certainly this could be changed per-map.. it would only make sense to spawn faster on ones with good roads, for example.. Also, I am considering varied travel speeds based on the roads and skill of scout, plus perhaps some player choice (but if you go too fast you're more liable to get attacked, plus may receive automatic armour damage). *Tinker* said: To roll play it we could say that the scout roll is not only about detecting them, but also engaging them But to help out the role-play (starting the scout at 30 mph is kind of silly) in such extreme examples. What if if they can spawn so close we can all start at varying faster speeds? i.e. 30-70 mph? There's some good logical thinking here..
*sam* Posted Mar 12, 2010, 1:09 pm	I'm now patching in tweaks to yesterday’s spawning code.. 1) a reasonable scout is now much more capable of avoiding ambushes (they *were* happening too often); 2) the distances that enemies will be at, with the new dynamically-chosen ambush spawns, has been substantially increased; 3) your spawn circle size is now based on your scout and also somewhat the map (this is something I intended to do a long time ago); 4) initial car speeds are now somewhat based on the map (they’ll be in the range 30mph-40mph) – and the initial speed of the NPC ambushers are also somewhat based on your 'scout roll'
lordbam Posted Mar 12, 2010, 1:43 pm	*sam* said: I'm now patching in tweaks to yesterday’s spawning code.. 1) a reasonable scout is now much more capable of avoiding ambushes (they *were* happening too often); 2) the distances that enemies will be at, with the new dynamically-chosen ambush spawns, has been substantially increased; 3) your spawn circle size is now based on your scout and also somewhat the map (this is something I intended to do a long time ago); 4) initial car speeds are now somewhat based on the map (they’ll be in the range 30mph-40mph) – and the initial speed of the NPC ambushers are also somewhat based on your 'scout roll' I'm wondering what that will do with my scouting without scouts.... :-)
*sam* Posted Mar 12, 2010, 1:50 pm	Now why would you scout without scouts?
lordbam Posted Mar 12, 2010, 1:58 pm	*sam* said: Now why would you scout without scouts? more fun :-)
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Mar 12, 2010, 2:10 pm	No scout = no set up circle i would imagine
*Tinker* Posted Mar 12, 2010, 2:24 pm	[quote=*sam*] 3) your spawn circle size is now based on your scout and also somewhat the map (this is something I intended to do a long time ago); [/quote] Sounds great, would it be fair to assume that on a return with damaged engines the circle size would be lessened?
*sam* Posted Mar 12, 2010, 2:33 pm	*Grograt* said: No scout = no set up circle i would imagine  Nah, there's a mix/max size for the setup circle
*sam* Posted Mar 12, 2010, 2:34 pm	*Tinker* said: *sam* said: 3) your spawn circle size is now based on your scout and also somewhat the map (this is something I intended to do a long time ago); Sounds great, would it be fair to assume that on a return with damaged engines the circle size would be lessened? Generally a larger squad will have a worse 'scout rating', I guess.. but the state of the engines isn't actually tested
*sam* Posted Mar 12, 2010, 2:35 pm	lordbam said: *sam* said: Now why would you scout without scouts? more fun :-) Heh, I thought you were going to say something about having a better chance of getting rares. And I was going to counter with (pasted from a RC discussion we've been having): I think there is some level of urban myth behind the idea that bringing a poor scout yields more rares. In fact, bringing a poor scout will certainly yield a higher-CR attack, but the actual vehicles in that attack are based on the fame of the NPC gang plus the location of the map. So yeah.. I guess if you get 12 vehicles rather than 10 against you, then you do strictly speaking have a 20% increased chance of rares, but only because you're up against 20% higher CR.. I think this is part of a bigger trend that we see here from time to time... perhaps due to the fact that precise numbers and calculations are hidden. We see players getting hunches about the effect of certain things, and they discuss these hunches with other players.. before you know it, these hunches are "known facts".
*sam* Posted Mar 12, 2010, 2:40 pm	Also.. please do continue to post your experiences with the new ambushes.. any info. is useful..
Fealty Lost Posted Mar 12, 2010, 2:43 pm	As to my scout yesterday in which I guess I was the first to experience a 'new' ambush: Firstly: I had an 85 scout with me. He was in an Apache. I wasn't sure about the spawn points on that map in my position, even asked in lobby if anyone was familiar with spawn points there. Not knowing, but figuring they'd be, of course, either behind or ahead, given the terrain, I set up a loose formation, with my carrier van (dual spike droppers) in tight to the rear of the formation. I had a box van/ram, Mutant Merc', Lancer and Mut' Marauder 35 meters to my front, facing me, on the downhill. I was on a slight grade uphill. 4 vehicles 55 meters to my left, including a Strongarm, Mut' Marauder, couple sedans. 5 behind me at 65 meters, including a Black Rock. 2 to my left at 45 meters: a Mut' Marauder and a Punisher. With no speed, facing uphill and surrounded, the tactical solution is, of course, attack the weak side, meaning I'd have to go right at about my 2 o'clock to set a line of escape up a hill with cover. I was going to get rammed. No question. They were moving way faster than I was, on the uphill, facing me, with the grade to help them accelerate. But I needed speed to get over a small rise to my right. No way I was avoiding getting rammed. The Mutant Merc' hit me first. A v8 and a 4L were damaged into the 80% range. The box van got another one, same result, and by Turn 2, I had smoking engines and, worst of all, half my vehicles knocked below 20 MPH due to the ramming and this caused my carrier van to have no avenue except to try and get through the tangle of 4 enemy and his own guys. A subsequent additional ram knocked an Apache perpendicular to the van's path of travel, stopping it in its tracks. With no momentum/speed, my entire squad was now getting pummelled from all sides. The carrier van never stood a chance, it doesn't matter where it had been positioned. By Turn 3, I had 4 vehicles with internal damage. My other 'covering' vehicle, an Apache with FOJ/MDer, was breached on its bottom and lost all but one reload for each weapon. As usual, the enemy just drove over/through/around the mines, but I did get one detonation, which is great, considering they usually miss them all or drive right over them. A Lancer managed to shoot up 3 Apaches and a LandRunner. Like nearly every person who scouts BL, I was set up with rear-facing weaponry. So, against the 6 vehicles to my front/oblique right, I had no defense. They had their way with me. Even at a 50/50 split, I'd have been outgunned 4-1. There was no challenge here. I knew I could get out of the ambush, the problem is, no matter what vehicles I'd been in, something was going to die. Buzzers would have been raped, especially from behind, given their propensity to take top shots from shots against them when they're even slightly angled downwards towards an enemy. With 3.2v8's, getting stopped by ramming/collisions, and armed as the vast majority are, with dual CCs rear, they'd have died too. We've seen several examples of this lately in regular 360 ambushes, just ask Mad Mike. My problem lies not with the ambush, but with a no-win situation. I knew something was going to die, the question was, what and how many. I got lucky, that's all there is to it. I should have lost 2-3 Apaches along with the carrier van, but I was able to get moving and get some terrain cover long enough to make a dash up the side of a hill to cover. My real issue is: large vehicle scouts are now a liability instead of a challenging option. All this new ambush stuff has done is force players who like 5+ vehicle scouts to stop doing them, lest they get caught in one of these and NOT be so lucky. Of course, there are only a few of us, so who cares? Why does the spawn have to be: Front, Back or scattered? Couldn't (and wouldn't) dynamic gameplay be enhanced by the enemy showing up enmasse in a totally random position facing towards us, to indicate their taking a short cut through the terrain to intercept us? If their scout defeats ours, then the distance to our squad would be reduced. To think we're stupid enough (even without a scout) to drive to 35 meters of the enemy without seeing them is ludicrous. Allow players to set their squad speed. The faster they go, the harder it is to react to the enemy and the easier it is to drive into an ambush. You would cut down the travel time on 50 mile scouts, but run an increased risk of a bad setup/ambush happening. But the players would get to decide to take the risk. Vehicles modifying a scout's ability to scout is also not very realistic. Current military scout vehicles weigh in excess of 20 tons and can scoot across broken terrain at speeds up to 60 MPH. They also provide a more stable platform for observing than a bouncing buggy/jeep. So you'd be able to do your job more efficiently in a larger, more stable vehicle where you could have a driver and all you had to do is scout. An effective ambush isn't one where you're just scattered all over. You split your team into no more than two groups, then pick a location/position that allows you to engage the enemy simultaneously from different angles to create confusion and a lowered ability for the target to effectively defend itself. Would it be possible to have enemy ambushers NOT appear right at setup? Depending on speed of scouting squad, scout ability and terrain, couldn't the enemy remain undetected until they clear intervening terrain, effectively 'popping' into view as their targets close? A player would see maybe 3-4 vehicles and think, "Ha! My scout rules!" ...then 50 meters later, he's swarmed by bad guys cresting hills to his flanks? Or the entire bad guy gang sets behind a hill waiting for you to pass? Until you can draw LOS, you'd never see them. So, you know they're out there somewhere, you just don't know where? Then having scouts who could crest hills ahead of the group would actually make sense. Just some thoughts. That's an ambush. But, I don't know how this is done or if it could be accomplished. Again, challenge I like. Losing gangers/vehicles with no chance to save them, not very condusive to good gameplay, which is what everyone is always telling me counts...gameplay and balance. Where's the balance when you're certain to have gangers die with no recourse? That ain't right.
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Mar 12, 2010, 2:45 pm	Abbreviate man..... i never read your posts as they are so dam long .... bullet point the facts
Fealty Lost Posted Mar 12, 2010, 2:48 pm	So, Sam, what you're now saying is, the larger the group, the better the chance to be ambushed? So, having 20 more people able to look around is...a...bad...thing? Are you serious? Why don't you just put a max vehicle number of 3 on every scout and be done with it?
