Warlords

[CaptainDawson 93]

14 hours ago, Nic1 said:

I think the not having the arsenal will be a problem if each team only has access to their factions gear because there is definitely an imbalance across factions with some gear. One example is in AT. Blufor has nothing like the vorona. The maaws/PCML has a lot less explosives in a single shot and is not TOW. MPRL is really only good for long range and requires a lock on. I know many players use the Vorona exclusively as the premier AT weapon including me. Almost everyone I see in game that is acting in an AT role is using the Vorona. Not having this on Blufor will be a huge disadvantage. Another example is the opfor special purpose helmet. There is no Blufor equivalent that has full screen night vision/thermal. Opfor will not have access to the Carrier Special/GL rigs which have the most armor. I know a lot of people will not be happy about not being able to use their favorite guns/loadouts.

 

I agree. While I still think vests, backpacks, and helmets should stay faction limited, Blufor will really be at a disadvantage if they don't have access to some of the most powerful weapons. The fact that Blufor does not have the Vorona is not the main problem though, the problem is that Opfor has better armored vehicles altogether! Without the Vorona, it will be very difficult to kill things like the T-140K seeing as the lag and dsync issues can really make the Titan useless compared to the Vorona in many scenarios. The Vorona also is the only man-portable weapon that can feasibly destroy tanks while they are dropping by parachute. A very big advantage as I have found out!

 

To say that the game takes place in the year 2035 but give NATO an outdated variant of the Merkava without Active Protection Systems is a bit ridiculous. There are Merkavas with Trophy APS that can defend against ATGMs and AT shells, seems like that would be a reasonable thing to include on the in-game Slammer seeing as the real life Merkava it is based on one has it now in 2019. I have a mod downloaded that adds APS to the stock vehicles, it really adds purpose to the Slammer when it can no longer be one-shotted by Vorona. Fun fact, today's Merkava is fully capable of intercepting and destroying the Kornet missiles the Vorona is based on. Kind of funny to assume the Vorona could be carried by a single soldier as well, since the real life system needs a crew of two and is used on a tripod or vehicle mount, but maybe that's besides the point. Maybe it's time for some balance, I mean, do you think such a heavy AT weapon can be reloaded and ready to fire in literally 5 seconds? Assembly and preparation takes nearly a minute on the real life counterpart lol. It's been awhile since we've seen changes to the stock vehicles... I feel like it would not be unreasonable to expect more capable NATO vehicles and less spammy man-portable AT weapons.

 

Opfor has ATGMs on its APC, and the T-140K has a secondary weapon that is basically as powerful as the Nato APCs main weapon! They have better mobility, even the Ifrit is faster than the Hunter and even has a smoke screen. Don't get me started on the helis and planes... I understand that there will never be a perfect balance between the two factions, but whatever we do, we need to avoid making the balance worse!

 

Maybe even add A-143 to NATO for reduced price. We have so many awesome vehicles and assets in Arma that aren't being used in Warlords, and they have a lot of potential. Perhaps even add NATO and CSAT heavy artillery vehicles, but limit them to 3 shots only, 10 minute reload time, and only medium range radius. Cheap Greyhawk CAS drone limited to 2 missiles, single use? Hey giving Blufor CAS drones but not to Opfor could be a balance to the Opfor superiority even... We need more variability in terms of targets, tactics, and otherwise. It's currently very repetitive. When it gets to the point that Blufor doesn't even bother to spawn tanks or APCs because they know they can be destroyed so easily, you know we have a problem.

 

Hey, maybe we can have access to some of the AAF and FIA assets on the NATO faction to at least add a little balance. In the campaign, NATO's ally FIA uses Gorgon APCs. FIA camo Gorgon on Blufor faction would be a nice addition and balance to CSAT's more powerful BTR. BTR can withstand up to 2 120mm APFSDS shells and it has access to 4 ATGMs which can each kill a tank in one shot. The NATO Marshal is severely lacking in comparison seeing as it cannot kill tanks yet can still be destroyed in a single hit by practically any AT weapon. Is there any way we can add the Gorgon, there is already a NATO camouflage you can unlock for it in-game with a script!

