World in Conflict Beta [Archive]

FesterShinetop

07-15-2007, 14:11

An open beta has been released for World in Conflict, a new RTS by Sierra.

I tried it and it looks absolutely gorgeous, I just spent 45 minutes just spectating a MP match admiring the graphics and the details, amazing!
The specs for this are pretty steep, but it ran surprisingly good on my old system that is just barely scratching the minimum specs... even with the settings at medium-high it was playable (I think due to my card, a 7300GT/512MB the only thing I have that is above the min. specs :laugh4: ), though there are some FPS drops... but still...

It is a true RTS though, so don't expect any fancy tactics and stuff ;)

The beta is mostly about MP, but if this game has some half-decent SP I might just get it for the pretty visuals alone!! :laugh4:

You can sign up for the beta here:
http://www.worldinconflict.com/beta/

And DL the beta here:
http://www.gamershell.com/download_20137.shtml

It's 1,7GB small... :dizzy2:

:2thumbsup:

Bijo

07-15-2007, 14:17

This is a game that caught my attention indeed. I have little care for multiplayer however, thus I will not try it out. If there were a single-player demo or something alike I would certainly check it.

Mikeus Caesar

07-15-2007, 15:56

Been waiting for this game for quite a while, jumped at the chance of playing the beta. Downloading now and should be done in 8 hours.

Husar

07-15-2007, 16:31

I'm playing this for some hours now, while it is indeed some sort of standard RTS, it is also different in some ways. First off you don't get a top-down perspective as usual, you get a camera similar to that of Total War games where you can choose an angle and can also look at the horizon or the sky even. Then there is no base-building at all, you order your troops and they're delivered via parchute or come flying in in the case of helicopters.

Ressources are also different, on the current ranked beta servers every player gets 6000 ressource points from which he can order units, those points will slowly refresh once one of your units is killed, so you can always order new units. On top of that you get tactical aid points for killing enemy units which allow you to call in artillery strikes, airstrikes, carpet bombing, tactical nukes, close air support, napalm, fuel air bombs, some reinforcements like spec ops paratroopers etc.

Also after choosing a faction you have to choose a branch from infantry, armour, support and air which will limit your unit choices though you can call some troops from other branches for an increased cost(armour commanders calling in a medium anti-air unit will pay 1000 ressource points while a support player gets them for 650 for example). Some tactical support costs also seem to differ between the branches. Also keep in mind that currently each team consists of up to 8 players divided into the different branches which results in two things:
1. teamplay is quite important, if everybody chooses air, noone can capture those tactical areas which are required to win the game, also no branch can beat everybody by itself, an armour commander will be very thankful for some anti air support from a support or air player for example.
2. more anonymity, less responsibility, leass sweat, well, if there are seven other players who can help you or help remedy a mistake you made, the game is a lot more relaxing(maybe not if you join a clan who expects this or that from you).

The goals are also somewhat different because you have to conquer some sort of victory locations to get victory points to win, indicated by two flags at the top of the screen which will expand to either side depending on who holds more locations. If one flag reaches one end you win by domination, if the timer runs out, the side with more of the flag wins and if one side gets all of those points, they win after some ten seconds or so. Victory points are not just single points though, they consist of at least two circles which both have to be occupied by friendly troops to capture the location, keeping troops in there afterwards will result in the creation of some basic defenses which make it harder for enemy raiders to capture the location.

Ok, that was a small introduction though at the start I just wanted to point out the differences in comparison to standard RTS games, well, this is only concerning the game modes available in the current open beta but maybe it's of help to someone. Also keep in mind that given a capable system the graphics are awesome, I can use fairly high settings and the graphics are very nice, napalm strikes, carpet bombing etc look very convincing and the game has one of the best nuke effects ever, including some noise in the contaminated area(which also seems to damage units travelling through).

People with DX10 cards might be interested in this nzone DX10 walkthrough (http://us.download.nvidia.com/downloads/nZone/videos/nzm_WIC_WALKTHRU_DX10.mov) which shows some amazing stuff like helicopters blowing away smoke etc.:2thumbsup:

Bijo

07-15-2007, 16:44

Hmmm, let me see. Husar's descriptive explanation + it is a war game + nukes + airstrikes + artillery + etc. + etc.... It becomes very attractive to check out.

Is there any high-speed download location available?

FesterShinetop

07-15-2007, 18:12

Is there any high-speed download location available?

Well, the link I provided is pretty good most of the time! And you can choose from different areas of the world...

