Release Discussion

[Murto the Ray]

I've removed several non-constructive, derailing, replies in this thread. I have messaged those affected and if they wish to follow up on the action taken then they can PM me.

Please keep discussion on topic, if you would like to talk with someone in particular then PM them.

[weeman]

with previous releases you could force fire pillboxes that have been discovered, under the shroud. Has this been taken out?

[OMnom]

That hasn't been taken out, but that bug has never been fixed. You're either using assault move instead of force fire or the actor under the fog of war got killed/sold off.

[Doomsday]

I really dislike how buildings don't tank anymore. I think it indirectly makes for less combacks because large engagements snowball more now because it's easier to wipe main base with larger army.

[netnazgul]

"I really don't like how buildings are used as tanks, base pushes are so strong"
*removed buildings as targets*
"I really don't like how buildings don't tank anymore".

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[kazu.]

i am afraid a heavy arty spam meta will be uprising ...
i guess i dont have to tell you guys how i feel about it

[SirCake]

Hey, cant find the original post but someone suggested to use a noncombat-building-attack-toggle instead of assault move+stance.

I want to reinvigorate this idea, because I hear a lot of complaints from mid-range players about the unit behaviour (units idling in an enemy base).

The default stance needs to be attack buildings, so units do what common people expect. Problem with that of course is that arty/other units will chase on "attack anything" currently and the assault move franky isnt good enough (not rebindable to single button, order modifier needed every time you order, units will stop attacking buildings after completing movement and/or losing sight).

The toggle solves it and makes assault move and attack anything obsolete. I imagine it like this:


Really clear. (and default is ON). With a hotkey.
I removed old attack anything and assault move, not needed anymore.
Tooltip could be "Attack Anything: Orders units to attack non-combat buildings. "

Basically it means I have moved to the camp of the "stance critics"

[FRenzy]

The idea was brought up by WhoCares, it can be a good idea indeed.

Nice design. I would even go further by placing it on the left (where AA is currently now). (Edit : with the same hotkey Alt A)

However, isn't AA useful for some units ? (Dogs, ... helis defending a base ?, ... ). Should we really remove it ?

[FRenzy]

I'd also add : give the choice to the player to set the default setting for all units.
Some players would want all their units by default to ignore buildings, and switch them in specific cases. And vice versa

[WhoCares]

Here was the idea in detail

http://www.sleipnirstuff.com/forum/view ... 590#303590

Objective of my approach was including this feature to make the game richer by leting the players shape the new meta by using it or not.

I love the "example" icon in the new bar stance, it resumes so well what i had a hard time to explain. Thx sir cake

I just wanted to help the dev by suggesting a smooth way to introduce this new feature they hard worked for (which i like) without generating what .... well what happend with all the sad consequences.

Althought, sire cake, you would leave the "attackanything stance" icon wich set your unit in "chase and berserk mode" (as you separated the targeting), who knows if someone will one day find a use for that.

[Clockwork]

For the next release it would be very good to have a automatic surrender on disconnection. It's a scourge in team games when the gg's fly in and they all disconnect - it's the equivalent of the kid taking his ball home when he gets upset.

[anjew]

For the next release it would be very good to have a automatic surrender on disconnection. It's a scourge in team games when the gg's fly in and they all disconnect - it's the equivalent of the kid taking his ball home when he gets upset.

This is probably the best way to deal with it but some people prefer to sit around and kill unused buildings for some reason. I just want a vicroty after the DC and then the option to keep killing the base but i believe there are some limitations.

Also another suggestion that usually comes along with this one is the ability to have server go back to lobby with all the same players still connected. This would be a really really nice feature.

[netnazgul]

For the next release it would be very good to have a automatic surrender on disconnection. It's a scourge in team games when the gg's fly in and they all disconnect - it's the equivalent of the kid taking his ball home when he gets upset.

There is a bunch of tickets raised about this, giving mixed opinions and problems with implementing it.
https://github.com/OpenRA/OpenRA/issues/13284
https://github.com/OpenRA/OpenRA/pull/13319
https://github.com/OpenRA/OpenRA/issues/13725

But I also vote up for this feature to be implemented in the game.

[Mo]

For the next release it would be very good to have a automatic surrender on disconnection. It's a scourge in team games when the gg's fly in and they all disconnect - it's the equivalent of the kid taking his ball home when he gets upset.

This is probably the best way to deal with it but some people prefer to sit around and kill unused buildings for some reason. I just want a vicroty after the DC and then the option to keep killing the base but i believe there are some limitations.

Also another suggestion that usually comes along with this one is the ability to have server go back to lobby with all the same players still connected. This would be a really really nice feature.

On the flip side, what if it's a genuine disconnection and other players want to continue using this disconnected base to carry them in build radius and tanking fire. I wouldn't want a disconnect to automatically mean a surrender as a teammate of someone who may disconnect.