[Markkos26 2]

On 8/17/2019 at 4:50 PM, bombe said:

Hi,

Me and my friend wants to make a mission with saved CP.

But we hurt some problems.
We used player setVariable ["BIS_WL_funds", 10000, TRUE]; .

But that give money to all players.... We used trigger to save-load in mission.
Have you got some help to give us please ?

Edit : We found the problem

 

@bombe 

Could you find a way to save the game's progress including the cp? Can you teach me how to do it please?

[Kanas Kanas 2]

35 minutes ago, Markkos26 said:

 

@ bombe 

Dokážete najít způsob, jak zachránit pokrok hry, včetně cp? Můžete mě naučit, jak to udělat, prosím?

//Save player CP

_list = [];
{player getVariable "BIS_WL_funds"]} forEach save_funds;
profileNamespace setVariable ["save_funds",_list];

saveProfileNamespace;

//Load player CP

{_x params ["_funds"]; player setVariable ["BIS_WL_funds",_funds, TRUE];
} forEach (profileNamespace getVariable ["save_funds",[]]);

[bombe 11]

4 hours ago, Kanas Kanas said:

//Save player CP

_list = [];
{player getVariable "BIS_WL_funds"]} forEach save_funds;
profileNamespace setVariable ["save_funds",_list];

saveProfileNamespace;

//Load player CP

{_x params ["_funds"]; player setVariable ["BIS_WL_funds",_funds, TRUE];
} forEach (profileNamespace getVariable ["save_funds",[]]);

Thank you,
We found another solution and it work well too
Wanna try the server ?

[Markkos26 2]

On 3/18/2019 at 5:15 AM, Jezuro said:

 

@darrenin Some UI-related scripts can't be serialized and it looks they need to be restarted  upon loading the game. I'll take a look.

@Jezuro how can I restart the UI manually?

[Jezuro 452]

The Redux version will support singleplayer environment including saving your progress. It should ve possible to save and load the game in MP but this is disabled for now in the Workshop scenario.

[General Kong 148]

Will the Redux version, after enough testing, eventually become part of Arma 3 as standard? (like the original Warlords scenario)

[Markkos26 2]

4 hours ago, Jezuro said:

The Redux version will support singleplayer environment including saving your progress. It should ve possible to save and load the game in MP but this is disabled for now in the Workshop scenario.

 

Which function can I extract from the init.sqf in warlords redux to put it in the warlords vanilla client and solve the lack of UI after load a saved mission.

[Jezuro 452]

It's not that simple I'm afraid. The code has been rewritten from line 1 basically.

[Markkos26 2]

3 hours ago, Jezuro said:

It's not that simple I'm afraid. The code has been rewritten from line 1 basically.

So it won't be compatible with any Vanilla Warlords module? for example "response team"?

[One In The Chamber 3]

Sector resets need to be reworked / reconfigured.  A suspected troll from the enemy team, "extendo", reset the sector just as Blufor was capturing Opfour base.

Anyone can come from the enemy side onto our team and call a sector reset, not to mention the abundant supply of trolls who show up on our own side.

sector resets should be like vote kicks

meaning, that a majority of people have to vote before a reset can even be selected.

One person being able to call a sector reset, and potentially sabotage a whole team is ridiculous.

Also we have found more exploits which must be removed

Opfor flew an ar-2 uav to our main base, flew it up to an altitude so high that people on the ground could not aim up to shoot it, and prevented players from fast traveling from the  base because "enemies are nearby". This was an obvious attempt to shut down our team from exiting the main base, while we were one sector away from victory.

Enemy Uav's, ar-2's, al-6's, whatever!, should not prevent fast travel.