Check out a video with the nuke-effect here:
http://www.gamespot.com/video/932462/6174796/world-in-conflict-gameplay-movie-4

Some more gameplay videos:
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/worldinconflict/media.html?mode=gameplay

:2thumbsup:

Mikeus Caesar

07-18-2007, 10:41

Aaaaaaaaah!

Not fair!

I finally got round to finishing the absurd 8 hour download time, only to get a corrupted ZIP error.

Here i go again...

:wall:

Mikeus Caesar

07-20-2007, 10:17

I know i'm double posting, but i have to tell you all this.

The beta, being a beta, is rather buggy, but from what i've seen, THIS IS THE GREATEST RTS SINCE THE TW SERIES. It's incredible. Absolutely incredible. The shocking enormity and brilliance of the nuclear bomb, the detail on soldiers, everything.

Keep a look out for this game guys.

Husar

07-20-2007, 11:07

The only bug I've found so far is that infantry hovers across craters instead of walking down into them. Either I'm still clouded by my own hype after almost 20 hours or I didn't find any other bugs. Though people with DX10 cards seem to have a few problems. I myself use (as many of you might know already) Vista Business 64bit, a 7950Gt and an E6600 with 2GB RAM and it runs pretty much fluent on rather high settings, the benchmark gives me IIRC 18 fps lowest and 22 average but I don't get a feeling of slowness in the game.

And the game has an interesting wheather system, basically the wheather and mood get worse the longer the fighting goes on, I made this screenshot to prove the infantry crater bug but you can also notice what the wheather looks like later in a round. And yes, everything being blurry is part of what I call wheather.

https://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i231/husar1985/infantry_on_crater.jpg

And by the way, my nickname there is the same as here, and it will stay since I was weak and preordered the game(you get an access code then which makes sure your account stays after the beta, although with all points reset to zero, and you get another map with NATO forces to play on, apparently you will also get bonus stuff in the upcoming demo).

Mikeus Caesar

07-20-2007, 13:45

About craters - it is rather annoying that they hover across them, but still, it's not gamestopping. And anyway, at least everything else goes down them - a field of craters is a good obstacle for fleeing enemy tanks. Slows them down enough for your artillery to hit them.

Did you get to use a nuke yet? I did. Most amazing thing i've ever seen in a game.

Also, what class do you mostly play as? I'm usually support or air. They're pretty damn good at racking up points and destroying everything.

EDIT: btw, Husar the link in your earlier post most definitely does not show nice pictures of DX10 graphics. It's some FBI report about a semi-automatic rifle converted to a machinegun with a piece of string.

Husar

07-20-2007, 15:12

I fired two nukes already, though I think that's still not enough, but carpet bombing isn't bad either.

Apparently I play mostly air and armour, at least I made most points with them.

And I'm sorry about the link, I usually test them and when I saw a download prompt I thought it was fine, seems like it was the wrong download though.:wall:
Fixed it now.:sweatdrop:

Bijo

07-24-2007, 17:44

The time was approximately 1750 or so. I checked hastily and found a fast download link originating in Germany. As I rejoiced, it took only 45 minutes or so to download, thinking it enabled me a quick peek and taste. Of course, naturally, afterwards I discovered the corruption of the large file. Good bandwidth has been squandered.

What are possible reasons for this corruption?

Bijo

07-24-2007, 21:46

Splendid; I have located the source causing corruption or more precisely general errors: the directory in which I stored the data was named WiC-β which was -- presumably -- somehow not allowed. Renaming it to WiC-Beta frought forth resolution.

Of course this occurred áfter data was redownloaded from another source which took another hour or so. Luck is on my side.

Mikeus Caesar

07-25-2007, 10:34

Husar - screw vehicles, infantry ftw. Masses of infantry that are kept on the move can destroy anything. I've taken on hordes of armour, support, air and enemy infantry, destroying it all, and as long you don't keep still for too long, you're fine.

I made the mistake of staying still a few times - fwoosh, napalm destroys three quarters of my men, while i make the survivors sprint for their lives into a nearby forest. Thank god you can replenish them.

Splendid; I have located the source causing corruption or more precisely general errors: the directory in which I stored the data was named WiC-β which was -- presumably -- somehow not allowed. Renaming it to WiC-Beta frought forth resolution.

Of course this occurred áfter data was redownloaded from another source which took another hour or so. Luck is on my side.

Have you begun playing on it yet?

Husar

07-25-2007, 10:53

Infantry is nice as long as the enemy artillery keeps missing and their armour players don't know that you can drive over them. Depends on the terrain though, if they have forests or houses nearby that helps, as long as noone destroys them with bombardements(napalm on forests = no infantry cover left :beam: ).