*sam* Posted Mar 12, 2010, 2:59 pm	Thanks for the info DA.. we've already moved on from yesterday's code, however. I acknowledged that it was spawning stuff too close, and ambushing too often.. I'd like to know opinions since I re-patched about 1 hour ago. However.. several of your points are highly valid.. Quote: Why does the spawn have to be: Front, Back or scattered? Couldn't (and wouldn't) dynamic gameplay be enhanced by the enemy showing up enmasse in a totally random position facing towards us, to indicate their taking a short cut through the terrain to intercept us? If their scout defeats ours, then the distance to our squad would be reduced. That would be do-able, of course. Some amount of enemy scattering (even into 2 or 3 groups, as you suggested later) might be more challenging than en-masse? Quote: To think we're stupid enough (even without a scout) to drive to 35 meters of the enemy without seeing them is ludicrous. Spawning NPCs is more about getting the challenge right than trying to be realistic. If we were slavishly realistic, we'd spawn the NPCs at 500m and you'd be able to auto-escape every time. Having said that, 35m isn't suitable, in purely gameplay terms.. it gives you no chance. I agree with that. Quote: Allow players to set their squad speed. The faster they go, the harder it is to react to the enemy and the easier it is to drive into an ambush. You would cut down the travel time on 50 mile scouts, but run an increased risk of a bad setup/ambush happening. But the players would get to decide to take the risk. Yep, seems reasonable. Quote: An effective ambush isn't one where you're just scattered all over. You split your team into no more than two groups, then pick a location/position that allows you to engage the enemy simultaneously from different angles to create confusion and a lowered ability for the target to effectively defend itself. Sure. The current 'scattering' code could easily be modified so that 2-4 locations were chosen and the NPCs spawned near to those locations Quote: Would it be possible to have enemy ambushers NOT appear right at setup? Depending on speed of scouting squad, scout ability and terrain, couldn't the enemy remain undetected until they clear intervening terrain, effectively 'popping' into view as their targets close? A player would see maybe 3-4 vehicles and think, "Ha! My scout rules!" ...then 50 meters later, he's swarmed by bad guys cresting hills to his flanks? Or the entire bad guy gang sets behind a hill waiting for you to pass? Until you can draw LOS, you'd never see them. So, you know they're out there somewhere, you just don't know where? Then having scouts who could crest hills ahead of the group would actually make sense. Just some thoughts. Yes, this I really like. A kind of limited fog of war.. effective at the start of the combat but basically when a car is seen for the first time, it stays visible for the rest of the combat? This would actually be fairly easy to do. Quote: Again, challenge I like. Losing gangers/vehicles with no chance to save them, not very condusive to good gameplay, which is what everyone is always telling me counts...gameplay and balance. Where's the balance when you're certain to have gangers die with no recourse? That ain't right. I agree 100%
FireFly Posted Mar 12, 2010, 3:55 pm	*sam* said: *Damon* said: Or the entire bad guy gang sets behind a hill waiting for you to pass? Until you can draw LOS, you'd never see them. So, you know they're out there somewhere, you just don't know where? Then having scouts who could crest hills ahead of the group would actually make sense. Just some thoughts. Yes, this I really like. A kind of limited fog of war.. effective at the start of the combat but basically when a car is seen for the first time, it stays visible for the rest of the combat? This would actually be fairly easy to do. I don't, think this is a good idea, this is a pretty radical change to how things work, better yet, what if an AI car gets stuck, that is common in some areas, and you cant see it? Just having a good ambush is punishing enough, I think.
*Longo* Posted Mar 12, 2010, 3:56 pm	*Grograt* said: Abbreviate man..... i never read your posts as they are so dam long .... bullet point the facts  X2
*Burden* Posted Mar 12, 2010, 4:08 pm	I really like the idea of a fog of war. I've wanted to suggest it myself. If an NPC gets stuck and we cant see it, technically it isn't even there. So once everyone demos but it, the event ends because it isnt on the vehicles list yet.
Togakure Posted Mar 12, 2010, 4:11 pm	And what if that vehicle just happens to be a firetruck, squad car, ambulance, etc? Sure you wouldn't know it was there, but wouldn't it bother you knowing the fact that there's a chance your rare spawn might be missed because it was stuck trying to climb a steep hill out of LoS?
*Burden* Posted Mar 12, 2010, 4:15 pm	Firetrucks dont get stuck before they get a line of sight. Ambulances and squadcars dont spawn.
Fealty Lost Posted Mar 12, 2010, 5:19 pm	Tog'...easily solvable by eliminating the list of vehicles you face at the beginning of the spawn. If you can't see them/your scout hasn't spotted them, then they don't list. You'd never know there was a rare, and you'd be happy. And if vehicles weren't listed at the beginning of the scout during setup...imagine the tension and apprehension over not knowing what's out there or where it might show up! And your point might actually validate using light, fast vehicles for scout personnel...to range around DURING the scout making sure nobody sneaks up on the group!! If it wasn't listed at the beginning of the scout, imagine how much more pleasing it would be to round a corner in your buggy and come face to face with a FT just setting there! I mean, kiss your scout goodbye, but hey! A FT!!
Togakure Posted Mar 12, 2010, 6:19 pm	I kind of like the idea about not knowing what vehicles you're up against, but how about truces? The way it works now, you can see the list of vehicles going to spawn, but don't know their locations yet. This allows players to try and truce if they feel the odds are against them too much. Without a list, what would be the deciding factor for players wanting a truce?
*sam* Posted Mar 12, 2010, 6:35 pm	Togakure said: I kind of like the idea about not knowing what vehicles you're up against, but how about truces? The way it works now, you can see the list of vehicles going to spawn, but don't know their locations yet. This allows players to try and truce if they feel the odds are against them too much. Without a list, what would be the deciding factor for players wanting a truce? That's exactly why the list was added, in fact.
Crazy AL Posted Mar 12, 2010, 7:23 pm	Just to add to the information about what kind of results are occurring with this new patch, I was arriving in Shanty in one of my transports with a CR of 134 and a 328 scout and got ambushed. I can't even REMEMBER the last time this guy got ambushed if it even happened after he was above 250... Perhaps it was a long overdue coincidence?
*sam* Posted Mar 12, 2010, 7:46 pm	How did the spawns look, Al? Not too easy, not too hard? BTW with regard to the fog of war idea.. yes, it would make the game harder when it came into play, but this could be off-set by reducing the NPCs CR. Giving them a much higher CR than the human squads is only a balancing factor because they're not challenging in other ways.
*Burden* Posted Mar 12, 2010, 7:47 pm	By the way, would the NPC not be able to see us too, if we were out of their line of sight?
FireFly Posted Mar 12, 2010, 8:16 pm	AI, affected by line of sight, bwahahahaha... Sorry about that, but really, how "Can" the AI even be under the effect of fog of war, program it to run around in random directions? This is a nice idea, but it would be a pretty major overhaul to how you play the game, what if you spawn on a heavy cargo travel on a hilly map, you start and can see none of the enemies, you have no idea if they are in front or behind, how fun is that, risk charging forward, only to come around the corner and have all the AI crush your lorries, and then desperately turning your rear weapons to face, or the other way around... As for the knowing enemy numbers and cars, did you all suddenly forget that is why we have "Scouts", that is the scouts job, isn't this why we know what the enemy cars are? Not to mention, of course you would know their location, ever heard of engine noises? and the art of kicking up dust, even most highway maps are pretty dusty, the only reason I ever saw ambushes work is because the ambushers shut down the engines, and wait, quietly. What would fog of war even add to dark-wind, except dead player gangers, and a lot of frustration of not finding enemy cars? Not to mention the impact on ballistic weapons, they depend on the ability to fire on far away opponents, and on many maps, there are enough obstacles over 200m...
*Marc5iver* marcgillespie55@gmail.com Posted Mar 12, 2010, 8:40 pm	Have to admit that these are all valid points by FF.
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Mar 12, 2010, 8:48 pm	yeh ....
*sam* Posted Mar 12, 2010, 11:07 pm	I dunno.. I think it could add a lot of fun, personally. You'd have to plan more carefully, both strategically and tactically, and would have to make off-the-cuff changes to your plans rather than always succeeding by playing the same way. And as I said, could be offset with reduced NPC CR. And yes, if you took a chance and charged forward maybe you'd get slaughtered. But then maybe you'd work out a better tactic than charging forward? I think it's unlikely that you see none of the enemy, even on a hilly map, you're bound to get LOS on some of them right from the start. RE ballistic weapons - I think you missed my comment about this being a 'partial' fog of war. As soon as an NPC car has been spotted for the first time, it stays visible for the rest of the combat.
*Lugal* Posted Mar 12, 2010, 11:13 pm	Ah so the proper nomenclature to be used isn't "Fog of War", but "Veil"? FoW means you can't see what your characters can't see. Veil means you can't see what your troops haven't seen yet.
FireFly Posted Mar 12, 2010, 11:14 pm	I know that, but what I am saying is, mortars rely on the ability to fire over a 200m area, on several maps I know, take those sars canyon maps for example, you wont be able to fire them properly... If you really want to do this sam, maybe you should seriously conciser that "Hardcore/Island/Deathmatch" Thing... Sure, it would add tactility, but a whole different kind than I see the game having... If you fought over a wider area, scouts would be an option, but its not, since guns often fire in the first turns, unless you run...
*sam* Posted Mar 12, 2010, 11:18 pm	FireFly said: I know that, but what I am saying is, mortars rely on the ability to fire over a 200m area, on several maps I know, take those sars canyon maps for example, you wont be able to fire them properly... I fail to understand how you mean FoW (veil?) would affect this, sorry. edit: oh I getcha, you mean they rely on early shooting at a bunched enemy FireFly said: If you really want to do this sam, maybe you should seriously conciser that "Hardcore/Island/Deathmatch" Thing... Sure, it would add tactility, but a whole different kind than I see the game having... Maybe it could be put in as an option. You choose to trade this feature for a reduced enemy CR. Entirely your decision until such time as we decided it wasn't too difficult or game changing.
FireFly Posted Mar 12, 2010, 11:29 pm	*sam* said: I fail to understand how you mean FoW (veil?) would affect this, sorry. Because mortars don't need a line of sight, and can fire over obstacles, if I cant see the enemy before they get into los, I cant target them, making mortars much less effective on those kinds of maps... On the sarsfield flats, (That canyon map), many spawns are out of los... [Edit]Nice that you got it, our mega squad relies heavily on mortars, we just had this battle, if this viel thing was in effect, we would have died, big time  *sam* said: Maybe it could be put in as an option. You choose to trade this feature for a reduced enemy CR. Entirely your decision until such time as we decided it wasn't too difficult or game changing. Well, that could work, but people would use it depending on were they are, and in that case, off for travels, on for muscle scouts, and so on... Still heavily in favor of Darkwind Deathmatch
*Burden* Posted Mar 12, 2010, 11:34 pm	For the mortar issue thing, just get a buggy to climb a big mountain or something.
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Mar 12, 2010, 11:35 pm	you mean like a spotter
FireFly Posted Mar 12, 2010, 11:37 pm	But by then burden, the AI will probably already have scattered, Anyone who uses amassed mortars (properly) knows that these does the best if you fire them from turn 1, the longer the battle goes, the less effective they get. Again, that might have worked if we fought over more than a 200m...
simonmaxhill Posted Mar 12, 2010, 11:49 pm	Mortars: currently overpowered and ridiculous. with fog of war: slightly less so
FireFly Posted Mar 12, 2010, 11:54 pm	Oh come now, firetrucks are overpowered to, all you have to do is get close to the things... Oh, heavy lasers are overpowered to... so are tank guns, maybe even car cannons!!! Sigh... In all seriousness thou, they take a whoopload of bulk, they are expensive, and only really effective in masses...
*Lugal* Posted Mar 13, 2010, 12:43 am	I was about to post saying that car cannons are overpowered, because my Sniper 3 Rapid Reload 3 Rapidfire 2 gunner can kill targets before they get within 150m. It's the gunner that makes a difference, and the "overpowered" weapons require really good gunners.  A HMG is arguably the best weapon in the game, because not only is it a solid, balanced weapon, but anyone can pick it up and fight effectively.  So why does no one ever cry that IT is overpowered? FireFly said: Sure, it would add tactility, but a whole different kind than I see the game having... This is a very good point.  I can't say whether Fog or Veil or whatever would make the game better or worse, but it would be significantly different.
Serephe Posted Mar 13, 2010, 12:50 am	Not true Lugal. Mortars are just as "overpowered" with 0 skill gunners as 500 skill gunners. Requiring a spotter for accurate ballistics would be fantastic btw.
Crazy AL Posted Mar 13, 2010, 3:41 am	*sam* said: How did the spawns look, Al? Not too easy, not too hard? BTW with regard to the fog of war idea.. yes, it would make the game harder when it came into play, but this could be off-set  by reducing the NPCs CR. Giving them a much higher CR than the human squads is only a balancing factor because they're not challenging in other ways. I had two in front heading towards me, a bandit off to my left flank and a couple of cars behind. 2 Eliminators, a scorp, the bandit and a chaser so nothing outrageous. My transport is an unarmed Big Pickup.
Togakure Posted Mar 13, 2010, 4:21 am	Personally I like the idea of a "veil of war", as long as it works both ways. It would also require a lot of testing and feedback to get working properly, so if it is added as an option later it should remain clearly an "option" until the bugs are worked out. But what are the chances of being placed on a map where both sides spawn in at locations where not a single car has LoS on an enemy vehicle? This could be cause for some of the concern. If both teams spawn in without LoS on each other, then in all fairness neither team would know where to go. How would you know if you're behind the enemy, or are they behind you? And are they facing towards you, or facing away from you? On certain maps, I'm guessing that requiring a spawn within LoS would sometimes lead to unfair positioning or enemy that are too close. Regarding mortars, I think how they work now is quite a bit unrealistic and somewhat unfair. Any type of indirect-fire weapon is going to be inaccurate as hell without a spotter, no matter how good the gunner is. I was a US Army Field Artillery soldier that mainly operated 155mm howitzers, but I am still quite familiar with the use of 60/82/120mm mortars as well. I think that mortars should be less accurate without someone on your squad having direct LoS with the target. It doesn't have to be the firing vehicle, but at least one person on your team that can assist in adjusting fire. And to compensate, if the firing vehicle does have direct LoS they should get an accuracy bonus. And I'm not sure what caliber the mortars are supposed to be or what type of rounds they are supposed to be firing, but I'm guessing they are similar to a light mortar (60mm-ish) firing a standard HE round? Maybe it's just me, but when you compare the mortar with the CGL, they just don't feel powerful enough in my opinion. I'm not just talking about the graphics upon impact, I'm talking about the actual blast/splash damage. They appear to be barely double the CGL, with maybe 2-3 times the range of a CGL? This is from observation, not personal use.
Fealty Lost Posted Mar 13, 2010, 5:33 am	I don't think FF's points are valid at all. What about scouts? For them to work, as is common wisdom, they're supposed to be out and about in tiny little no-armor having vehicles ranging far ahead of and around the main body, looking for these bad guys. So, FF...range your freaking scout out far and wide ahead of your squad. He would discover the bad guys, their locations would become known and you could adjust your travel accordingly. I think it would be a riot not to know where they were. Plus, with a high-level scout, as has been mentioned, you would probably not get ambushed or if so, would, because of the high level, probably already know where they are. On a total fail of a roll, well, welcome to the Real. It was you bored and never losing any stuff guys who wanted increased/nastier ambushes...and now that you have the chance to get them...you're whining about it? I think FoW would be a great addition to the game. I think making scouts actually WORK to get results is also great. As for trucing: extend the time to truce to 10 turns. If you feel a great disturbance in the force just as you're getting ready to round that blind hill-blocked corner...too freaking bad. Suck it up. No, just kidding...trucing would be moved to first encounter. It would be a 'gut' call. If you see 6 bad guys...odds are there are probably another 12 hiding somewhere. You can't always get perfect intel'. Sometimes it takes a command decision, right or wrong. There's always a next time. Hope for a return! Isn't that what everyone told me... "...play for the return!"
*Ninesticks* Posted Mar 13, 2010, 6:32 am	Tog said: I think that mortars should be less accurate without someone on your squad having direct LoS with the target. It doesn't have to be the firing vehicle, but at least one person on your team that can assist in adjusting fire. And to compensate, if the firing vehicle does have direct LoS they should get an accuracy bonus. Mortars are already far more accurate when the firing vehicle has LoS to target. Not sure I would agree with some of the comments about them being overpowered/ridiculous - they are notoriously fickle things unless you can get all the components right and as FF has already mentioned they only really come in to their own as a means of knocking cars out when used in numbers. Tog said: And I'm not sure what caliber the mortars are supposed to be or what type of rounds they are supposed to be firing, but I'm guessing they are similar to a light mortar (60mm-ish) firing a standard HE round? Maybe it's just me, but when you compare the mortar with the CGL, they just don't feel powerful enough in my opinion. I'm not just talking about the graphics upon impact, I'm talking about the actual blast/splash damage. They appear to be barely double the CGL, with maybe 2-3 times the range of a CGL? This is from observation, not personal use. Mortars have pretty much double the range of a CGL, the blast radius is larger. I would best describe the difference I suppose in direct damage/blast radius as CGL=MML compared to MM=RL.
*sam* Posted Mar 13, 2010, 9:15 am	Togakure said: Personally I like the idea of a "veil of war", as long as it works both ways Just responding to this minor point (you're the 2nd to mention it, and when we discussed FoW before, a couple of years ago, it was mentioned too).. If I do implement veil/fog, it won't work both ways. The computer has very limited capacity for sttrategy already - that's why it needs extra CR in order to offer you a challenge. Do you think in Age of Empires the computer armies are affected by FoW? I'd almost guarantee the answer is no. Making computer-controlled adversaries in games is all about making a fun, challenging game, not about applying the same rules to both humans and computers. You're an intelligent, sentient being; the computer is a jumped-up electronic calculator.
LoSboccacc Posted Mar 13, 2010, 9:27 am	how true. most games I know have the ai knowing everything and faking not to know your position because it seems more realistic that way, more than the other way around.
*sam* Posted Mar 13, 2010, 10:04 am	It's explained quite well here actually (see the cheating section): Wikipedia
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Mar 13, 2010, 10:41 am	Fog / Veil feels like a good idea, but as stated by FF how much of a difference to DW game play would it make, i consider it may change the feel completely, though i can see the virtues of the idea, implementation concerns me
Serephe Posted Mar 13, 2010, 10:42 am	As long as we can see dustclouds of cars moving offroad.
FireFly Posted Mar 13, 2010, 11:58 am	Again, I have to defend the mortars, they don't need expert gunners, this is true, but that helps a lot, they already get a penalty for firing when not having los, I can direct you to a travel we did with rear mortars, 90!!!% of the shots MISSED completely... When you were in the army, when you practiced with those Howitzers, over how long a range was it, this is 200m we are talking about, not 2 km, or further. And I'd also like to stress, how you need many of them 1 or 2 mortars ain't going to do much, in my scouts, we use 10, and that is when they get effective, lorries are the best car, just because they take 80 bulk each and the ammo is a lot of bulk. I'd also like to stress this, the mortaras have a magic "210" line, were they have the best accuarcy, the closer you get, the wilder the shots, if you have fast cars that can close quickly, well, you just rendered the mortars useless... Well, kinda, in our case they are backed by 8 buzzers and a firetruck, but that's not a mortar issue And again, the veil seems like a good idea, but it seems better for the hardcore version of darkwind... And Damon, I want "Nastier" ambushes, not FoW, they are completely different, an ambush should be thought even without something like a Veil. (Edit) Don't misunderstand me, I kinda like the idea of a veil myself, but not in the darkwind we have right now, it really does seem like a "Darkwind - Hardcore" thing, I think all it would do to the current dw thou is mess things up, and see an outcry from the ones that, well, will undoubtedly, lose a guy to this...
*Tinker* Posted Mar 13, 2010, 1:21 pm	FF if mortars are not good on a map because of the veil then don't use them
Serephe Posted Mar 13, 2010, 1:41 pm	What's wrong with people "losing a guy" now and then? This is Darkwind: War on Wheels, not Hello Kitty Online.
FireFly Posted Mar 13, 2010, 1:51 pm	Oh please, darkwind is way on the hello kitty side of things, that's why doing something radical is not a good idea, and will upset a lot of people... Makes me think back on that "Sam's vision" thread, with people starving to death and everything... And tinker, sure, that could work, if we knew what map we would get in advance, sadly, we don't, we can only pick direction.
*Tinker* Posted Mar 13, 2010, 2:01 pm	FireFly said: And tinker, sure, that could work, if we knew what map we would get in advance, sadly, we don't, we can only pick direction. Yup it's about direction, like not going towards the maze for instance
*Longo* Posted Mar 13, 2010, 4:49 pm	FF....why are we discussing mortars in the "New Ambush Spawns" Announcement? I want to hear about this topic, not you complaining about mortars? Start a new thread?
FireFly Posted Mar 13, 2010, 4:58 pm	Why are we discussing fog of war? It went like this, it span of into a fog of war discussion, then I mentioned that mortars would get nerfed if this was implemented, then Simon said something about them being overpowered... My original post only has a slight mention of them.
Flaming savage Posted Mar 13, 2010, 5:47 pm	I just saw an event at Scattered Hills....3 cars started under the bridge...in an ambush.