I had to call in a cheetah and an ai to take that drone at the main base out

it was the ai, paradropping at the main base that finally removed the troll, exploiter drone from the main base.

This is ridiculous. Surely someone in the right position can fix this.

All it takes is one troll who calls a sector reset to sabotage the whole team's victory.

The need to fix the sector reset cannot be ignored if this mode is to have any future at all. Otherwise the game will just be cancer, thanks to exploiters and trolls.

That is all. 

End. 

 

[Nic1 12]

@Jezuro I know you are working on the new warlords version but you still haven't fixed one of the exploits in the version still on official servers which is people hovering 20 km over sectors with helis to cap them and ground forces can't do anything about it. 

[crs24 33]

@One In The Chamber

Resetting without cause is a problem but I’m also wary of people being stupid with not voting about that like with not votekicking idiots, although a prompt like with choosing the next sector might work. The current sector reset does need 2000cp from the person doing it and there’s a cooldown before anyone can do it again afterwards. Its annoying when some troll does it without cause but if you can get people to vote for the current sector again you hopefully can get it selected before people die from being out of bounds if it was locked and the idiot won’t be able to reset again for a few minutes where you can at least try votekicking him if he’s a real idiot.

If theres a drone blocking fast travel move a bit away from the base and you’ll be able to fast travel again from outside the base if you can’t kill it.

@Nic1

I agree that the sectors capture area really should have a maximum height as well. The helicopters I think depending on type can’t actually fly higher than say 4-5km which is still higher than the view distance, but a jet can also fly straight up for the same hovering effect till they hit the service ceiling.

[vikingbjorn 3]

So, here is a problem.  A darter drone, if close enough, prevents one from fast travelling.  Using the arsenal game mechanic exploit, i.e. short click 'i' to open ones own inventory, then going into arsenal via gear menu, one can drop what seems like an unlimited number of drones backpacks on the ground by right clicking them in inventory and then re-equiping them via arsenal and repeat and rinse.  You can then send those drones autonomously to opfor or blufor base at a height of 50 meters canvasing the entire base.  And, voila, noone can fast travel until the drones are destroyed or they are beyond 200 meters (I think) from those drones.  Given, that one individual can spawn so many drones, if they are destroyed, you can simply replenish them.

 

While I haven't seen this gimic implemented at a massive scale on a single sector, it certainly can be done and would limit any teams ability to fight.  

 

Shouldn't this be fixed?

 

Thanks!

**Note:  Just read the above post by "One In The Chamber" after already writing this.  Drones should not prevent fast travel per reasons I have stated above.  We already have enough issues with hackers and trolls changing vehicle skins, scribbling on the map, cluttering up comms, killing every one at once via invisible bullets or bombs. removing all our items and making us skydive or teleport to uncapped sectors.  Let alone turrets still under the map or under water.

 

 

[One In The Chamber 3]

@crs24

We were at opfor base, the capture was at 55%, or more. All the while, the desperate, obstinate, totally unrealistic opfor team was spamming out unarmed orcas and howering those helicopters over terrotories blufor had captured from them earlier. By the time our capture of their base was at 25%, the opfor helicppter crew and other opfor units had captured anthrakia, rodopoli, agios petros, ionina, ghost hotel. All we had remaining was gergios base. There was an enemy saboteur, by the name of "extendo", on our team. He tried to divert me from driving my slammer up over to the enemies base, saying that I should take command of the sam system on lakka factory hill. Well hell, man. There were no enemy aircraft to fire on, I've got no time for this, I'm rolling on to seize the enemy base! So this extendo traitor became concerned, his precious team that he was trully alegiant to, was going to loose. So after blufor forces had made landing at the opfor base and captured to about 50% ( we were almost at victory after HOURS of struggle, HOURS OF STRUGGLE!!!!! ) the enemy spy on our team called a sector reset. The 2000 cp price limit you mentioned meant NOTHING AT ALL in this scenario, because the enemy saboteur had been collecting 500 cp a minute for maybe 3 hours. The cooldown you mentioned meant nothing as well in this situation, that one sector reset at the point he called it forced us to have to recapture anthrakia, rodopoli, agios petros, and other points before we could target opfors base again, this would potentially take HOURS to acomplish. All the things you brought up claiming to be defenses against abuse are totally ineffectual against committed saboteurs / trolls, and such people are the reason this matter is even being brought up at all in the first place. Sector resets in the fashion they currently are facilitated are broken. 