Ja'chyra

07-25-2007, 12:26

Does this game have a decent single player option, if so I might download it tonight.

Husar

07-25-2007, 16:11

The beta is MP only apart from the Tutorial which is not really a decent SP option.
If you want SP, you should wait for the SP demo which will hopefully come shortly after the end of the open beta(31st July that is). But since release is end of September, I have no idea when the demo(s) will come.

Bijo

07-25-2007, 17:31

Have you begun playing on it yet?
Hardly; not so much time. But I had a brief moment a while ago. One or two matches actually shortly. It is very... chaotic and too RTS-like for my taste. The chaotic part is the worst, however. I was playing a one-on-one match and this guy started spamming helicopters.

Agh, I guess online multiplayer RTS isn't my taste. If anyone wants to play you can locate by the name Mr. Black. I'll hardly be playing anyway, so you'll probably won't find me if you search.

Mikeus Caesar

07-25-2007, 18:45

Hardly; not so much time. But I had a brief moment a while ago. One or two matches actually shortly. It is very... chaotic and too RTS-like for my taste. The chaotic part is the worst, however. I was playing a one-on-one match and this guy started spamming helicopters.

Agh, I guess online multiplayer RTS isn't my taste. If anyone wants to play you can locate by the name Mr. Black. I'll hardly be playing anyway, so you'll probably won't find me if you search.

1 on 1 matches generally aren't the best. 8 v 8 messes are much better, as you'll have other people sorting out the chopper spam, leaving you to do your own thing. And of course it's chaotic - it's war. If you don't think fast, you die. And you could have just changed roles to support, pwned all his choppers with heavy AA and then quickly taken all of the control points, thus winning in about 10 seconds due to total domination.

Bijo

07-25-2007, 22:19

Husar

07-26-2007, 19:16

Wow, I never played 1on1 so far, 8vs8 sounds a lot more relaxed because you can blame the other 7 guys on your team if you fail.:laugh4:

Bijo

07-26-2007, 19:41

Playing one-on-one will give you generic battle capability (infantry, armour, airforce, support).

The worst thing about this multiplayer beta is when annoying American guys/boys with silly nerdy voices (almost even gay-like (I have nothing against them by the way)) use their mic and start dissing people. It sounds ugly. "Right, you know.... next time nuke the enemy.... ah, *cough* not your friends." What a terrible voice it was.

Husar

07-26-2007, 21:44

Press and hold Tab and then mute the guy or just mute everybody.:beam:

Bijo

07-26-2007, 22:53

It usually goes too fast before I discover who it was, but I suppose I could have muted them all. What is really foolish is when players of your team use their mics to communicate hoping you understand them as the sound quality is beneath the meaning of terrible or horrible. A word of greater intensity is necessary but such eloquence capability eludes me momentarily. Why utilize (very unclear and bad quality) voice chat if the in-game communication system is already good and very effective? (Perhaps experienced clans but not public games.)

There was one person who did that and I could not comprehend him. Use the in-game system and get it over with. Such a person even dares to complain the team is not playing well and is not listening to him. I wonder why?
[/rant]

Anyway, I've been playing a little this evening and I've acquainted myself with it. It is very good and enjoyable (for as much as I allow it). General-purpose infantry is my favourite of course. Rapid transportation of troops to, then, occupy buildings and forests. Infantry should be made stronger and faster however: regarding balance it is silly how slow they are on foot; they are too easily crushed beneath tanks as one would expect infantry to be smart and quick on their feet to evade such desparate moves.

Mikeus Caesar

07-26-2007, 23:42

Well, alright. I just played a little and it's simply too fast. I'm probably getting old already, heh heh. I'm just not used to the damn game and it's too multiplayer to me. The game appears promising however. If there will be a single-player demo I'd certainly check it out. If the release version will have SP I will certainly get it.

When you're on the main menu, the music playing in the background with fragments of radio reports gives me the idea that single player will be very detailed and very awesome.

Alexander the Pretty Good

07-27-2007, 16:42

Played through the tutorial, looks very nice and the mechanics are interesting. It's burning my GPU though...

I think I'll give MP a try now.

Bijo

07-27-2007, 18:42

Single-player is promising indeed.

For sake of easiness I put my settings to low and added some effects separately. For multiplayer acceptable speed to see what occurs is more important than pretty graphics and slowdown. And even on this low setting it looks reasonably good.

