Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About MichaeljonesMJ

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. So i've done my first two vanilla playthroughs (me learning things in first game, and me trying to be optimal in second game). I like the concept of SM so far, but i feel there's issues that i would need to be changed/fixed before i return for any further games. Pathing. In my second map, there was a giant raised "island" in the middle of the area, and if i ever ordered my rovers to go north of that island, instead of going around it they would just go straight north into it and get stuck in the cliffs. Because there's no "shift click" ordering, i had to manually order them to go to bottom left corner, then top left corner, then finally top middle. Can the pathing PLEASE be fixed? Collaboration loss on science. Nowhere in the game does it explain or mention it. The ONLY place where i saw it mentioned was on the early rover research that said it gave +100 research to rover, and less to additional ones. Thats it. During my 2nd game i decided to make a "science dome" - basically houses, service buildings and research institutes. Everyone a scientist. All working together to better mankind. Except during the "active shifts" HALF of my research was lost to "collaboration loss". What the fuck is this? And, considering the whole game is about research, WHY is it even in place? You're already making a decision on whether to go science or not because you need manpower for other stuff, why penalise players for having science buildings? Also, i dont know if this was a bug or not, but when it was night (and all my science institutes had a closed shift), my research from institutes DOUBLED because there was 0 collaboration loss and they still provided full research even though they had no night shift. It also confused the fuck out of me. A bit minor - Why does Arcology spire go through the glass dome? Wouldn't that pose some... structural issues?
  2. Personally, I care a lot about immersion. Thus, the most immersion-breaking part is the terrible ragdoll physics. The twitching, weightless and unresponsive bodies (twitchy weapons included) with a complete lack of gore makes Arma 3's battlefields, especially infrantry-based firefights, clinically clean. As an example of what would be a proper approach, I found Brothers in Arms series, especially Brothers in Arms, portraying gore and the horrors of war in a pretty balanced, non-PSTD-inducing way. Some say Red Orchestra 2 is also a great choice, but I liked how BIA series striked the better balance there. That's all, folks. What's the biggest for you? The AI itself as a whole? Clueless AI driving? Lack of dense and more realistic particle effects? Gore? Physics? Input lag? Speak out.