FireFly Posted Mar 13, 2010, 11:54 pm	S188138 I knew this new code would be trouble... Oh yes, losing a potential cutlass, to a thing like this, Oh how lovely, I survived... barely... and couldn't loot the cutty because reaching a good spot wasn't going to happen, really, really, fun, first one I've seen there in a good long while to
*Ninesticks* Posted Mar 14, 2010, 5:08 am	FF do you think the tone of your comment is helpful, constructive or even mildly mature? Does there really have to be a gnashing of teeth, the pulling of hair and much wailing when we all know that the new system will undoubtedly have problems. Heaven forfend that we act like adults, calmly list in an easy to read format the event ID, what the problem was, any losses sustained etc. Sam is nothing if not a fair minded individual and will address anything that arises. Sam needs useable feedback to perfect any changes. Sam is one bloke on his own making these changes, expecting a perfect roll-out each and every time is frankly stupid. If the big software publishing houses with all their resources cannot get it all correct at their first attempt, why on earth do you think it is possible for a single person operation? Anyone care to challenge that?
*Lugal* Posted Mar 14, 2010, 7:38 am	*Ninesticks* said: Sam is one bloke on his own making these changes, expecting a perfect roll-out each and every time is frankly stupid. If the big software publishing houses with all their resources cannot get it all correct at their first attempt, why on earth do you think it is possible for a single person operation? Because he created a game that I find more enjoyable and which held my interest for longer than those churned out by the big software publishing houses with all their resources. But you are right, as usual.
ISHOULDCOCO Posted Mar 14, 2010, 9:31 am	I will post about FoW elsewhere I wanted to add a couple of things Pirates screw up too - it does not just have to be about the players skill Can players get an Ambush 'ring' around a target if the skill is high enough I love the idea of engagement at longer range - with the improved Ai it is a real option and adds to variation fights COCO
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Mar 14, 2010, 10:28 am	Thank you nine for putting this into perspective as usual, angry tones need to be held back for considered helpful comments and submissions.
Stingray191 Posted Mar 14, 2010, 11:59 am	Just had some new encounters and enemy placements out BL- FL way. And I have to say that I'm glad I pulled my big travel groups back to SS because they were some bloody thrilling encounters with one car versus 2-5 enemy. Versus the 8-10 my travel guys get........ perhaps far more exciting than I would hope to find. But - like all things warfare-ish - you send the scouts in first. Time to re-evaluate. Am liking the changes but damn it's getting tough out there. AND AI steering is getting savagely better - time to learn some new tricks.
FireFly Posted Mar 14, 2010, 12:56 pm	*Ninesticks* said: FF do you think the tone of your comment is helpful, constructive or even mildly mature? Does there really have to be a gnashing of teeth, the pulling of hair and much wailing when we all know that the new system will undoubtedly have problems. Oh, I'm sorry, You see cutlass every day, and have a scorpion spawn less than 1m behind you on the same scout, right? I think that anger was justified, thank you, least it wasn't abusive or anything.
Serephe Posted Mar 14, 2010, 12:57 pm	It's a game. Chill out or take a break.
FireFly Posted Mar 14, 2010, 12:59 pm	Oh, I am perfectly calm Serephe, I just get annoyed when what I said many pages back would happen, happens...
Serephe Posted Mar 14, 2010, 1:09 pm	It also happened occasionally with the old system. The game has bugs occasionally, it's made by one man, that one man happily fixes any damage caused by the bugs.
*Ninesticks* Posted Mar 14, 2010, 1:23 pm	FF said: Oh, I'm sorry, You see cutlass every day, and have a scorpion spawn less than 1m behind you on the same scout, right? I think that anger was justified, thank you, least it wasn't abusive or anything. Of course I don't see a cutlass every day, that would be silly and so is that part of your question. Indeed I have had it happen to me, several times, in fact I can still remember the last time being a mortar boxvan getting bounced off a cliff at scattered hills by a cojoined spawn. Did I get angry and start mouthing off? Nope, because I have the common sense and, dare I say, manners should I suffer a loss unfairly to - 1. Remember it is a game 2. Write a bug report/PM Sam When I read your post all I could see was  'waaaaah I didn't get to loot a cutlass waaaah', and indeed your reply would appear to back that up. Now I am quite willing to accept that was not your intent, but that is how both those messages came across. I know I get peeved/disheartened at wading through a load of moaning, mainly because some people (not just you) would rather have a go at Sam (who is trying to improve the game for their benefit)' rather than take part in the process and help Sam in his efforts improve the game by giving appropriate feedback. So in short, do you have a 'right' to be angry about it - nope, never - not in my opinion.
FireFly Posted Mar 14, 2010, 1:27 pm	It was feedback, delivered in the mood I was at the moment, annoyed, very annoyed, that is. I never said anything against sam, I just remember saying that a random ambush system might be to random to work properly right before it was implemented, and now it not working properly potentially cost me something really good... I just hope he will get this working properly...
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Mar 14, 2010, 1:35 pm	But the tone doesn't have to be angry FF, yes we all know sam will fix this and other things, hence asking for feedback, but ranting does not get your point across, and certainly wouldn't persuade sam to be more helpful to you, or your situation in general, it is not like this kind of glich hasn't happened in the past to everyone, it is not a personal FF attack.
*goat starer* Posted Mar 14, 2010, 2:27 pm	you know those mosquito things that they put on walls where youths gather and they emit a high pitched noise only teenagers can hear to make them go away? can we get one in the forums?
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Mar 14, 2010, 2:52 pm	We have you, but your power seems to have dwindled.
Parapsycho Posted Mar 14, 2010, 10:03 pm	goat starer said: you know those mosquito things that they put on walls where youths gather and they emit a high pitched noise only teenagers can hear to make them go away? can we get one in the forums? seconded
Groove Champion Posted Mar 15, 2010, 3:16 am	I'd just like to remark the new ambush code is (marvelously) deadly in the FL region! It's a wonderful improvement!
*Burden* Posted Mar 15, 2010, 3:57 am	goat starer said: you know those mosquito things that they put on walls where youths gather and they emit a high pitched noise only teenagers can hear to make them go away? can we get one in the forums? But then that would chase me and Rez away
*goat starer* Posted Mar 15, 2010, 8:56 am	bill and i had a cracking ambush on the pits yesterday... bunch of chasing cars including mutant mercs and apaches... in front of us a head on beaster and polt with a few mutant mashers. driving head on at the facing bunch trying to get the beaster to turn with RGMs and bills front mounted car cannon was utterly hair raising. as far as i can see this new ambush code is a work of genius!
ISHOULDCOCO Posted Mar 15, 2010, 11:28 am	goat starer said: bill and i had a cracking ambush on the pits yesterday.. S188450 It is fast and bloody COCO
*sam* Posted Mar 15, 2010, 11:56 am	FireFly said: S188138 I knew this new code would be trouble... Oh yes, losing a potential cutlass, to a thing like this, Oh how lovely, I survived... barely... and couldn't loot the cutty because reaching a good spot wasn't going to happen, really, really, fun, first one I've seen there in a good long while to That certainly shouldn't happen, in fact there's specific code in place to check that each car is a certain distance from each other car. However, you haven't quoted the right event ID there.. if you let me know the correct one, I'll investigate.
*Tinker* Posted Mar 15, 2010, 1:21 pm	S188683 NPC spawns almost arm's length away from us We were set up at the closest possible place to him in the blue circle though
*sam* Posted Mar 15, 2010, 1:43 pm	I found the bug that caused this Tinker-- it's the same one that hit FF, Ninesticks, JS and probably others. Should be ok now!
*goat starer* Posted Mar 15, 2010, 1:44 pm	if you set up at the edge of the circle you should expect an ambush to be close... its always been like that.
*Tinker* Posted Mar 15, 2010, 1:59 pm	goat starer said: if you set up at the edge of the circle you should expect an ambush to be close... its always been like that. Was it? but anyways was just posting for information
*sam* Posted Mar 15, 2010, 2:37 pm	It depends on the ambush, tinker.. it's possible that the enemy could be close to the edge of the circle, yes. As close as what you show there is pretty unlikely though.
*goat starer* Posted Mar 15, 2010, 2:40 pm	on badlands returns and on scattered hills you would frequently get a car close enough to hit you head on in the first turn if you were at the front of the circle... frequently causing engine and weapon damage and several times setting my buzzers on fire. on the scattered hills ambush where they start on either side of the bridge they are often only a few meters outside the circle. always been one of the fun bits of ambushes with the attendant confusion and chaos.
FireFly Posted Mar 15, 2010, 7:02 pm	*sam* said: FireFly said: S188138 I knew this new code would be trouble... Oh yes, losing a potential cutlass, to a thing like this, Oh how lovely, I survived... barely... and couldn't loot the cutty because reaching a good spot wasn't going to happen, really, really, fun, first one I've seen there in a good long while to That certainly shouldn't happen, in fact there's specific code in place to check that each car is a certain distance from each other car. However, you haven't quoted the right event ID there.. if you let me know the correct one, I'll investigate. S188131 That should be the one...
Lord Foul Posted Mar 16, 2010, 3:43 am	I knew it was going to happen sooner or later with this new ambush code and it happened tonight. Most know Acid land was already tough when it came to ambushes on that map. The new code makes them even worse and actually not enjoyable to play because there are few options you can use and now the AI using military like positioning. I was facing a gang with fame at my level and I was using a 350+ scout. But I was still somehow ambushed at 91m out in the open in a spot anyone with a brain would be watching for an ambush at since it's the perfect spot. This is where I have a problem with the new code. 1 - These new ambushes are so close and precise, that one must asume all post apocalyptic NPC gangs are using radar or satellites to spring these urealistic ambushes. This would explain why players can't ambush due to them not having access to radar or satellites. lol 2 - A very high level scout would not fall for such a close ambush. Maybe a further away or better hidden one. What sort of roll would a 350+ scout have to make to roll an ambush and put the enemy at 91m in a spot that gives the player few options? I would have been firing on them long before any reached 91m, it's like a deathrace where you have to let the enemy be at less the 100 before you an fire on them, silly. I could understand this type of ambush occurring if I was not using a scout or a low level one, but a 350+ scout? I wonder what insane ambush I would have faced with a less skilled scout. 3- The NPC cars are put in places their engines would either not let them reach or would have their engine revvng trying to climb these mountains that I'd hear them. Not to mention the ones placed in the open on these moutains where I can cleary see them before reaching such a bad spot.. 4 - It's my opinion the new ambushes are to deadly and if Vets are having a hard time or are now a major challenge for them, this does not look to well for less skilled players who face such brutal situations. Add that an ambush can take twice a long timewise to complete, if you are lucky enough to walk away. 5 - If you keep the code as is and are going to put the player into such unrealistic situations, at least give the player a cookie to try and attain from the battle. Remember my idea of perma damaged ultra rares that you wanted to add? here is the place to do it. The 700 famed gang I faced in this ambush had no rares, not even a razorback. Just the usual never ending clone of missleboats. S188861 I would prefer to have a challenge or be challenged to accomplish an enjoyable goal. not be put in near no win unrealistic situations.
