Look at you two. Both respected members of the Empire community, and you had to resort to this. FEEL ASHAMED OF YOURSELVES. Edit: Also come on FN, you can't straw man people's arguments and then accuse Flasche of using ad hominem. Of course, the preceding statement is fallacious in some way, but this thread has clearly degenerated far past the point for that to matter. Of course, the preceding statement is valid, but you could argue that the thread had clearly degenerated far past the point for that to matter at the moment where Flasche resorted to Ad Hominem. Of course, the preceding statement is valid, but you could argue that the thread had clearly degenerated far past the point for that to matter at the moment where you resorted to using straw man arguments. Of course, the preceding statement is valid, but at this point, we're back to the head of the Ouroboros, or maybe the tail, though I prefer to think the tail, simply because it's more intuitive to think that that's where snakes shit.
I think you two need your daily dosis of empires, it helps to center your irritating aggressions against actual problems in our community, i.e. hobbes boomtanking, Trickster being trickster and casual logic failure of human beings.
Because of his voice, I always think of Reznov as some sort of character instead of an actual person. Then he writes something like "casual logic failure" and I simply cannot imagine him saying that. Fuck you Reznov, fuck you. Stop humanizing yourself.
K, fuck life, i will stop being human and live a life as a jeep mechanic. Who else would make dem fckin things, obviously not raven cus he fucks them up everytime he starts to have stupid fckin ideas. dem bill piles not stoppin.
I'll have you know a communist manifesto detailing the exact circumstances of a peasants revolt in what is now Leningrad is actually quite a compelling argument against playing empires. just because i know you'll read this, it's sarcasm
If you think targets will confuse your team, don't give them. Problem solved. A good commander should know when giving a target is beneficial or a hindrance.
you mean to say that single target attack orders have made the commander role more difficult than in last patch? this is exactly what i'm talking about. the commander's tools ought to be straightforward and used with the least difficulty to convey the greatest amount of information. it just doesn't make sense that the commander would only be able to assign one target to one unit. If the commander can say it in words, the commander ought not to have to. They should use their commander tools to get the point across instead.
'wallhacks' is a loaded word. the more you use it, the more desperate you look. there are many games where players may see each others' location through obstructions. it is no less fun than when players cannot see their enemies' locations; it is merely a different kind of gameplay. personally, i think that when both teams have full targets that the game is more exciting on the ground. you know exactly how many enemies there are (not including scouts) and you have a vague idea of their positioning. you need to take into consideration your own squads formation and make sure that you can trick the enemy into allowing your squad to gradually flank them. in short, it makes the game more about squad level tactics and cunning rather than pure physical skill. you're forgetting the alternative. it's either full targets or NO targets, flasche. the compromise just doesn't work for empires. it's false information. when you get target info from the commander, it should be complete because he has a top down view of the field and can see everything that's going on. when you get a target from a squad leader, it should be a single target because a squad leader is ON the field and can only point in one direction. when given by a squad leader, the target is the one that the squad should focus their fire on. it's just not right to give the squad leader power to a commander because 1. it's not fair to the player being targeted. his enemies do not even need a line of sight (squad leader targets) in order to target him.
I think single attack targets are good, they let you easily single out something you want dead. I didn't like the way target spam was implemented before. I think it would have been a much better implementation to simply have multiple targets on anything the commader could see and was within a certain range - that way it is ultra easy for the comm to give multiple targets, yet it still requires some time management because you still need to get out there and build shit, help others, drop buildings, etc. My problem with the way target spam was is that you were unfairly dependent on your commander, it was no fun to do, and once you gave them you could just bugger off - it felt so arbitrary and it caused so much rage for hardly any positive effect. It wasn't like giving targets was anything other than holding a button and moving a mouse, constantly, all game. It did keep you more in touch with the fight though - which is why old comms move all over the map and don't get disorientated, newer guys only look in places when they see something needs doing or is being destroyed. But other than situational awareness I think they looked horrible and felt horrible.
Single attack targets are good but they still turn into wallhacks at <5v<5 games. Then again, that's not how you play this thing - it needs at least 4 times that.
