"Falling Back" units drive through Fire....

[Tank Girl]

This is what happens:

1. Units are hit by Napalm from plane.
2. Units try to drive out of the flames.
3. Units are not fast enough and "panik" which leads them to "fall back"
4. Units start driving through the flames, but this time dont try to get out anymore
5. Units die...

This is problematic, since flame planes often create long lanes of fire that are directed towards the spawnside of the map. Somehow units that are falling back try to move towards that side and therefor directly through the fire.

This is especially bad, when they are just at the edge of the fire and almost in safety, but then "fall back" and try to chose their doom instead of driving like 2 more meters towards safety.

Unit AI should be improved to make chose units the shortest way out of the flames when "Falling Back"....
Also, Falling Back units should not drive into flames deliberatly...

 

[DuroSVK]

Why do you disagree with her? She has a point on this very annoying issue.

 

[TGApples]

Honestly, any unit that's in flames and pinned/falling back should automatically try to leave the flames.

 

[Herr_Robert]

Improvements to the AI would be welcome. It would be interesting if one of the devs could chime in on this. Things like this tend to be much more difficult than changing unit prices and stats.

Why do you disagree with her? She has a point on this very annoying issue.

Yeah, it is silly that some people hit the disagree button just because they don't like someone, lol.

 

[Kampfkekskrieger]

I have seen somebody else issuing this.
Its a bit annoying, but on the other side, it reminds me to draw back my units a shot or two earlier, before they panic, it disciplinates me to better survival care for those soldiers ^^.
With a reaction only a second earlier, I can avoid the worst.
To be honest, without you, I would not have noticed it even.

What I find a bit strange instead, is the drawback direction is always to my base line, not perpendicular to the frontline curve, this sometimes makes them escape into an enemy pocket behind my own territory, or striving it, so I could also complain about this.
But on the other hand, this is what happens only after a 'silly' move from you, and has ironically somehow deserved that you avoid this to happen...
I mean: instead of repairing the behaviour after being panicked, its much more common to avoid the catastrophe BEFORE it happens, not repairing it afterwards...
I mean its also something strange to say, the soldiers would have a clear mind know where to go.
Running into a fire when panicked is not good, yes, but somehow...its so silly that it could even happen in real life...
So taking it very strict, you are right with this issue, but somehow its also beyond the line a step either... I mean you must see the things relative. I would rather make the life for a player easier somewhere else in the game where it really matters.

 

[Karlburg]

There's really not much you can do if a pwerfer hits your tank push and this is why. It's mostly the way they bounce from flame to flame and stay stunned the whole time. Whatever resistance armored vehicles have to stunning has nothing on this.

 

[Tank Girl]

Why do you disagree with her? She has a point on this very annoying issue.

Habit I guess

Still glad to see I am not the only one who noticed.

@Kampfkeks:
you have point, but in this case you cannot "avoid" the situation. With a hell of a lot of micro you can make ur units evade sideways from the attacking planes direction, but you know what happens when you drive tanks sideways while in enemy range

The thing is, even with my smoke rounds already in mid air when the flames hit, the units still die because they dont leave the flames, period.

 

[Lykanion]

I absolutely agree. It's the same with units standing beside a fire and panicking under artillery fire, attacking planes or just any kind of damage, really. When panicking, they sometimes just drive right into their fiery doom. That's not very convincing, and it's annoying as hell to lose valuable units this way.

If I'm not mistaken, I had newly deployed units on their way to the front drive right through napalm. It really, really would be great if the developers would add a check for their pathfinding to avoid certain death in napalm.

 

[Kampfkekskrieger]

In this case, we have a much bigger problem, because this mistake comes from a too 'steel' game!

I have had the feeling since beginning, but it was not to grab into words, even though it is sitting on our nose but nobody is talking about it:
The game takes a LOT of energy to feel comfortable to play.
Once you are in the game and AFTER you made your initial setup and the game starts, its fun, but before that, its takes somehow a huge amount of will to dare to click on the desktop button, start a game mode, and setup the units. The battlegroup armory is fun, even would be a lot, if it was more polished.
But the things inbetween feel very like you have to mobilise a lot of inner power to make your mind ready to take the load.

And the panicked people being too much to micro, or impossible is then indeed beyond the line, but a symptom of a too 'heavy for your mind' game.

Its not that there would be much to click and physically the pace is more than okay, its a good step better than Red dragon, but its just insanely stupidly hard to do that few things that you need to do, because you dont get it what you need to do. You dont get the easiest things come up to your mind.
And now please do me a pleasure and look at this video of Yuris Revenge, only to look into the interface:

The interface has a high, maybe bit too much glaring glass or plastic like embedding, and the colors are with high contrast to make clear what is clear, and what is same looks same and what is different looks different.