It would be splendid if they would release a free multiplayer version like it was done with F.E.A.R.

---

Alexander, MP took me an evening to get used to. Now I find it very enjoyable and also because in normal public matches without clans I usually in the end get some positions for best teamplay, best role (infantry), one of the top three players, transportation, tactical aid, repairs, etc. Very nice if you see your name multiple times.

---

I mentioned the in-game communication system before, and it's worth mentioning once more. To request allied aid one basically holds 'Q' (or whichever button is chosen for it) for a popup menu to appear whereafter you select an option (examples: need artillery; need anti-air; need repairs; need chemical/napalm strike; etc.) and then click a target (area or foe). It is beautful.

Gameplay -- from what I've seen -- mostly revolves around heavy armour, heavy air, heavy artillery, many airstrikes, nukes, etc., and not so much around infantry, but that's exactly why I like infantry (and I like infantry more in any case). They are so versatile and good if well applied. It is a nice sight when your infantry hidden in the bushes and/or buildings suddenly send anti-air rockets towards passing helicopters, especially when they were first attacking your teammate who was just retreating his armour towards you and another teammate's anti-air vehicles. Most satisfactory.

Husar

07-27-2007, 18:59

I agree in general Bijo, but if they were my choppers, you better prepare for some napalm. ~;)

Alexander the Pretty Good

07-27-2007, 19:07

I'm not good enough for infantry. Kept getting nailed by everything.

I am decent at support, if I'm allowed to MLRS everyone to death. Of course, then I get rocked by raiding choppers and don't have AA. If I buy AA, there's no choppers around... :wall:

My team has never won a battle though. :bigcry:

Very fun.

Bijo

07-27-2007, 19:16

I agree in general Bijo, but if they were my choppers, you better prepare for some napalm. ~;)
Immediate relocation after the attack is necessary. A napalm strike would then be rendered useless and wasted, heh heh. I've seen some players direct napalm (or worse.... chemical clouds) to my infantry but they usually miss, unless I wasn't paying attention. Sometimes it's just minimal damage.

Still, I find infantry too weak and vulnerable to easy point-and-click attacks, especially quick tank runs. I had two squads being run over by one tank due to their slow response and lack of autonomous behaviour. And if there are no forests or buildings they are I'd say almost useless. Forests and buildings perish too easily by these point-and-click offensives.

Infantry's special run option must be eliminated and they should always run. Then the option is to be replaced by some other one that is useful. Or the option must stay but normally they always run fast and the option makes them run even faster than before. And normal infantry's anti-tank weapons must be stronger -- as strong as pure anti-tank teams'. That should give a better play for infantry commanders.

Yes, indeed: I want infantry to own. Wanna fighdehboudid?

Alexander the Pretty Good

07-27-2007, 22:18

More impressions:

The game is too fast, especially with unbalanced teams. It's not the number of players that's unbalancing - a 5 v 7 game where the 5 have all logged weeks of playing time and are "majors" is going to be unfair to 7 new players (part of the reason I've lost 20 matches and only one twice).

You'd think there would be a simple balancing thing that mixes high ranked players evenly. It would be an excellent feature.

Being support is really frustrating at times. No one will willing provide air cover, so if you don't, then you'll get chopper ganked. If you do concentrate on AA units, the helis avoid you and everyone complains there's no air cover. The darn heavy AA units move too slow to be everywhere at once. And if you follow a tank column, you'll die when the other team's support finds you.

The Daisy cutter is scary. For the first time, I saw it floating lazily at my position. I thought, "hmmm. Wonder what that is." It fit in because my team was airdropping things all around it. So then I realize it's a falling bomb. Boom! No units. Very cool though.

The "Assault" mode is better than the multi-objective mode because it increases team work by focusing everyone on one objective. Of course, defense is really hard...

Husar

07-27-2007, 22:47

Haven't played assault yet.

Concerning support and anti-air units, if the choppers avoid you that's their problem as long as your team can take points and conquer the map. The big deficit of helicopters is they cannot conquer anything and without conquering you cannot win.

On a sidenote, I really like those two trailers here rule the world (http://www.gametrailers.com/player/20406.html) and destruction blues (http://www.gametrailers.com/player/22824.html).:2thumbsup:

Todsay the german version got an 18+ rating now I really hope they won't cut it in some way by replacing soldiers with cyborgs or renaming nukes to rabbits or whatever.:dizzy2: Otherwise I shall cancel my preorder and get it in english.:wall:

Bijo

07-27-2007, 22:51

More impressions:

The game is too fast, especially with unbalanced teams. It's not the number of players that's unbalancing - a 5 v 7 game where the 5 have all logged weeks of playing time and are "majors" is going to be unfair to 7 new players (part of the reason I've lost 20 matches and only one twice).