*Longo* Posted Mar 16, 2010, 4:31 am	I watched the event Lord F. That was a wicked ambush! You really only had 1 way to go, and took it. Very well played. A mere mortal would not have survived.
*Ninesticks* Posted Mar 16, 2010, 5:07 am	LF said: I knew it was going to happen sooner or later with this new ambush code and it happened tonight. Really and where and what did you say exactly? LF said: Most know Acid land was already tough when it came to ambushes on that map. The new code makes them even worse and actually not enjoyable to play because there are few options you can use and now the AI using military like positioning. Why wasn't it enjoyable exactly? A lack of options? A lack of options on a road that has a distinct lack of options in the first place? Or do you actually mean you didn't have an easy way of getting out of it? LF said: I was facing a gang with fame at my level and I was using a 350+ scout. But I was still somehow ambushed at 91m out in the open in a spot anyone with a brain would be watching for an ambush at since it's the perfect spot. Are you saying that you should never be ambushed then because you had good scout along? You fail to tell us what vehicle he was in and what distance you had gone. You go after a high fame target you are more likely to be ambushed (your gang's fame is irrelevant). LF said: 1 - These new ambushes are so close and precise, that one must asume all post apocalyptic NPC gangs are using radar or satellites to spring these urealistic ambushes. This would explain why players can't ambush due to them not having access to radar or satellites. lol Are ambushes meant to be loose and imprecise then? Are they meant to mostly ineffective? Or are they meant to be where your forces are caught unawares by a well positioned enemy force that puts you at an initial disadvantage? LF said: 2 - A very high level scout would not fall for such a close ambush. Maybe a further away or better hidden one. What sort of roll would a 350+ scout have to make to roll an ambush and put the enemy at 91m in a spot that gives the player few options? I would have been firing on them long before any reached 91m, it's like a deathrace where you have to let the enemy be at less the 100 before you an fire on them, silly. I could understand this type of ambush occurring if I was not using a scout or a low level one, but a 350+ scout? I wonder what insane ambush I would have faced with a less skilled scout. How is this relevant? Your scout failed their scout roll badly and you got ambushed. Are you honestly suggesting the quality of the scout should affect how effective the ambush is? Doesn't that go against the logic of it being an ambush (you either see them or you don't)? Well you wouldn't be firing on them before they reached 91m because it is an ambush - as in you were unaware of their presence. LF said: 3- The NPC cars are put in places their engines would either not let them reach or would have their engine revvng trying to climb these mountains that I'd hear them. Not to mention the ones placed in the open on these moutains where I can cleary see them before reaching such a bad spot.. Well guess they would be pre-positioned then, much like an ambush in real life. Look earlier in this thread and the patch thread for possibly explanations on this, particularly in regard to them being in the open and moving at speed - if you really want to. Whilst a certain illusion of reality is nice to maintain, game balance/playability trumps that every time does it not? Quote: 4 - It's my opinion the new ambushes are to deadly and if Vets are having a hard time or are now a major challenge for them, this does not look to well for less skilled players who face such brutal situations. Add that an ambush can take twice a long timewise to complete, if you are lucky enough to walk away. You didn't mention what the result of your ambush was. I had a tough ambush earlier today resulting in a breached vehicle. I don't consider that deadly, I consider it a bit of a challenge and my vehicles looked like they had been through a fight, but they were still in good enough condition to fight a full return. LF said: 5 - If you keep the code as is and are going to put the player into such unrealistic situations, at least give the player a cookie to try and attain from the battle. Remember my idea of perma damaged ultra rares that you wanted to add? here is the place to do it. The 700 famed gang I faced in this ambush had no rares, not even a razorback. Just the usual never ending clone of missleboats. S188861 So what you are saying here is, if the player has to fight there way out of situation then they should be getting rares? By that logic, conversely every time you get a normal spawn you shouldn't get any rares. From this and other comments you have made I have no idea why it is only you that is failing to meet any rares. What CR are you scouting with, what type of vehicles are you scouting with etc etc. LF said: I would prefer to have a challenge or be challenged to accomplish an enjoyable goal. not be put in near no win unrealistic situations. So are you normally challenged in a scout - really? Is the enjoyable goal not survival in an encounter like that - does it have to be a shiny toy? I would be interested to know if anyone has completely lost an encounter since the change due to the new ambush code being more effective for the AI. I know DA lost a carrier van, but that was mostly, in my opinion, down to an unfortunate chain of collisions that left his carrier van sat still with a horde of cars coming up behind it. DA survived and won that fight even though his squad appeared to be set for passives with sniping weapons - I wouldn't call that too deadly - challenging perhaps but not too deadly.
Serephe Posted Mar 16, 2010, 5:24 am	S188537 Lost ambush. Sam fixed the issue that got me killed though I believe.
Groove Champion Posted Mar 16, 2010, 5:25 am	I'm glad to see the new ambush code is shattering some comfortable conventions... As with any major change, the community's reaction has been mixed and the criticism has been omnipresent, but all things considered this is an improvement in terms of replay value: the game will remain challenging beyond what we have seen up to now. I briefly considered canceling my free FL-SS taxi service after I was caught in an ambush on the FL-BL leg of the travel. Shortly after then I decided I much rather enjoy the extra challenge!
*Ninesticks* Posted Mar 16, 2010, 5:35 am	Depends on when it was Ser, I will have a check later. Even worst case scenario that is one loss, three wins that I know of for definite (probably more). No doubt Sam will make further changes if things have gotten too hard.
Serephe Posted Mar 16, 2010, 5:36 am	I love it. I've had multiple ambushes that I've had to sacrifice something to survive. I think it's fantastic, and I want it to stay difficult at least down south.
*goat starer* Posted Mar 16, 2010, 9:48 am	*Ninesticks* said: LF said: I knew it was going to happen sooner or later with this new ambush code and it happened tonight. Really and where and what did you say exactly? LF said: Most know Acid land was already tough when it came to ambushes on that map. The new code makes them even worse and actually not enjoyable to play because there are few options you can use and now the AI using military like positioning. Why wasn't it enjoyable exactly? A lack of options? A lack of options on a road that has a distinct lack of options in the first place? Or do you actually mean you didn't have an easy way of getting out of it? LF said: I was facing a gang with fame at my level and I was using a 350+ scout. But I was still somehow ambushed at 91m out in the open in a spot anyone with a brain would be watching for an ambush at since it's the perfect spot. Are you saying that you should never be ambushed then because you had good scout along? You fail to tell us what vehicle he was in and what distance you had gone. You go after a high fame target you are more likely to be ambushed (your gang's fame is irrelevant). LF said: 1 - These new ambushes are so close and precise, that one must asume all post apocalyptic NPC gangs are using radar or satellites to spring these urealistic ambushes. This would explain why players can't ambush due to them not having access to radar or satellites. lol Are ambushes meant to be loose and imprecise then? Are they meant to mostly ineffective? Or are they meant to be where your forces are caught unawares by a well positioned enemy force that puts you at an initial disadvantage? LF said: 2 - A very high level scout would not fall for such a close ambush. Maybe a further away or better hidden one. What sort of roll would a 350+ scout have to make to roll an ambush and put the enemy at 91m in a spot that gives the player few options? I would have been firing on them long before any reached 91m, it's like a deathrace where you have to let the enemy be at less the 100 before you an fire on them, silly. I could understand this type of ambush occurring if I was not using a scout or a low level one, but a 350+ scout? I wonder what insane ambush I would have faced with a less skilled scout. How is this relevant? Your scout failed their scout roll badly and you got ambushed. Are you honestly suggesting the quality of the scout should affect how effective the ambush is? Doesn't that go against the logic of it being an ambush (you either see them or you don't)? Well you wouldn't be firing on them before they reached 91m because it is an ambush - as in you were unaware of their presence. LF said: 3- The NPC cars are put in places their engines would either not let them reach or would have their engine revvng trying to climb these mountains that I'd hear them. Not to mention the ones placed in the open on these moutains where I can cleary see them before reaching such a bad spot.. Well guess they would be pre-positioned then, much like an ambush in real life. Look earlier in this thread and the patch thread for possibly explanations on this, particularly in regard to them being in the open and moving at speed - if you really want to. Whilst a certain illusion of reality is nice to maintain, game balance/playability trumps that every time does it not? Quote: 4 - It's my opinion the new ambushes are to deadly and if Vets are having a hard time or are now a major challenge for them, this does not look to well for less skilled players who face such brutal situations. Add that an ambush can take twice a long timewise to complete, if you are lucky enough to walk away. You didn't mention what the result of your ambush was. I had a tough ambush earlier today resulting in a breached vehicle. I don't consider that deadly, I consider it a bit of a challenge and my vehicles looked like they had been through a fight, but they were still in good enough condition to fight a full return. LF said: 5 - If you keep the code as is and are going to put the player into such unrealistic situations, at least give the player a cookie to try and attain from the battle. Remember my idea of perma damaged ultra rares that you wanted to add? here is the place to do it. The 700 famed gang I faced in this ambush had no rares, not even a razorback. Just the usual never ending clone of missleboats. S188861 So what you are saying here is, if the player has to fight there way out of situation then they should be getting rares? By that logic, conversely every time you get a normal spawn you shouldn't get any rares. From this and other comments you have made I have no idea why it is only you that is failing to meet any rares. What CR are you scouting with, what type of vehicles are you scouting with etc etc. LF said: I would prefer to have a challenge or be challenged to accomplish an enjoyable goal. not be put in near no win unrealistic situations. So are you normally challenged in a scout - really? Is the enjoyable goal not survival in an encounter like that - does it have to be a shiny toy? I would be interested to know if anyone has completely lost an encounter since the change due to the new ambush code being more effective for the AI. I know DA lost a carrier van, but that was mostly, in my opinion, down to an unfortunate chain of collisions that left his carrier van sat still with a horde of cars coming up behind it. DA survived and won that fight even though his squad appeared to be set for passives with sniping weapons - I wouldn't call that too deadly - challenging perhaps but not too deadly. Thankyou Nine I was going to get all narky about that 'the games too hard but i won anyway post' but you did it admirably and with rather more restraint than i would have managed. i mean OH MY GOD!!!! WE MIGHT ACTUALLY LOSE OCCASIONALLY!!!  I would love to be in an ambush like this
LoSboccacc Posted Mar 16, 2010, 10:05 am	I know we were ambushed in a group scout and that required us to use our brain instead of going on the same spot of tha map again and again were the ai get usually stuck and forming the line. it was hard, and amusing - even if the enemy was at 100mt in plain sight both in front of us and behind, on a place where it could possibly happen without us seeing them first. and it breaks so wonderfully the convention of having only front facing weapon to minimize the cr..... now rear weapons and dropped weapons are essential to get out to safety.