And this is what steel division is maybe missing: A good introduction video, and the <everything that happens between the games> interface, it lacks of any sort of inscenation takes you a lot of energy to push down theese buttons, where in other games, it works so much of automatically, that you need to pay attention not to get consumed up by that game.

With counting this bug then to a mistake of presentation of the game, problem of controlling the game properly, including the need of proper panic behaviour from games side, this is the 40% that is missing from the game, while playing very good, sometimes also perfectly gameplay wise, you need a much more easy to use interface, that you dont need to think about so much, at best not at all.

See also the lobby table before the game in the video starts: the tables of the later C&C games are very bad, but that one, and the loading screen from Yuris revenge is a desirable minimum requirement (functionally its almost the same, but it feels like a huge difference!), and now give me a similar video supported installation process as it was in Act of War, it even had a news papers like well written handbook/manual, this part of welcoming the people to the game is what is missing! Finally I found that out!

So beware of solving that bug, because the ride will never end before this mistake is fully solved and that is its size of the problem! Tell me your opinion on that, but I am quite sure!

 

[Fade2Gray]

Honestly, any unit that's in flames and pinned/falling back should automatically try to leave the flames.

They do, problem is that, by the OP, they get pinned within the flames. The rout mechanics are better than they were in EE (where they were so toxic that they by and large were removed from the game in ALB/RD), but they are still going to require another major rework. I dare say you might see this sort of improvement in the next SD game, unless rout gets scrapped again.

 

[Tank Girl]

They do, problem is that, by the OP, they get pinned within the flames. The rout mechanics are better than they were in EE (where they were so toxic that they by and large were removed from the game in ALB/RD), but they are still going to require another major rework. I dare say you might see this sort of improvement in the next SD game, unless rout gets scrapped again.

Since you dont play the game so I help you:

They are not "pinned" in the flames. They are falling back through the flames, using the scenic route instead of just driving the short way out of it.

Seriously, why you even posting in this board?

 

[Fade2Gray]

Since you dont play the game so I help you:

I'm getting a good laugh over your grudge and how you feel so insecure as to point this out every single chance you get after I had to tell you because you couldn't figure it out for yourself. I wonder how long until the angry PM's resume?

They are not "pinned" in the flames. They are falling back through the flames, using the scenic route instead of just driving the short way out of it.

I suggest you clarify your posts then. From what you said and from what I've seen and heard from others, it sounds exactly like that, units end up panicked/pinned within the flames and thus end up dying because of it. When the AI spazs out, it is well known to have problems with rout since EE. At least it isn't as bad as it was back then.

Seriously, why you even posting in this board?

The irony of being asked that by someone who ranted about leaving the game and not coming back...

 

[Jim_Hatama]

True. Napalm is very gamey and cheese mechanic- not fun to use not fun when used on you

 

[a.gotcha]

I mentioned this before, Units safe, with no threat around. Napalm strike comes and I even evacuate units in time. They are OUTSIDE napalm area, and they panic and move directly back into fire to die a nice barbaque death.
I would very much like to be a strategy game not a babysit game. So far, I babysit more than I do strategy. Those units need so much attention!

 

[KKnispel]

Why do you disagree with her? She has a point on this very annoying issue.

>her

 

[Herrmaus3r]

They do, problem is that, by the OP, they get pinned within the flames. The rout mechanics are better than they were in EE (where they were so toxic that they by and large were removed from the game in ALB/RD), but they are still going to require another major rework. I dare say you might see this sort of improvement in the next SD game, unless rout gets scrapped again.

I struggle to understand how you can add anything of importance to a discussion around detailed game mechanics if you don't own the game?

Maybe before judging how great "the rout mechanics" are, you should actually buy the game and see just how dumb it can really be when your 200+ point tank turns on its side for no reason and gets killed by a 50 point unit.

It's one thing if there's a random/low chance of it occurring, but when the entire game revolves around this mechanic you're exposed to just how many mistakes it makes.

For the record, fully agreed with OP, incendiary weapons should be very powerful, but right now they are exponentially so, because the "falling back" mechanic fails to leave the fire, and dies horribly.

 

[IS-2]

>her

did u just assume zir gender?

 

[Rojan]

>her

You'll be receiving a call from my gender rights activism attorney.

True. Napalm is very gamey and cheese mechanic- not fun to use not fun when used on you

I'm not sure what you mean by this but fires spread from more than just incendiary filled explosives. Artillery can start fire inside of forests. It is not a 'gamey' mechanic in the slightest, the AI is retarded in falling back or sitting in it during a fall back.

 

[Tank Girl]

did u just assume zir gender?

is Drama Queen a gender in itself?