You'd think there would be a simple balancing thing that mixes high ranked players evenly. It would be an excellent feature.
You could go to the beta forums and discuss it (if it hasn't been already). I think you have a point in saying imbalance should be avoided.

The Daisy cutter is scary. For the first time, I saw it floating lazily at my position. I thought, "hmmm. Wonder what that is." It fit in because my team was airdropping things all around it. So then I realize it's a falling bomb. Boom! No units. Very cool though.

Heh heh, I had the same thing. I would not recommend to play as Support, however: I would recommend Armour or Air and let other people deal with Support.

The "Assault" mode is better than the multi-objective mode because it increases team work by focusing everyone on one objective. Of course, defense is really hard...
I tried it out and didn't like Assault which is slightly strange or unexpected as I seem to recall I wished an Assault/Defend mode in certain war games before. I think Domination mode is better for it encourages more coordinated and tactical teamplay all over and not raw strategic blasting and pounding of one area. At least the latter has been the experience I've had in Assault mode.

---

Husar, one should get the English version anyway ;)

Alexander the Pretty Good

07-28-2007, 00:28

After an intense Assault map, I might become a tank WOMAN OF ILL-REPUTE. ~;p

The Ruskies overran all the objectives up till the airfield in under 5 minutes. I started dropping heavy tanks on the capture points and praying. It worked though, since they only rushed light tanks and their choppers were sliced up by timely support.

Delightful. And I suggested the rank balancing on the beta forums. :2thumbsup:

EDIT: When does this beta end? With July?

Also, I play under the nom de guerre of "Hellbender".

EDIT 2: If you sign up at Massgate's forum and set an avatar for your account, it will be used as the logo on your units.
http://beta.massgate.net/forum-index.php

Bijo

07-28-2007, 12:11

EDIT: When does this beta end? With July?

I think it is the end of July indeed.

Mikeus Caesar

07-28-2007, 13:29

The Daisy cutter is scary. For the first time, I saw it floating lazily at my position. I thought, "hmmm. Wonder what that is." It fit in because my team was airdropping things all around it. So then I realize it's a falling bomb. Boom! No units. Very cool though.

Daisy cutter is pure brilliance. I managed to turn the tide of a game with a single daisy cutter - half the enemy was playing as Armour, and had all gathered near the crop refinery for a final assault. It had to be done. Out of about 28 tanks (lots of light tank spam!) about 3 heavy tanks survived, their owner having noticed the bomb innocuously floating out of the summer sky and managing to drive off in time. My team then managed to storm the bridge and air-strip, resulting in one of the most horrific (but brilliant) stalemates ever, in which there were no trees left and the entire map was covered in craters.

Husar

07-28-2007, 15:41

EDIT 2: If you sign up at Massgate's forum and set an avatar for your account, it will be used as the logo on your units.
http://beta.massgate.net/forum-index.php
You should read the screenshot topic some more.:beam:

https://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i231/husar1985/World%20in%20Conflict/Leopard2.jpg

Alexander the Pretty Good

07-28-2007, 17:15

You played the closed beta, Husar? I want Leopard tanks so badly...

Bijo

07-28-2007, 17:51

And still the infantry tree is so vulnerable and buggy. If it will not be fixed I will not purchase the game.

* there seems to be a forced auto-selection of transport trucks and squads when you command them to embark, thus when you select another irrelevant unit and command it somewhere both non-embarked selected squads and the previously selected trucks will move there, whereafter usually most of the embarking fails and must be performed again or what's left of it. It decelerates you, especially during overture for example when immediate conquest of points is necessary and no one else is nearby to do so.

* infantry's mobility is poor meaning great vulnerability, though it can be remedied by, indeed, hasty transportation (trucks, armoured cars, transport choppers), but unfortunately they are expensive severely reducing your chance at an effective combat force. Trucks are reasonably cheap -- and even then you will have limited fighting capability -- but they easily perish by enemy choppers (and armour). If you're unlucky to have your troops inside they will die alongside the transport unless you unloaded them in time.

Teamwork in this regard is possible, but will most likely not occur because it requires coordination by proper communication -- something usually lacking in public games.

* if there is no cover, your infantry are even more vulnerable.

* cover such as trees and buildings perish easily.