Big Daddy Posted Mar 16, 2010, 5:11 pm	I haven't followed much discussion here, or on any threads for a few days. (But I hope 'veil of war' would only affect character effectiveness, not human player visibility - that would be a huge and I think negative change). But I did want to pipe in that the new spawn points are awesome, making for some new and interesting challenges. I've had it for a mix of fighting scouts and light/unarmed travelers, it has been fun for both. Very nice enhancement, thanks Sam.
simonmaxhill Posted Mar 16, 2010, 6:06 pm	I'm loving the road spawn and ambush changes. To players who took losses: don't think of it as rape. Think of it as surprise sex.
Groove Champion Posted Mar 16, 2010, 6:25 pm	From the front and the back!
Celeris Posted Mar 16, 2010, 7:11 pm	I was just in an ambush of a quasi-muscle scout (S188919), and I think that this is what ambushes should be. We started surrounded, far too close to the enemy to escape, but not so close that one has to wonder whether everyone had their eyes closed (seriously, how do you wind up next to the enemy without noticing him?). The fight was tough, and we took losses, but it was winnable (actually, the odds could have been a bit tougher (it was in SS, anyway)). If this is the norm for the new code, I like it. A fight for one's life is refreshing.
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Mar 16, 2010, 7:17 pm	It isnt so much the new spawns that are upsettiong some, but the fact they may lose very experienced gang members that may have taken years to train ( i myself have no complaints ) i can understand there concerns to overly close ambushes that give then little time to react, and especially for those getting these ambushes with a very high scout.
LoSboccacc Posted Mar 16, 2010, 9:34 pm	S189078 I don't know if this was an ambush or not, but I report as an "ambush weirdness": started with one car in front and one behind me, the one behind me facing away from my position
*Ninesticks* Posted Mar 16, 2010, 10:10 pm	Yep was an ambush LoS. Definitely something wonky with the orientation of the Longshot it's facing appeared to be about 90 degrees out (it appeared worse because you set up towards the front of your deployment circle).
Lord Foul Posted Mar 16, 2010, 10:39 pm	Goat Quote: mean OH MY GOD!!!! WE MIGHT ACTUALLY LOSE OCCASIONALLY!!! I would love to be in an ambush like this If you want to lose occasionally with your best characters and equipment, be my guest and I’ll be watching for your uber skilled large gunner or other high skilled guys in the hall of Fame. Leave the safe buzzers at home and go out in weaker chassis if you don’t feel challenged enough. Add some spice to it and don’t bring a scout.
Big Daddy Posted Mar 16, 2010, 10:40 pm	I do sympathize some with the complaints here. Personally, I favor gameplay over realism, but I think the un-realism here could cause what I do think is a serious problem: surprising the player. I write (infinitely less fun) software too, and it is generally a very important goal for things to work the way the user expects. Even if the software can do something that's better, if it surprises the user, it probably won't help. Sometimes you should change to what he expects, sometimes you can give better hints and change his expectations. Here, the unrealistic surprise is that during initial positioning, the user may reasonably think, "well, the enemy must be speeding straight at me down this road, or have jumped out from behind the hills over there". It is frustrating if instead you find that you're surrounded at close range and have made things worse by your initial positioning. What if during positioning, based on scouting skill, we were given some general information about enemy position? We already get pretty specific details about the enemy count and chassis. What if we also got a broad description of near, medium, or long range and direction(s)? Better scouts would get more specific and/or accurate information.
*Lugal* Posted Mar 17, 2010, 12:03 am	I do agree with you Big D, and some of those ideas have been suggested before. I think the main rational behind NOT giving too much information to the player during set up is that it goes against what the set up circle is for. "Back in the day", your car spawns were placed by the computer, and that could result in placements ranging from simply funny to instant-death-by-terrain.  The placement circle was added to allow the players to specify the travel formation of the squad. The 'reveal' phase where you can see the enemy is the actual first contact.  That's when you step in and take control, and the battle starts.  By disclosing too much information to the players during set up, it would allow players to custom set up unrealistic formations tailored to the enemy's set up. To think of it in pen-and-paper roleplaying terms, the set up phase is the DM asking what order you're marching down a corridor.  There's some meta-gaming involved; you know something's up, but you don't know what or from where.
Serephe Posted Mar 17, 2010, 12:30 am	Really we need fixed formations and the removal of the setup circle.
Marrkos Posted Mar 17, 2010, 12:35 am	*Serephe* said: Really we need fixed formations and the removal of the setup circle.  That wouldn't work, because the system can't reliably place the vehicles.  Even with fixed formations we'd still need the Setup Circle/Phase to correct wonky placements.  Perhaps the incidence of bad placements would decrease but I don't think they would be eliminated.
Serephe Posted Mar 17, 2010, 1:15 am	Well, it's either that or people stop complaining about bad placements when they exploit the setup circle to make the game easier.
FireFly Posted Mar 17, 2010, 8:25 am	About Formations, we had some great ideas about that in another thread way back, it went along the line of adjusting your spawn area in accord to formation...
*goat starer* Posted Mar 17, 2010, 9:51 am	Lord Foul said: Goat Quote: mean OH MY GOD!!!! WE MIGHT ACTUALLY LOSE OCCASIONALLY!!! I would love to be in an ambush like this If you want to lose occasionally with your best characters and equipment, be my guest and I’ll be watching for your uber skilled large gunner or other high skilled guys in the hall of Fame. Leave the safe buzzers at home and go out in weaker chassis if you don’t feel challenged enough. Add some spice to it and don’t bring a scout. Foul... I dont take a scout... It was always this way with ambushes... go and have a look at the scout where i lost two renowned buzzers and an osprey because a firetruck started 20 yards away... I lasted 9 turns. and guess what.. when i started taking blue text I surrendered... i lost the equipment but kept my 'uber' gangers. if you want to take a look in the hall of fame you will see a few VERY good gangers i have lost.. mainly in ambushes and in all cases they were the most exciting scouts i have done. And after losing them I have been a little annoyed but have simply trained more. The other day i lost the leg of a guy who is probably one of the best gunners in the game - 370 large guns.. 150 guns.. and it was exciting! darth wittered on and on about carebear attitudes but yours is frankly rifdiculous... if you want to make it so that you cant lose (or can only lose if you decide to go out in a symph) then this is not a game. The idea that because you have invested in training gangers they should somehow be invulnerable is just ridiculous... if you want to see people win all the time watch a film. using buzzers and high end equipment should give you resilience in an ambush but it shouldnt make you invulnerable. You have always wanted this game to be ludicrously easy... you used to argue about spawn points incessantly in the rules council... if you dont want to lose stay in somerset. Some of us are quite happy to lose gangers and equipment if it makes the game more challenging.
*Bastille* Posted Mar 17, 2010, 10:43 am	So guilty of exploiting spawn circles. Isn't that what they are for, oh no, thats the discovery channel. ok, stupid jokes aside, I have often thought I should place on the road, but when I know I can probably get away by placing on a mountain top, Ill do that. Maybe re-introducing the height placement rule will change things, although Im already so hesitant and indecisive over squad setup, so that I am prepared for what might come, I may take even more time to set my squads up if such a rule came into action. Hang on, then why am I bringing it up. /me wonders away to ponder before exploding.
LoSboccacc Posted Mar 17, 2010, 10:53 am	maybe the circle radius could be dependent on the scouting roll: high roll means that you are ambushing them, so the circle is large and you can position in the best place that will give you the edge over the AI, while a low scout roll means that you are restricted to a column formation along the road
*goat starer* Posted Mar 17, 2010, 10:55 am	the height thing caused real problems in fl where even the road can have a huge height difference in the circle. people need to adapt ther car setups to the ambush code... not change the code for ambushes again or change the placement rules... bill and i showed the other day that having a mixture of front and rear weapons is now very effective if you meet an ambush... use rams.... use heavy rockets and rocket racks to blast a way through...
*Wolfsbane* Posted Mar 17, 2010, 10:59 am	I stuck a front mounted ram on my BL buzzers a while back, because rez refuses to use scouts and ramming through ambushes was costing me v8s . I was thinking last night that I should trade a CC reload for a front HR - should help against smaller enemies at least.
Flaming savage Posted Mar 17, 2010, 11:06 am	Just bring a lorry and put rams on all sides. Sorted.
Fealty Lost Posted Mar 17, 2010, 11:13 am	What is an ambush? There are three types: Mechanical, Organic and Combined. A mechanical ambush is one that is done with devices meant to incapacitate/wound and or kill, without exposing your troops to danger. This includes everything from simple mechanical traps to explosives on trips to command-detonated devices. DW doesn't allow for this...thankfully. Organic ambushes are ones in which a force of men strike at another from various concealed positions with the hopes of dealing more damage than that which is taken. These are usually done by small units for the benefit of gathering intelligence/capturing live enemy; but can also be done for inflicting casualties. A combined ambush is one which utilizes 'breaks,' or a series of injury-dealing devices meant to funnel an enemy unit towards an organic engagement, arriving in disarray and with reduced combat effectiveness; in concert with an armed unit taking advantage of the confusion of a force being attacked by unseen devices to produce casualties with little organized resistance. These are usually done solely for inflicting casualties. Again, thankfully, DW doesn't have these. The key to surviving an ambush is a violently aggressive manuever aimed towards a perceived weak point in the enemy's setup; hope against hope that a unit can 'break out' from the ambush and at least, survive, at most, turn the tables on the attackers. It's a crapshoot. But a good 'point man' can be the difference between getting caught...and be the catchers. Since most ambushes tend to start from a static positioning of forces: Why can't Scout Skill be the determining factor (not the vehicle its in, either) as to when your squad encounters an ambushing enemy? Since the computer has already decided on an ambush and knows where the setup circle will be and has already placed its forces: Why can't the setup circle's placement be affected by a 'good' scout roll? Instead of starting out surrounded, the circle is moved back a variable number of meters based on the success of the scout roll? This way, 'uber' scouts (and occassionally, a lucky newbie) could have a chance of 'seeing' something that causes him/her to alert the rest of the squad, who stops its normal 'travel' formation and sets up for what they believe is an immenent threat? Also, since ambushes are launched from concealment; enemy forces are allowed to move into the 'kill zone' before the attackers reveal their positions, then it should never happen that you are surrounded front and back on a road. Front, yes, by all means; to represent a 'road block' set up by the baddies to intercept traffic coming down the road. It's an ages-old accepted way to halt victims. Then, off-road enemy move to surround you by entering from concealed postions off the road. So, instead of the Scout Skill being the determining factor in whether there WILL be an ambush, it affects the placement of the setup circle instead? Since an ambush is something that has to be set up well in advance of the arrival of an enemy, the Scout would be the determining factor in whether your squad stumbles into the ambush or not. The greater the success of the scout roll, the further back from the encounter area the setup circle would appear. Barely 'win' the roll, and the leading edge of your setup circle could still be within the outer edge of the enemy's ambush area. Sidebar: Since it's being discussed: rares should spawn TOTALLY at random, not just because you have figured out what vehicles at which distance in what direction to take. That's an exploit. There should be a modifier for taking rares out to hunt rares, but not a big one and it should only affect the percentage chance of encountering a rare(s), not how many/what type. Sidebar: And for crying out loud change HPs and Shop Awards already.
