Alchenar

Uhhhh, ok. This looks a lot like last year's update with the year iterated by one.
 
 

Don't forget steam workshop, something I'm shocked hasn't been set up because it would instantly replace all of the various map and mission repositories while being much easier to use.  

So in Battlefront time I should check back in June?

So in Battlefront time I should check back in June?

So in Battlefront time I should check back in June?

I'm not remotely qualified, but my intuition is that the real problem is that the game engine is doing something really inefficient every time the camera moves. It's that, rather than anything in the simulation that causes issues.  
 

I'm totally on board with the answer 'no modding because we need to be able to monetise content' because I think game devs should absolutely be entitled to do that, but 'no modding because someone might have fun' is such a strange philosophy to have.  
 

I'm totally on board with the answer 'no modding because we need to be able to monetise content' because I think game devs should absolutely be entitled to do that, but 'no modding because someone might have fun' is such a strange philosophy to have.  
 

I'm totally on board with the answer 'no modding because we need to be able to monetise content' because I think game devs should absolutely be entitled to do that, but 'no modding because someone might have fun' is such a strange philosophy to have.  
 

I'm totally on board with the answer 'no modding because we need to be able to monetise content' because I think game devs should absolutely be entitled to do that, but 'no modding because someone might have fun' is such a strange philosophy to have.  
 

I'm not remotely qualified, but my intuition is that the real problem is that the game engine is doing something really inefficient every time the camera moves. It's that, rather than anything in the simulation that causes issues.  
 

Yeah not being a programmer I accept that this is a bit of a 'things that you don't understand sound easy' but performance is the big one.   The game engine isn't leveraging multi-threading, modern RAM expectations, or anyone's GPU integrated or otherwise nearly to the extent that it could.  I can accept that it might just be too much work to make happen, but as a user I'm just not going to get excited about anything in an engine update that isn't 'the game no longer runs like ass'.
 
There is one QOL update though that I'd like and that's the option to have artillery/air fire missions where I can pick multiple point targets in order. Or an area target with prioritised point targets.  

I should be able to tell a paladin battery of 3 guns 'I want you to precision strike these three points in one salvo'.  Or an attack helicopter 'strike this tank specifically and then go after targets of opportunity in this area' as a single order.  

e; oh and this isn't quite an 'engine upgrade' but get Steam Workshop set up.  That's really not much work at all and would be fantastic for the community.

I'm sceptical.  A 1/3 larger force is a pretty huge tactical advantage where neither of these tanks has an advantage in speed, size or firepower really worth writing home about.
I'd say the answer is 'six M4s, with maybe a bit of pocket change left over for the allied player that becomes relevant when we talk combined arms scenarios'. 

I wrote my law dissertation on this case!
There's lots of subtext that gets missing from most reports, but long story short they probably lied and it's unconvincing that the dead kid actually grew weaker much faster than the others.  Custom of the sea was you were supposed to draw lots, they didn't, that's why they went on trial.
The trial judge was a bit of a crusader who basically forced the jury into a factual verdict, then stacked the appeal court so that the answer to the facts was 'this is murder'.  
 

1. More than 10 FPS when the cameral moves.  
2. Actually just more FPS in general.  

I'm sceptical.  A 1/3 larger force is a pretty huge tactical advantage where neither of these tanks has an advantage in speed, size or firepower really worth writing home about.
I'd say the answer is 'six M4s, with maybe a bit of pocket change left over for the allied player that becomes relevant when we talk combined arms scenarios'. 

The only reason that unit cost should exist is for balancing QB battles.  It might be a useful guideline for scenario designers, but it doesn't make any sense to be hardlocking away the kind of scenarios they can design.
If you can agree with that logic (and I really don't think any other way of looking at it is sustainable), the only reason point cost should exist is for fairness.  Rarity is useful to to keep MP OOBs within certain parameters and prevent weird cheesy nonsense.  This is probably the most obvious instance in which the point costs are obviously very wrong - equivalent medium tanks should all sit in the same cost spectrum and the Pz IV and Sherman are about as close to equal as anything across the sides in the game.
One of the best things battlefront could do for the MP community is open up unit costs for modding.  They clearly aren't interested in spending time doing balance passes on point buy, at least let the community develop some consensus options.  

The only reason that unit cost should exist is for balancing QB battles.  It might be a useful guideline for scenario designers, but it doesn't make any sense to be hardlocking away the kind of scenarios they can design.
If you can agree with that logic (and I really don't think any other way of looking at it is sustainable), the only reason point cost should exist is for fairness.  Rarity is useful to to keep MP OOBs within certain parameters and prevent weird cheesy nonsense.  This is probably the most obvious instance in which the point costs are obviously very wrong - equivalent medium tanks should all sit in the same cost spectrum and the Pz IV and Sherman are about as close to equal as anything across the sides in the game.
One of the best things battlefront could do for the MP community is open up unit costs for modding.  They clearly aren't interested in spending time doing balance passes on point buy, at least let the community develop some consensus options.  

Obligatory question for when this happens:  have you decided whether to issue Steam keys to current customers to let them transition over to that platform?  
In case anyone hasn't used Steam and is wondering why - the quality of life improvement from never having to worry about installer .exes and getting automatic patching is something you'll never want to come back from.  

The quite backfill colour is a bad idea, it makes it difficult to read the text.

The quite backfill colour is a bad idea, it makes it difficult to read the text.

Obligatory question for when this happens:  have you decided whether to issue Steam keys to current customers to let them transition over to that platform?  
In case anyone hasn't used Steam and is wondering why - the quality of life improvement from never having to worry about installer .exes and getting automatic patching is something you'll never want to come back from.  

The quite backfill colour is a bad idea, it makes it difficult to read the text.

Obligatory question for when this happens:  have you decided whether to issue Steam keys to current customers to let them transition over to that platform?  
In case anyone hasn't used Steam and is wondering why - the quality of life improvement from never having to worry about installer .exes and getting automatic patching is something you'll never want to come back from.  

Oh Battlefront aren't remotely on the same level.  Just take a look at the DLC list:  https://store.steampowered.com/app/312980/Graviteam_Tactics_MiusFront/
Professional customers pay for the game engine but customers pay for quality content, and Battlefront hasn't yet tried to cash in on that front.  The silly thing is once you've got your game engine up and running that's the hard and costly bit, you can churn out campaign packs for comparative peanuts left, right and centre (see Command Ops, CMANO, Panzer Corps, etc etc).  
Meanwhile in the last year we've had one module for Fortress Rome, and in the last two years Shock Force 2 (which is a rebuild of old pre-existing content).  Sure, Battlefront have chosen to spend their time on professional contracts (and I don't blame them, that's good money) but technically releasing something once a year isn't the same thing as what Graviteam or the other major players are doing and I don't think Battlefront would ever claim they were.