* if your infantry has been spotted usually the nearest cover to which you flee is the most obvious target for airstrikes. Where else must an infantry player go to be safe? One simply directs napalm or chemical weapons at buildings and forests and they are done. You could choose to not run into forests which is unexpected, but if enemy ground units engage you any kind of relocation is futile and there isn't much left to do than to engage suicidally, going down, and taking as many foes with you as is possible.

* infantry is easily spotted by choppers even if you are in heavy deep cover again such as forests. If you're right in the center of it and they fly over they see you. How should that be possible? And if you have your squads set to 'hold fire' they still fire and are detected. Napalm, large area, boom, done.

* due to the tricky balance between mobility and combat power, you'll hardly ever have superior infantry ably taking on foes.

* prices, again, are too high for what you get in return.

Overall, it requires extreme micromanagement (and luck) for infantry to be effective -- more than other roles. And they are buggy, and they are -- compared to others -- expensive. Infantry should be the best damn role in the game because it's always the foot soldiers who are versatile, effective, and sneaky. When still -- even when moving -- they should be not or hardly detected. Even (bombed out) buildings should provide cover and stealth.

The combination of overemphasis of easy airstrikes, artillery, general raw power (including illogically fast tank runovers of entire squads), infantry's weak anti-air and anti-tank arms, the difficult balance between mobility and power, etc., makes infantry the toughest and most frustrating tree to play... but also the most rewarding and satisfactory if you succeed.

It is either hit or miss.

Alexander the Pretty Good

07-28-2007, 18:57

I wonder how easy it will be to mod. That could solve a lot of problems if it's flexible.

Husar

07-28-2007, 21:31

No, didn't get access to the closed beta, i just preordered the game which unlocks the Riviera map with NATO forces. Could be a bit late now though since IIRC the open beta ends on the 31st.
I just hope the demos will come soon.

Mikeus Caesar

07-29-2007, 14:05

Bijo - i'm a master of infantry, and find them quite fun to play as. When hiding in forests, as soon as you're spotted, just start moving. That way you get out of the way of any napalm strikes. Plus, choppers shouldn't be too much bother - normal, bland, 600-point foot infantry can easily take out an entire group of choppers, especially while concealed in a forest.

Also, bombed out buildings do provide cover. Just try it, you'll be surprised.

Bijo

07-29-2007, 16:27

When hiding in forests, as soon as you're spotted, just start moving. That way you get out of the way of any napalm strikes.
Unless they predict you will move and possibly target a larger area. And even if you evade the airstrike -- or artillery -- there is sometimes the case where smart people use the strike -- of whatever size -- behind you while a crushing tank force, easily running you over, engages you in the front. That's more or less a full encirclement which can be very quickly effected.

Plus, choppers shouldn't be too much bother - normal, bland, 600-point foot infantry can easily take out an entire group of choppers, especially while concealed in a forest.

Correct. But I also use anti-tank infantry to make sure tanks take a good punch if I encounter them while I advance. This -- with the greedy prices -- reduces anti-air capability. Damage from the standard infantry to air units and armoured ground units is low.

And since the enemy can easily burn forests, there is nothing left of it after a while.

Also, bombed out buildings do provide cover. Just try it, you'll be surprised.
Probably correct. I have seen a shield icon on bombed out buildings but should the infantry not be concealed? They wear appropriate camouflage uniforms and are men who have more free movement and ability than for example a tank to remain undetected and surprise a foe while lying still on the ground or something alike.

Still, fact remains in this beta infantry control is buggy and it hinders one's efficiency when playing them (which is already the most difficult and underpowered): (building) selection; embarking; movement; defensive orders (run); concealment; etc.

How about those craters? They are indeed hovering over them -- though their selection shows appropriate adaptation to the ground -- while they should be lying in it to some degree of concealment (preferrably full concealment just like in forests).

And while I'm at it, I think they should exclude use of specialized anti-infantry airstrikes such as napalm and gas in multiplayer :clown: And Or give infantry some form of protection against gas.

EDIT:
That single-player demo must arrive and it better be good so I will play it eagerly and again and again.

EDIT2:
A most dissatisfactory event when one does much effort and he must wail in bitter defeat as his foe triumphs.
https://img409.imageshack.us/img409/936/wicbscore01md4.th.jpg (https://img409.imageshack.us/my.php?image=wicbscore01md4.jpg)

It was very close. We were behind a great percentage whereafter we finally hussled and were winning only for the enemy to come in full force to engage my infantry. Perhaps large efforts were too much directed at other points than the bridge. Hah hah, but look at that tab: we had more points and STILL we fell beneath their military boot. And look at that: that person in the tab dares to take my transportation title? :clown:

Mikeus Caesar

07-30-2007, 09:57

I see you've got your graphics on the 'ultra butt-ugly' setting ~;)

Nicely done though, coming top in nearly everything. I have to disagree with you though on excluding napalm and gas from multiplayer - that's tantamount to having it nerfed, just because you don't like it. Seriously, Napalm and gas is easy to avoid. Just make sure you keep your units out of the way of any obvious strike zones, and if you are spotted, just run into the centre of a forest. People always seem to think you'll stay at the very edges.

And consider yourself lucky if hit by gas. At least with that you have a chance to save all of your men if you've got fast enough reactions.

Bijo

07-30-2007, 12:59

I see you've got your graphics on the 'ultra butt-ugly' setting ~;)
Actually, it would've looked nicer: I forgot to enable high quality textures and was, while in-game, curiously wondering why for instance those flags looked so ugly, and of course I poorly saved the shot as a JPG with my limited picture knowledge. Graphics in-game look good enough to me with high textures, bloom, high-quality terrain and craters, some stuff here and there, nothing fancy, no shadows. I don't really need superb graphics: they distract too much from the game ;)

Nicely done though, coming top in nearly everything. I have to disagree with you though on excluding napalm and gas from multiplayer - that's tantamount to having it nerfed, just because you don't like it. Seriously, Napalm and gas is easy to avoid. Just make sure you keep your units out of the way of any obvious strike zones, and if you are spotted, just run into the centre of a forest. People always seem to think you'll stay at the very edges.

What if you're not in a forest or if there's no forest nearby? For instance the Farm map doesn't have much trees. As Soviets I either take and defend the north farm on the right or the bridge in the center. It only takes a little spotting and napalm to set the small amount of trees ablaze. Some would possibly argue infantry should start on the left side but ah. This still is not just about napalm and gas: it also includes artillery of course.

Can you imagine in that match I posted there I was virtually defending the bridge by myself with most of my infantry forces and minimal outside aid?

And consider yourself lucky if hit by gas. At least with that you have a chance to save all of your men if you've got fast enough reactions.
Those I have, but the chance of success is small. They usually direct gas at you when you garrison buildings (and sometimes in forests). Even if one has fast reactions it is still severely minimized by the buggy controls metioned before.

Mikeus Caesar

07-31-2007, 11:22

What if you're not in a forest or if there's no forest nearby? For instance the Farm map doesn't have much trees. As Soviets I either take and defend the north farm on the right or the bridge in the center. It only takes a little spotting and napalm to set the small amount of trees ablaze. Some would possibly argue infantry should start on the left side but ah. This still is not just about napalm and gas: it also includes artillery of course.

Farm map is actually quite easy to defend, depending on how you position your men. I managed to hold the airstrip for an entire round against constant tank and air assault, with artillery constantly pounding my position. By the end it looked like Iwo Jima, just a barren hell, but i was still holding it!

Bijo

07-31-2007, 16:37

Farm map is actually quite easy to defend, depending on how you position your men. I managed to hold the airstrip for an entire round against constant tank and air assault, with artillery constantly pounding my position. By the end it looked like Iwo Jima, just a barren hell, but i was still holding it!
Heh heh! You are saying you defended it alone against armour and air? I hardly know the airstrip location 'cause I hardly engage it by ground or air but it is the left side, right, where there are more trees near the closest drop location?

If so, it reasonably removes the need for transport and it does provide extra starting cover which would probably remain if the foe would be hindered in coming close. That still leaves their easy point-and-click strikes.

---

I have been playing more support, though. It is quite nice and I have racked up points and kills quickly. I have seen that with infantry the thing is that you are not just a ground force which can assault and defend -- you are also a "support" force to aid ground/air in conquest or vice versa (which is obvious). This is a great versatiliy which requires a not-so-simple-as-other-roles mastery to utilize efficiently.

I have been dropping my infantry role slowly since I finally started enjoying support with heavy artillery *shame*. It actually allowed me to finally launch a nuke or two which is something I could hardly do playing infantry.

Husar

07-31-2007, 19:50

I've just played a bit(some hours actually :sweatdrop: ) with Bijo.
Yes, he is a good player and he has way too much time.:laugh4:

Well, it was fun and we also tried out the group feature of the lobby which basically allows players to form a group and chat withing that group as well as join a server together. Apparently when one member of that group joins a server, the others are asked whether they want to follow. It's different from joining a clan because it's not permanent and adds no tags or anything, I think it could be very useful once someone knows a few people playing the game.