Anyhow, so after the enemy spy called the sector reset that would force blufor to engage in recaptures that could potentially take hours to complete, myself and one friend realized , that with the drone fast travel denying exploits and the enemy sending in vote reset traitors, that the mission was totally compromised by unscrupulous and toxic people, who were only able to commit their abuses via broken game mechanics, so we left. 

End. 

Edited August 27, 2019 by One In The Chamber
Additional detail

[Jezuro 452]

Noted. I will introduce voting for sector resets.

[Markkos26 2]

How can I make a specific independent squad (like snipers) spawn when a sector is attacked?

 Is it advisable to synchronize units to the sector module in the editor?

 

[damsous 329]

15 hours ago, Jezuro said:

Noted. I will introduce voting for sector resets.

The biggest miss in this game mode is when a side is able to capture a territory without assignation, so that create some stupid situation cause everybody is able to travel behind the front line and capture unguarded area, but there is other area that are locked, this thing destroy the session all the time, i have spend many hour on it and stop playing because its simply not enjoyable.

 

So you really should do a choice :

There is no area selection and everybody can attack any area.

or

An area cant be captured if not selected. (i mean area owned by player side (OPF_F, BLU_F) not the independent.

 

The game mode have a great potential, but ruined by a weird conception.

[Markkos26 2]

Hi!,

How can i make a script run over a team leader unit if i use the spawn point module?

[Jezuro 452]

Redux 0.53 is now hosted on one of our official servers. You can find the instance in your server browser or connect directly at 85.190.155.161:2302.

[pr9inichek 133]

Some strange things which i have got, played in Redux:

1. Nicknames hard to see

Spoiler

https://imgur.com/a/zvI7Fp2

2. Some dialogs bad position

Spoiler

https://imgur.com/a/k21P7QC

 

[CaptainDawson 93]

To be a little more specific, the Redux server is [EU] #11. Currently at 0 players... I guess I gotta get a discord squad together if I don't want to play by myself

[CaptainDawson 93]

@Jezuro , got a few people on the server last night to do a quick trial. I still need to test a few things with vehicles, just to see if I can find any bugs. 

 

Here are my thoughts:

 

AI: The AI are more challenging than the stock Warlords. I personally think this is great, it makes capping sectors a little more nuanced than simply mowing down helpless AI. There are 3 problems with this however.

 

1. There are still WAY too many AIs considering their skill and accuracy increase. I know Warlords is not canon in the Armaverse, but let's be real. AAF currently have more AI than the entire realistic population of Altis. The current amount of AI between Telos, Lakka Factory, Neochori, Kavala, Georgios, and Nidasos should be their ENTIRE manpower. Please consider keeping the skill the same, but reducing the amount of AI significantly. I suggest removing one third to one half of the current AI to make up for the increased skill. Move a fair portion of those AI into buildings, either starting position inside or locked in with DisableAi "PATH" command. These two things combined would not only make sector caps quicker, but also increase the immersion and encourage real tactics besides mowing down everything with a HMG car.

 

2. The extra sectors combined with the AI skill will make the game take LONGER. This is definitely a bad thing. The longer the game, the more players give up and leave. Team balance parameter and disabled team switch means the player numbers can decline quickly once the game gets to a point where one side has an advantage, because new players will not want to play on the losing side. If new players happen to join on the losing side and are getting seal clubbed, they can't switch teams now, so they will just leave and go play fortnite. Shorter game can be easily attained by reducing the sectors and/or decreasing the amount of AI.