*goat starer* Posted Mar 17, 2010, 11:19 am	Damon_Angel said: Sidebar: Since it's being discussed: rares should spawn TOTALLY at random, not just because you have figured out what vehicles at which distance in what direction to take. That's an exploit. There should be a modifier for taking rares out to hunt rares, but not a big one and it should only affect the percentage chance of encountering a rare(s), not how many/what type. rares should spawn when you hunt a gang that can afford them (success = high fame) when you hunt in an area where they are useful. when you are facing a high CR opponent (the enemy will risk their good cars to get good prizes). Oh... thats EXACTLY what we have at the moment rares are one of the ways this game creates progression... games need progression to keep people playing... you are proposing to remove that mechanism... its short sighted and basically looks greedy. Also given that people have found Firetrucks with just an apache and a BPU in the past i really cant see what your problem is. now about ambushes.......................
Serephe Posted Mar 17, 2010, 12:25 pm	Damon is right, we need harder ambushes where they've laid minefields!
FireFly Posted Mar 17, 2010, 12:27 pm	*Serephe* said: Damon is right, we need harder ambushes where they've laid minefields!  No, your saying I might actually get to use the bottom armor I put on all of my cars, good heavens... But only if we get to do the same, hehe
simonmaxhill Posted Mar 17, 2010, 5:01 pm	I've always interpreted the term "ambush" loosely in terms of how DW does it - similar to the initial deployment in table top wargames, it's an approximation that allows us to skip straight to getting to grips instead of having to manuever for hours and hours until we finaly get close. The cars aren't just "popping up out of the ground" - different groups, split up and hidden all over the landscape, harass and corral the travel/scout pack until they feel they've got them into a vulnerable position or are forced to engage. I think the argument isn't "this is unrealistic" so much as it is "this is too hard." I have the perfect counter argument, though. "No it's not."
Groove Champion Posted Mar 17, 2010, 5:14 pm	game, set, match simon.
simonmaxhill Posted Mar 17, 2010, 5:20 pm	I was wicked in forensics club. My other counter was "neener neener neener". Nobody could stop me and that's how we took all-state and I became a local celebrity and then had a VH1 behind the music style fall from glory.
Jim Posted Mar 17, 2010, 6:25 pm	lol
*Lugal* Posted Mar 17, 2010, 7:56 pm	simonmaxhill said: My other counter was "neener neener neener".  Nobody could stop me and that's how we took all-state and I became a local celebrity and then had a VH1 behind the music style fall from glory. I still have my issue of Tiger Beat with you on the cover.
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Mar 17, 2010, 8:10 pm	This is all too disturbing
*Rezeak* reecestensel@hotmail.co.uk Posted Mar 17, 2010, 8:38 pm	I heard that this thread was once about ambushes... kinda rings a bell...
Groove Champion Posted Mar 17, 2010, 10:08 pm	It was about tweeners ambushing Tiger Beat cover models.
*Bastille* Posted Mar 17, 2010, 11:36 pm	Quote: maybe the circle radius could be dependent on the scouting roll: high roll means that you are ambushing them, so the circle is large and you can position in the best place that will give you the edge over the AI, while a low scout roll means that you are restricted to a column formation along the road That makes sense, "We didn't see em coming". not sure how it would limit large squads and if some squads would not be able to set up in some situations, but it simulates the idea that if we do see the enemy we can use the high escape roads and place in crazy places, with a good scout roll,(like the road into shanty where you can place on a mountain). Would make a regular spawn quite nasty.
Lord Foul Posted Mar 17, 2010, 11:51 pm	Quote: Foul... I dont take a scout... It was always this way with ambushes... go and have a look at the scout where i lost two renowned buzzers and an osprey because a firetruck started 20 yards away... I lasted 9 turns. and guess what.. when i started taking blue text I surrendered... i lost the equipment but kept my 'uber' gangers. if you want to take a look in the hall of fame you will see a few VERY good gangers i have lost.. mainly in ambushes and in all cases they were the most exciting scouts i have done. And after losing them I have been a little annoyed but have simply trained more. The other day i lost the leg of a guy who is probably one of the best gunners in the game - 370 large guns.. 150 guns.. and it was exciting! I watched that event after it happened to you way back and remember you were forced to surrender to save your leader due to getting caught on an object. You took the risks by not using a scout and paid the price of taking that risk. If you had not been caught on that object you would have continued to fight to claimed that fire truck to claim your reward for the risk. But it also shows you don’t like to lose because you took the best way out to save your uber characters as equipment is far easier to replace. How much more annoyed would you be if you had lost your near 1000 skilled leader? Quote: darth wittered on and on about carebear attitudes but yours is frankly rifdiculous... if you want to make it so that you cant lose (or can only lose if you decide to go out in a symph) then this is not a game. For one you’re over exaggerating as there no mention of me saying I don’t want to lose. Everyone loses at some point, even I do. I find your attitude to make the game even harder frankly ridiculous. There’s no shortage of players losing battles and there’s no shortage of players losing gangers at every skill level on a daily basis. You may think I have a “carebear” attitude, but I look at the big picture and don’t base my comments on only my play style. I think of the less skilled or newer players with less skilled crew and lower grade equipment put into these new ambush code positions. I actually care about retaining players and building up the game, not pushing them away be making the game harder to appease a small group of players. You as a vet have the choice to make the game harder by various means, less skilled or newer players don’t have as many options and would have a far more difficult time with dealing with these type of situations. If those players are put into to many of these near no win situations to often and come up on the losing end to often, they will get discouraged and possibly stop playing. We don’t know if the new ambush code starts off weaker and becomes stronger the further south you go, but if it’s the same strength in all areas, then this could become a problem for those players. If you have a problem with me trying to make sure the game is still inviting for newer players and instances won’t arise to push them away, then I’m sorry you feel that way. But please don’t saying my comments are ridiculous when deep down you show that you don’t like to lose as well. Put yourself in the newer players shoes before jumping all over my posts. Quote: The idea that because you have invested in training gangers they should somehow be invulnerable is just ridiculous... if you want to see people win all the time watch a film. using buzzers and high end equipment should give you resilience in an ambush but it shouldn’t make you invulnerable. Nowhere in my previous post did I imply or say such a thing, why are you adding this to try and discredit my comments? Considering I have not used a buzzer since 2008 your comment is baseless. Many know I use muscle cars and racers in my wilderness scouts which can add a level of difficulty on its own. You chose to use buzzers to give your scouts resilience in an ambush, which clearly shows you don’t’ like it to be to difficult but won’t use a scout so try and pull rares. You want to take risks, but not lose your uber gangers by using one of the most invulnerable chassis available. Quote: You have always wanted this game to be ludicrously easy... you used to argue about spawn points incessantly in the rules council... if you dont want to lose stay in somerset. Just because I care about the game and retaining players has nothing to do with trying to make the game easier. I’m only one person expressing my views and if Sam examines those views and agrees with them great, if not I move on. Back when you were on the RC I didn’t “argue” about spawn points (Head on code) in the RC, I presented data to the RC and Sam to go over. There was a thread just like this one with players being upset about the head on code and I brought it to Sam’s attention. Sam agreed the head on code was to brutal and detrimental to the players enjoyment and modified the code to make it les so. I did not twist Sam’s arm to make that change but at least I made the effort to show how it was affecting other players because I actually cared. Simon: Quote: I've always interpreted the term "ambush" loosely in terms of how DW does it - similar to the initial deployment in table top wargames, it's an approximation that allows us to skip straight to getting to grips instead of having to manuever for hours and hours until we finaly get close. The cars aren't just "popping up out of the ground" - different groups, split up and hidden all over the landscape, harass and corral the travel/scout pack until they feel they've got them into a vulnerable position or are forced to engage. I think the argument isn't "this is unrealistic" so much as it is "this is too hard." I have the perfect counter argument, though. "No it's not." That would be an acceptable situation except the scout being harassed/corralled is not being allowed to fire its weapons until the enemy is well within weapons range. Add that the scout is not allowed to make any adjustments while being harassed or corralled. If they new they were being corralled or harassed, all efforts would be made to avoid a near no win situation. Basically the scout/player is being put into a position they have no control over. Now if say the enemy had a better skilled scout than you, I could understand them having the upper hand, but if they don’t and your scout knows the area better, your scouting party would be able to avoid such situations. Players put themselves in these ambush situations because they purposely don’t use/bring a scout. But the players that actually make the effort to train and bring skilled scouts should be able to avoid these brutal ambushes because of the level of scout used.
*goat starer* Posted Mar 18, 2010, 12:13 am	Lord Foul said: I watched that event after it happened to you way back and remember you were forced to surrender to save your leader due to getting caught on an object. You took the risks by not using a scout and paid the price of taking that risk. If you had not been caught on that object you would have continued to fight to claimed that fire truck to claim your reward for the risk. But it also shows you don’t like to lose because you took the best way out to save your uber characters as equipment is far easier to replace. How much more annoyed would you be if you had lost your near 1000 skilled leader? foul.. you are entirely missing the point... even leaving aside your inaccuracy... (i surrendered because i breached and was taking internals - the obstacle was incidantal and even had it not been there i would have lost)... the basic point is that i DID lose... three of my best vehicles... and i ENJOYED it... i wasn't annoyed... because unlike you i seem to have a pretty clear idea that this is a game and games are only fun if you lose sometimes... In other scouts i have abandoned characters (take a look at them in the hall of fame) with gunnery skills most people have never reached to die because it suited the role play to do so. there is a massive shortage of players losing battles... you only have to look at people garages... and the strangely small number of people in that hall of fame to see it. you are not talking abput what happens to newer players .. you are talkig about what happens to you... trying to dress that up does nobody any credit. If your attitude to the game is such that you dont want to lose then fair enough... admit it ... move on.. but dont pretend its about making it 'inviting to newer players'. The problem has always been maintaining interest beyond a certain point not getting people to feel invited. the rest of your post is complete drivel.. you deliberately distort everything i saiod and as always debating with you is like talking to a self interested cloud. You started the thing about head on code.. nobody else was interested... it was the same as this. YOU said if i wanted more challenge i should leave my buzzers at home.. I merely pointed out that this type of change gets it bang on.. you can still use buzzers and still be at risk. whether you do or not is irrelevant and again i have no idea what you are trying to say because you never actually read anyones posts or reply to them with any rational argument. Sam has finally put some challenge into the game.. it is to be applauded.
Stingray191 Posted Mar 25, 2010, 10:53 pm	Oh #### yeah there is some challenge to be had. Sigh - thought I had the right set up to beat front and behind but a small error in placement (and poor judgement) cost me a few turns and suddenly I was fricking swarmed. 5 dead gangers - thankfully only 1 I greatly cared about. But - still approve of changes. Gotta rethink again.
FireFly Posted Mar 26, 2010, 8:13 am	Goat, there is no shortage of ganger's dieing... have you checked the Gazette anytime in the recent year? That High skilled ganger's aren't killed as much, isn't this obvious, people take better care of their higher skilled ones. Have you even checked the hall of fame lately? There are about 2 - 4 deaths per day, thats quite a lot considering it takes longer than that to train one.
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Mar 26, 2010, 9:23 am	But they all belong to Burden
Bruv Posted Mar 26, 2010, 1:55 pm	There is a fair bit of vets trying to decide what is good for everyone in this thread, so I will try to put the relative newbie perspective forward. The first thing I was told when I joined up was never scout alone. I ignored this advice and lost three gangers. This was fine because I was told in advance what to expect. I moved some gang members to GW and learned the hard way about the increase in the frequency of returns. This also was fine as it was my choice to up the ante. A while later I learned through the forums that ambushes were changing and would be more difficult. I kept scouting in the same way I had before and began losing/running away a lot more. This was fine until I was ambushed on a 2 car scout by a half dozen scorpions front and back starting at less than 100m. I got so cross with the game I almost packed it in. If I was a new player again and I decided having been told about the risks to drive my best gangers to firelight, I don't see that I would have much complaint in having them all killed. If I decided that me and another noob should scout SS and we get set upon by impossible opposition I would probably decide to play elsewhere. That said I would point out some things: It is very important that new players are told what to expect. Being killed because you took on something too big is far less annoying than being killed because you didn't know how big it was. Somerset should be easier than elsewhere. Some other MMPORGs have a literal sandbox where you can learn before being thrust into the wider world. I'm not advocating that approach but scouting SS should be less of a risk. If you want a challenge for your 200 gunner in his A armoured buzzer, go elsewhere. The best encounters are the ones where you are challenged, not killed in the first 10 turns, not destroy the enemy without taking a hit and not put the hammer down and leave the two landrunners chasing you in the dust. I don't know if you could code it effectively but some things just aren't fun, or are actively irritating/dull and should be avoided. This is getting a bit long but you get the idea.
LoSboccacc Posted Mar 26, 2010, 2:19 pm	I'd like too to see some more balance between faction strength and encounters, but that would allow for "mining" the somerset factions if they have their CR artificially limited (that was the main counter argument, last time we talked about it) still I totally agree that even if the wastes are a dangerous places and such one should have some way to make a risk assessment of what he will be up against. the way it is now the risk is proportional to scout level, scout area and somewhat gang fame and totally independent on what you bring to your scout. There is no "gearing up" for that difficult mission, there is no sense of advancement in getting better or more hardware. I mean, I see on the road kill ninja page that they have 13 gangers. what would happen should I bring 15 FT on them?
Snakebit Posted Mar 26, 2010, 3:06 pm	Bruv said: This was fine until I was ambushed on a 2 car scout by a half dozen scorpions front and back starting at less than 100m. I got so cross with the game I almost packed it in. Being killed because you took on something too big is far less annoying than being killed because you didn't know how big it was. Somerset should be easier than elsewhere. Some other MMPORGs have a literal sandbox where you can learn before being thrust into the wider world. I'm not advocating that approach but scouting SS should be less of a risk. If you want a challenge for your 200 gunner in his A armoured buzzer, go elsewhere. The best encounters are the ones where you are challenged, not killed in the first 10 turns, not destroy the enemy without taking a hit and not put the hammer down and leave the two landrunners chasing you in the dust. I don't know if you could code it effectively but some things just aren't fun, or are actively irritating/dull and should be avoided. Quoted for truth. Great post. There needs to be some way to ease into the scouting process. Death racing for 2 laps 10 times a day isn't it.
iceman Posted Mar 26, 2010, 3:36 pm	The way to ease into scouting was supposed to be scout with a Marshall rarely see the marshalls taking out new players scouting these days but most of them aren't active in SS to be fair so new players jus go out with other slightly less new players like SMK here or you or korn say I think it kinda works, although they more get thrown in the deep end with lil advice during the scout
LoSboccacc Posted Mar 26, 2010, 3:48 pm	well, as a noob I prefer just to attach* to whatever scout is going out, I don't feel like harassing marshal as they probably have better thing to do than babysitting me. there is a catch: scouting skill can be field trained only in wilderness, and until you don't have enough yourself you depend on others to bring scouts to your party and such - so there isn't a path that a noob may follow to exit from noobinesh, without depending from other players (don't read me wrong, I love group scouts) that is, apart from running from one place to another with a light unarmed car hoping for the best. but a single ambush in that situation and you'll need to restart from scratch. so we the noob are left to depend from other experienced players to grow up - which isn't bad but also mean that when there's nothing going on we're stuck doing nothing but town events, that don't train scouting so while entertaining does little to change our situation. * with mixed results
iceman Posted Mar 26, 2010, 4:14 pm	Losho I think the way the game was supposed to work wasyou had to do a lot if courier runs to build up some good scouts after mastering town events and being proficient at playing a supporting role in group scouts then when they were 50+ you could start to lead scouts out of ss least ways that's what I did
*Ninesticks* Posted Mar 26, 2010, 4:43 pm	Yep, courier runs/scout training will certainly help you build up your scout skills till you are happy to supply the scout. They train up much quicker this way than through regular scouts from town. In the alternative, ask a marshal to tag along on your scout and for them to leave their scout at home so you can train yours up. Hopefully, their knowledge, equipment and characters can help you deal with any mishaps.
*Tinker* Posted Mar 26, 2010, 9:21 pm	Bruv said: A while later I learned through the forums that ambushes were changing and would be more difficult. I kept scouting in the same way I had before and began losing/running away a lot more. This was fine until I was ambushed on a 2 car scout by a half dozen scorpions front and back starting at less than 100m. I got so cross with the game I almost packed it in. I wonder if this was not when the game started to get influenced a a player's exploit where he flooded the NPC gangs with billions of $$$, there by artificially increasing their fame and in consequence their toughness to beat on a scout or travel Just wondering because since around 2010-03-18 10:25:11, this game as been a mother for my best 400+ scouts, or maybe it's from something else (like putting your scout in a FT that greatly reduces his abilities?) Anyways on a solo travel (BL->SV) in a FT with said scout, got ambushed by 6 suvs and 1 muscle car Also trucing has been a nightmare of late, i'm guessing for the above reasons
*Wolfsbane* Posted Mar 26, 2010, 9:37 pm	*Tinker* said: maybe it's from something else (like putting your scout in a FT that greatly reduces his abilities? This, I suspect.  The scout modifiers based on vehicle size seem to be massive - 50 scout in a flash is massively better than 100 scout in a Trash Truck, from what I've experienced recently.
Fealty Lost Posted Mar 27, 2010, 3:48 pm	...since getting my 'bad' 35 meter ambush, I've noticed a definite increase in ambushes. I'm running about 50% ambushes since the inception. To counter this, I put my scout into a buggy. For three scouts it seemed to work, however, every scout he started out yellow morale and quickly proceeded to red...and demo'd, until a demo happened 140 meters away from any enemy, with a friendly within 40 meters. He stopped in front of a Black Stone, and had the #### shot out of him. End of scout. Now I'm back to a scout in an Apache. Still getting more ambushes than before the new code and going out without a scout/low scout almost guarantees one. My last 7 travels have been 5 ambushes to 2 regular deployments.
Serephe Posted Mar 27, 2010, 8:56 pm	With a 130 scout in a buzzer, I'm not getting many ambushes at all - in fact, I can't remember the last one I got when I wasn't messing about with fresh recruits in junkers.
Dwarger Posted Mar 27, 2010, 9:04 pm	I haven't noticed an increase in ambushes. Running multiple scouts from somerset with Apaches usually and <50 scouts and only an occasional ambush. Worst one was about 50 meters and we were behind them so I don't think that one counts really. It may just be location that is having a major effect on the ambushes.
simonmaxhill Posted Mar 27, 2010, 9:06 pm	Since, for the most part, people seem to be able to play through with a teensy tiny bit more challenge, is this increase in ambushes really a problem? Is it bug or a feature? I think feature.
*goat starer* Posted Mar 28, 2010, 6:47 pm	i have no idea where this new 'lots of ambushes' nonsense is coming from... i was asked what i thought about them and had to tell sam i had only had 2 since the changes... still only had 2
*Wolfsbane* Posted Mar 28, 2010, 7:10 pm	I assume you always run with uber scouts though, right? Pretty much half my travel encounters have been ambushes, many of them new style. Only damage so far is one buccy and my nerves
*Ninesticks* Posted Mar 28, 2010, 7:17 pm	Not necessarily Wolf, a lot is down to luck, how big a group you are moving, local piracy levels etc. Just had a 380+ scout (not in a heavy vehicle) in a heavy transport group get ambushed between Texan and Shanty.
FireFly Posted Mar 28, 2010, 7:41 pm	Luck you say... My last 2 SS scouts got ambushed, with a 130 scout, in SS, both on the exact same spot, on the farmlands....
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Mar 28, 2010, 8:21 pm	Unlucky
Mad Mike Posted Mar 29, 2010, 12:03 am	could be unlucky... have been geting close encounters but nothing too crazy. our megas get ambushed but not too close. I have just learned to put lorrys in the middle and surround them with the other vehicles and that protects them
Bruv Posted Mar 29, 2010, 3:17 pm	There is a more general point here about what you're ambushed by. I sometimes feel like the CR of my opponents must be hugely more than mine, and they ambush me, getting hit with 8 rocket launchers on the first turn seems a little unfair.