With the new update, Yoshiro posted a thread at the forum to ask whether we would like the next one to be about improving the gameplay or adding new content.
Since that thread is locked now, and my thoughts are better suited for the suggestions subforum, here is a new one.
---
First, I would like to note that this separation of 'gameplay' and 'content' is somewhat artificial – they are closely connected, and this is the key to my suggestion.
Second, and you may have guessed, I'm here to promote the idea that flamethowers and mortars have a place and great potential in RO2 (the HoS setting and any other Soviet-German settings there are or might be).
They could both be a great addition content-wise – hey, new weapons, new classes; and gameplay-wise – once again, conceptually new weapons*, new map ideas, new tactics and new ways to play old maps.
And speaking of new ways to play old maps, I must say that the desire to see these weapons in RO2 has lingered in me since the release of RS, and the last update has made obvious, how much a conceptually new weapon can do to a game. I'm talking about the transports, and I am so happy to see that, for example, Rakowice often sees much more energetic combat now. The armoured cabs have triggered this post.
---
So, let's talk about the content, shall we?
Luckily, both the Germans and the Soviets had comparable (in specs, in number, and in periods of use) weapons of these classes.
>>>>>
Mortars
<<<<<
The Soviet RM-38/40/41:
http://ift.tt/1nVlvga
For pictures of the '41 variant:
http://ift.tt/1nVlxom
http://ift.tt/1nVlvgd
The German Granatwerfer 36
http://ift.tt/1nVlvgf
(there are some decent diagrams under the 'External links')
Both the mortars had 50 mm calibre (like Type 89), with shells that were somewhat heavier than those of Type 89.
The available distances were from 50m to about 800m (RM) and 500m (Gw36).
Both were operated in a way similar to what we've seen in Type 89 – there were a number of angle settings, plus the distance setting via a gas valve.
All the RM models were widely used by the Soviet infantry until 1943, when they were retired. Initially each rifle company had 3-4 50mm mortars (i.e. one mortar per platoon). Later, these mortars were moved to larger specialised regimental mortar units, but the practice of making improvised units for the task and of directly reinforcing infantry platoons/companies with mortar crews was very common. Technically, the weapon had a crew of 3-4, but due to wartime personnel shortages, it usually was 2.
Gw36 were produced all through 1941 and their phasing out began in 1942, but they remained in service until the end of the war (though in 1944-45 to a limited extent, because of the lack of ammunition). They were designed to support a single infantry platoon and, at least in theory, were supposed to be supplied to each one. The mortar had a crew of 2.
Both the weapons were quite popular, because they presented a real piece of artillery under platoon commander's immediate control, and were fairly mobile (though about 2.5-3 times heavier than Type 89).
>>>>>
Flamers
<<<<<
The Soviet ROKS-2/3:
http://ift.tt/1nVlvwt
For pictures check:
http://ift.tt/1nVlvwv (ROKS-2)
http://ift.tt/1nVlxEG (ROKS-3)
The German Flammenwerfer 35/41:
http://ift.tt/1nVlxEI
http://ift.tt/1nVlxEJ
And for some pictures:
http://ift.tt/1nVlvwz
ROKS-2/3 and Fw41 were about the same in weight, range, fuel capacity and number of shots before refueling (I've read that Fw41 was designed with the ROKS series in mind). Fw35 was much heavier, had more fuel, and allowed up to twice as many shots (so it might not be as interesting in our case, though it's more like the American flamer in the RS).
These weapons were widely used by both the sides throughout the war. The flamethrower teams were typically present as special units in infantry regiments, or divisions, and attached to other units to reinforce them, or (1942 and on – common practice in the Red Army) there were company or even battalion-sized assault units saturated with flamethrowers and SMGs.
---
So what can be said about these weapons from the point of view of the game?
- These weapons are completely (sort of) new to RO2, and they have the advantage of having been common IRL, as well as the fact that they are portable, unlike other heavy weaponry available to infantry**.
- These weapons aren't entirely new to the game in general. Seeing that very similar weapons have been implemented in RS, the task is clearly not impossible.
- Despite the fact that normally these weapons had to be manned by more than one person, they are portable enough for us to suspend the disbelief. After all, in the game, the PTRS, Type 89 and M1A1 are entirely handled by one player. Which isn't exactly correct, but, in the end – better for the game.
- In my personal opinion, even if both weapons appear in the game, their use should be limited, to maybe 1-2 of each type (on maps where they would appear): these should simply be additional tactical tools for the commander. The higher RS numbers, IMO, would break the gameplay in RO2.
---
Now think about what they could bring to the maps that already exist.
- how about throwing a shell or two into the ever-bunched-up defenders on B on Bridges?
- how about ordering your mortar to clear out some of those pesky stationary MGs on Spartanovka?
- or blasting the attackers in the gullies on A and B in Winterwald?
- or clearing the A tunnels in Mamayev with a little fire?
- or covering the bunker entrance in A or B with a flamer in Rakowice?
- or making quick flame work of the E building in Red October?
- or Apartments? Wait.
The potential of these weapons is enormous, and I see that they could easily break the usual patterns of how players behave on maps, and make combat more dynamic.
---
That's about it for now.
I would like this thread to be a compilation of informative and (hopefully) inspiring material for the developers, modders and map-makers, so your suggestions and ideas are very much welcome: I will update the main post with thoughts from the comments.
---
* As opposed to the often-suggested new weapons that would not bring much novelty into the RO2 combat, like PPD or Luger, since they are very similar to the weapons already present in the game.
** As much as I'd love to see AT guns in the game, they would have the same problems that stationary MGs have. Plus, they're a bit too much for the scale of the game.