Well, the beta ends tomorrow at 9am CET, that's when we can only hope for an MP demo to come soon.:laugh4:

Bijo

07-31-2007, 20:12

I learn fast ;)

Regarding time, I have actually been inventing excuses to dodge certain duties to allow me to play this -- damn good(!) -- multiplayer beta since it is about to cease soon and I hadn't much time to actually acquaint myself with it (which was only a few days). I figured I was to sneakily take as much joy of it as I could while it's lasting :hide:

Csargo

08-01-2007, 07:11

Played a game just a minute ago. Had to get some play time in before it closes. :D

Mikeus Caesar

08-01-2007, 12:39

Heh heh! You are saying you defended it alone against armour and air? I hardly know the airstrip location 'cause I hardly engage it by ground or air but it is the left side, right, where there are more trees near the closest drop location?

If so, it reasonably removes the need for transport and it does provide extra starting cover which would probably remain if the foe would be hindered in coming close. That still leaves their easy point-and-click strikes.

I spread my infantry out across the entire airstrip and managed to defend it by myself, yes. Just so long as you move your units about after each attack (prevent the use of ta strikes on you), use the special grenade launcher ability, keep a constant stream of reinforcements coming and make good use of the resupply button on depleted units, then you can easily win. In the end the enemy team pooled all their TA together so that they could nuke me, it was hilarious.

Bijo

08-01-2007, 19:04

Too bad the beta has ended. It was a good ride. I figured I actually could've upped my settings as I now have noticed it is pretty smooth when set to Very High and a few options deactivated that don't really influence picture quality that badly (and soft shadows even remain). Well, it's just good to know for when I get my hands on this game in the near future. It also shows this is a terribly well done engine which even my poor system can handle well.

EDIT:
* Does anyone here know when the single-player demo will arrive?
* Heh heh! I noticed I've made it quite high on the leaderboard of the beta.

Husar

08-01-2007, 20:18

Yes, you were at least in the Top 300, I was in the Top 2500 or so for some time but then I didn't play and fell back since only the points made in thelast 7 days count for the ladder.

The Demo should be out between soon(say the devs in the forums) and the end of August(says the newsletter I got at the end of the beta).

Concerning the engine, you should've played Ground Control, which was also by Massive Entertainment, it ran smoothly on my somewhat outdated Pc back then and it looked really great for it's time, it was the reason I never really worried about WiC and my system specs. It was released as freeware by the way and maybe you want to try it until the WiC demo comes, you can get it here (http://www.fileplanet.com/142438/140000/fileinfo/Ground-Control-Full-Game-w/-GC2-Multiplayer-Demo).

Csargo

08-01-2007, 20:29

You were like 4000 something Husar. I wasn't even on the ladder.:sweatdrop: It was fun while it lasted.

Husar

08-01-2007, 20:36

Csargo

08-01-2007, 20:38

That was yesterday when I crawled up from 7000 something, I fell down since I visited my parents last week. Ladder is not very important anyway and I don't usually consider myself an elite player, upper middle field is enough for me when it comes to games, otherwise I'd have to invest more time than I consider fun.

:yes: I played only about an hour or a little more total. I don't put much time into games, but this one was entertaining while it lasted. I'll definitely get the demo.

Alexander the Pretty Good

08-01-2007, 22:24

I was playing a little Ground Control, and WiC is really just a big upgrade for it, when you boil the two games down.

Husar

08-01-2007, 23:09

I was playing a little Ground Control, and WiC is really just a big upgrade for it, when you boil the two games down.
That can be said about sooooooo many games. And you probably mean Ground Control 2 since the first has no unit resupply.
I only wish there was a game that was just a graphical upgrade to old Janes' flightsims.

Bijo

08-01-2007, 23:31

Yes, you were at least in the Top 300, I was in the Top 2500 or so for some time but then I didn't play and fell back since only the points made in thelast 7 days count for the ladder.

Concerning the engine, you should've played Ground Control, which was also by Massive Entertainment, it ran smoothly on my somewhat outdated Pc back then and it looked really great for it's time, it was the reason I never really worried about WiC and my system specs. It was released as freeware by the way and maybe you want to try it until the WiC demo comes, you can get it here (http://www.fileplanet.com/142438/140000/fileinfo/Ground-Control-Full-Game-w/-GC2-Multiplayer-Demo).
I don't think I will be playing that much, but I will at least have a look at Ground Control.

Regarding my leaderboard position, I saw it was 156.