 

3. Many players (mostly new players) will not like the increased AI difficulty, considering that there are literally thousands of AI. We already have players who don't know what they're doing, logging into Warlords without ever playing the SP campaign or any of the training tutorials. That's not our fault, but having some way for players to learn the basics of Warlords in game would be great. And again, decreasing amount of AI would help this.

 

Balance:

Starting players on the Opfor slot list is VERY effective. I had a friend who is new to Arma play, and he went on Opfor despite wanting to play with me on Blufor. He didn't even realize how to switch teams, but of course once I told him he couldn't switch because of the team switch parameter. While it can potentially be very annoying at first, I think this is a good addition. Preventing cheaters from switching teams once they know where everything is is important. Having some of the noobs spread onto Opfor means we probably won't have to deal with situations where Opfor is stacked with veterans while Blufor is 95% new players like we do now. Of course, players who wanted to play on Blufor and find themselves locked to Opfor will inevitably rage quit sometimes lol.

 

Contested sector teleports: Adding a bigger teleport spawn area on contested sector is nice, but I noticed that when you fast travel to contested sector, you always spawn on the same side regardless of what sector you teleported from. I can imagine when redux goes live, it won't take long for campers to discover that everyone spawns in the same side of the sector. Possible solution to prevent camping, increase size of the restricted zones for the rest of the sectors. I see some sectors like Oreokastro have already been increased.

 

Asked some players about their experiences:

 

We have 1.5 or 2km view distance on Redux instead of 4km on default Warlords, they want 4km back.

Instant rearm for vehicles, should at least take a little bit time (I suggest at least one or two minutes for realism)

Once in a tank, sectors are extremely easy to capture, leading to a very big difference between infantry and vehicle capping since AI are more skilled. Again, AI need to do more than stand there and be mowed down. Meta of mowing down AI with a HMG cal vehicle can be fixed by putting at least a few AI to garrison buildings.

No briefings for novices. In may people's opinion we need a concise briefing for new players to at least understand the basics of the game. We are sick of saying "Hold I to fast travel, click Strategy, click Fast Travel" in side chat for the entire game.
White name hard to see on map

There is an issue (which I haven't confirmed) that the Xi'an AI pilot does not exit on landing, preventing the player from flying the Xi'an.

They still don't like the night (I suggested accelerated night but regular time day, they liked it. Another suggestion, start in very early morning with real time to allow more daytime fighting)

They don't like the rain (random weather is nice addition, but when it's continuously bad weather it gets annoying. One game I played it was night and raining for a significant amount of time. Maybe add parameter for maximum time length of fog/rain)

According to random noob, it's "not very fun". Presumably because it is hard to learn Warlords without help and he keeps dying.

Some say Redux is still better, some others say the original Warlords is better.

[vikingbjorn 3]

I played with Redux a bit last night (think with Dawson) and some today.  Here are some of thoughts (mostly from a multiplayer perspective):

1.  Strategy:  As far as I can tell, there is no way to tell which sectors or when the enemy has captured them.  Flying over what must of been captured sectors did not reveal that they were a part of the enemy teams.  This removes a major aspect of game strategy.  The ability to find out what the enemy is doing, prepare and potentially counter it.  An enemy that captures sectors fast tends to require a different response then one that does so slower.  And, knowing in advance which sectors are captured allows one to formulate strategies.  This lack of situational awareness or some means of gaining it just seems a bit too blind.  Say one takes the shortest sector path to the enemy base.  Even if you have enemy captured sectors to your left and right, you have no way of knowing so on the map.  Which means that the enemy could continually interrupt your sector chain if they have previously captured a base and you wouldn't know which sector they are spawning from unless you attacked it first.  

2.  Game difficulty:  The game seems more difficult early on and then much easier as you get tanks and certain types of aircraft.  I'm not sure how this would be attractive to a novice in single player mode as one would get killed over and over again for many hours before being able to even try tanks or aircraft.  Perhaps this is also related to view distance, but I did not get fired at from AT/AA when  using tanks from 1-1.5 km and never got fired at when using a Blackfish.

3. Reward system,.. i.e. cp per kill varies based upon whom or what you kill.  I like it but,.... This will tend to reward the more expert players allowing them to earliest get into vehicles and get even more kills while newer players will tend to be left on the sidelines as infantry.  This could be said for regular warlords, as well, except for this version it is now more.  It does certainly seem to take longer to get into a 'first vehicle' in redux.  And, given this slower start, losing a vehicle early on could take a while to recover from.  Which adds to game difficulty.

2. View distance.  Change it back to 4k please.  You have to fly at extremely slow speeds in order to just get a cameras eye for CAS.  Not even sure if blackwasp or shikras can be used to engage ground targets with this view distance.  Targets don't show up on plane sensors unless they are 1.5 km away.  And, if radars are working right (didn't have enemy planes to test with), all aircraft will get shot down before they even know a target is there.  Also, just about every defensive position that is used in regular warlords is no longer tenable as you can't see or lock targets anymore with tanks or even verona/AT missiles.  

3.  View distance and radar.  I put up both a cronus radar and a tigris.  And, was not seeing any targets presented on the TDL in my T140k.  In fact, even with a strider or those new AA/AT tanks 50 feet away, the T140k didn't show anything on it's radar.  Not sure why I was experiencing that.

4. Could not use pilot position in blackfoot helicopters.  Could get into gunners seat but not pilot.

5.  When I put down a cronus radar I had over 10k cp.  Radar price was 8500.  After placing radar, had over negative 1000 cp.  Could not fast travel etc until the cp per minute got that back into the positive.

6.  Was able to get the vehicles and airplanes I used to rearm but it was a bit counterintuitive as it only rearmed when I was looking at the vehicle and if I looked at the ammo crate/vehicle, I still had the option to rearm but it would not do anything.  Also, could not rearm a plane at it's rear.  Had to place ammo truck near the cockpit in order to rearm it.

7. Player's AI.  They seem just as they were in the regular version of warlords.  Which means that there is no improvement.  And, they need a lot of improvement.  It just gets so ridiculous.  Please allow us to command AI to do things that the game supports but this game mode doesn't.  It would be nice if something like the UAV terminal map was available for instructing AI to do things. Multiple waypoints, loiter commands, ability to get AI to patrol vs just standing there or even to properly use aircraft.  I would like my AI to patrol a pre defined path in a sector of my choosing, independently do search and destroy missions in helicopters or blackfish along a predefined path or just work properly in the vehicle of my choice.  

8.  Arsenal:  Most complaints I have heard about arsenal in warlords is not that it exists but that it is easily exploitable.  If there is no arsenal in this game, then long live the days of thermal vision.  Because, it just makes it easier to find and kill targets.  If no arsenal, then one should be able to spawn as one of the classes of AI that are available instead of having to exchange weapons and clothing with them.  Otherwise, expect tanks to capture a sector or two before one can either fit or prepare defenses against them.

9: Player, Vehicle and Aircraft spawns:  Fast travel to seized sector spawns tended to be at the edge of sector often times when I wanted something that was on the other side.  This might be useful when being attacked but was more of an annoyance when just traveling to get something from a sector.  Contested sector spawns sometimes spawn in same spot no matter the angle.  Needs more testing to get how it is supposed to work. Vehicle spawns appear to be close to players location.  This was ideal.  Cas planes did not land but spawned in a spot outside of the sector.  This would be the first spot in enemy territory I would thoroughly mine in any multiplayer game.

10: Overall Impression:  Same deck of cards, different rules.  At this point and time, I wouldn't think that regular warlords player would be drawn to Redux as a better version of warlords unless it offered more capabilities.  Which it doesn't seem to do.  Sure the game play is different and some ways harder but also simpler and more restricted.  It is a reduction of the original,... thus Redux?  It seems much more geared towards fast twitch tank battles once the the sides start shooting at each other.  But, since the economy seems more kill based, perhaps very brief tank battles as one might not be able to spawn as many.  Besides that, the strategy seems simpler as well.  What you can see, you can kill. Whether you are infantry or in a tank or an aircraft.  Albeit, the situational awareness black hole where you do not know where enemies are coming from could lead to protracted multiplayer games.

 

And lastly, please add something like a quick command list for new players!  Multiplayer games almost always include 1 or more players that do not know the simplest commands like hold down 'i' to get to the menu.  Let alone how to tell their AI to shoot.  These are the same folks whom most likely leave the game out of frustration because there is nothing intuitive in the initial presentation of the game on what to do.

[CaptainDawson 93]

@vikingbjorn thank you, you have perfectly summed up how we feel about Redux. Now everything has been discussed and rediscussed at this point. It's pretty clear that the current Redux is not going to cut it without some significant changes. My last few things to say on Redux, adding to what @vikingbjorn said, is that removing the Arsenal would be the end of Warlords' popularity. Honestly Warlords lacks the appeal it had when it was originally released. When Warlords first came out, it was as it should be: Everyone could choose how they wanted to fight, and work out a strategy to fight as a team. Then some people realized that some stategies were excessively overpowed and started spamming that one tactic. Mostly spawn camping certain sectors like AAC. Now that everyone knows most spammy tactics, both teams are dominated by a few expert players who massacre everything using unrealistic tactics. Yes I am one of those players. Yesterday I mowed down a platoons worth of armored vehicles by teleporting back and forth near their paradrop locations with a Bergen and Vorona. Because this is how you get ahead in the game, counter spam with spam. Redux will fix this, but at what cost?

 

IMO, changing the base and sector layout and countering spammy tactics is all that is needed to make Warlords unpredictable again. Players already know what to do, the same old thing every single game. Same spawn camp AAC, same Rhino ripplefire spam, and same Neophon mow down AI with HE rockets. Limiting the use of the ammo truck (single use), Rhino (timed reload, several minutes to reload ATGMs), and Airplanes (limit time they can fly or better yet, disable reload) is far better than simply increasing the prices to match the players complaints. Before writing me off, please consider my argument! Example: Navid is a single-use weapon on KOTH instead of increased permanent buy cost for a reason! Endgame vehicles like Rhino and planes NEED to have a counter, they can't be allowed to operate unhindered for the whole match! Let us play on more equal footing, force players to make a new strategy as a team on an alternate map layout. Instead of having to deal with one-sided air spam and constant camping. Nobody wants a beat down they cant fight back against, you see the player numbers go down as soon as this happens. We want it to be like when it first came out: Discovering new tactics and strategies to win, not the same thing over and over again.

 

Redux has a many great additions, but the real problems are not only not adressed, but arguably made worse. If a T-140 comes into a Blufor sector without warning, there is literally almost nothing they can do. No easy access to AT. No one brought AT because they didn't find them or not enough CP? Blufor now lacks Vorona, huge disadvantage when going against tanks! Paradrop launcher crate? Now the tank can easily spot them. Arsenal is what allows players to switch roles and customize their experience. I understand the removal is to counter exploit of it, but most will agree after the security changes, hacking and exploiting has become fairly rare. The arsenal is one the the places Warlords shines! Warlords does not need a massive overhaul. It needs only for the spam tactics to be eliminated. Change the sector and base layout, it does not take a genius to see that Blufor is getting unfairly camped at AAC nearly every single match and that the war on Anthrakia is extremely predictable. Randomized sectors is great, though hiding the enemy's progress might be a bit too far. There are so many cool vehicles and game mechanics that are yet untapped in Warlords. Warlords is awesome and has so much potential, we just need players to have a reason to play it again!

 

Thank you @Jezuro for all your work on this project, I hope that whatever solution you come to it will restore Warlords to its full potential.