Since that thread is locked now, and my thoughts are better suited for the suggestions subforum, here is a new one.
---
First, I would like to note that this separation of 'gameplay' and 'content' is somewhat artificial – they are closely connected, and this is the key to my suggestion.
Second, and you may have guessed, I'm here to promote the idea that flamethowers and mortars have a place and great potential in RO2 (the HoS setting and any other Soviet-German settings there are or might be).
They could both be a great addition content-wise – hey, new weapons, new classes; and gameplay-wise – once again, conceptually new weapons*, new map ideas, new tactics and new ways to play old maps.
And speaking of new ways to play old maps, I must say that the desire to see these weapons in RO2 has lingered in me since the release of RS, and the last update has made obvious, how much a conceptually new weapon can do to a game. I'm talking about the transports, and I am so happy to see that, for example, Rakowice often sees much more energetic combat now. The armoured cabs have triggered this post.
---
So, let's talk about the content, shall we?
Luckily, both the Germans and the Soviets had comparable (in specs, in number, and in periods of use) weapons of these classes.
>>>>>
Mortars
<<<<<
The Soviet RM-38/40/41:
http://ift.tt/1nVlvga
For pictures of the '41 variant:
http://ift.tt/1nVlxom
http://ift.tt/1nVlvgd
The German Granatwerfer 36
http://ift.tt/1nVlvgf
(there are some decent diagrams under the 'External links')
Both the mortars had 50 mm calibre (like Type 89), with shells that were somewhat heavier than those of Type 89.
The available distances were from 50m to about 800m (RM) and 500m (Gw36).
Both were operated in a way similar to what we've seen in Type 89 – there were a number of angle settings, plus the distance setting via a gas valve.
All the RM models were widely used by the Soviet infantry until 1943, when they were retired. Initially each rifle company had 3-4 50mm mortars (i.e. one mortar per platoon). Later, these mortars were moved to larger specialised regimental mortar units, but the practice of making improvised units for the task and of directly reinforcing infantry platoons/companies with mortar crews was very common. Technically, the weapon had a crew of 3-4, but due to wartime personnel shortages, it usually was 2.
Gw36 were produced all through 1941 and their phasing out began in 1942, but they remained in service until the end of the war (though in 1944-45 to a limited extent, because of the lack of ammunition). They were designed to support a single infantry platoon and, at least in theory, were supposed to be supplied to each one. The mortar had a crew of 2.
Both the weapons were quite popular, because they presented a real piece of artillery under platoon commander's immediate control, and were fairly mobile (though about 2.5-3 times heavier than Type 89).
>>>>>
Flamers
<<<<<
The Soviet ROKS-2/3:
http://ift.tt/1nVlvwt
For pictures check:
http://ift.tt/1nVlvwv (ROKS-2)
http://ift.tt/1nVlxEG (ROKS-3)
The German Flammenwerfer 35/41:
http://ift.tt/1nVlxEI
http://ift.tt/1nVlxEJ
And for some pictures:
http://ift.tt/1nVlvwz
ROKS-2/3 and Fw41 were about the same in weight, range, fuel capacity and number of shots before refueling (I've read that Fw41 was designed with the ROKS series in mind). Fw35 was much heavier, had more fuel, and allowed up to twice as many shots (so it might not be as interesting in our case, though it's more like the American flamer in the RS).
These weapons were widely used by both the sides throughout the war. The flamethrower teams were typically present as special units in infantry regiments, or divisions, and attached to other units to reinforce them, or (1942 and on – common practice in the Red Army) there were company or even battalion-sized assault units saturated with flamethrowers and SMGs.
---
So what can be said about these weapons from the point of view of the game?
- These weapons are completely (sort of) new to RO2, and they have the advantage of having been common IRL, as well as the fact that they are portable, unlike other heavy weaponry available to infantry**.
- These weapons aren't entirely new to the game in general. Seeing that very similar weapons have been implemented in RS, the task is clearly not impossible.
- Despite the fact that normally these weapons had to be manned by more than one person, they are portable enough for us to suspend the disbelief. After all, in the game, the PTRS, Type 89 and M1A1 are entirely handled by one player. Which isn't exactly correct, but, in the end – better for the game.
- In my personal opinion, even if both weapons appear in the game, their use should be limited, to maybe 1-2 of each type (on maps where they would appear): these should simply be additional tactical tools for the commander. The higher RS numbers, IMO, would break the gameplay in RO2.
---
Now think about what they could bring to the maps that already exist.
- how about throwing a shell or two into the ever-bunched-up defenders on B on Bridges?
- how about ordering your mortar to clear out some of those pesky stationary MGs on Spartanovka?
- or blasting the attackers in the gullies on A and B in Winterwald?
- or clearing the A tunnels in Mamayev with a little fire?
- or covering the bunker entrance in A or B with a flamer in Rakowice?
- or making quick flame work of the E building in Red October?
- or Apartments? Wait.
The potential of these weapons is enormous, and I see that they could easily break the usual patterns of how players behave on maps, and make combat more dynamic.
---
That's about it for now.
I would like this thread to be a compilation of informative and (hopefully) inspiring material for the developers, modders and map-makers, so your suggestions and ideas are very much welcome: I will update the main post with thoughts from the comments.
---
* As opposed to the often-suggested new weapons that would not bring much novelty into the RO2 combat, like PPD or Luger, since they are very similar to the weapons already present in the game.
** As much as I'd love to see AT guns in the game, they would have the same problems that stationary MGs have. Plus, they're a bit too much for the scale of the game.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire