Reloading for DoW 2

[s33k]

Talking about the weapons we would like to see and how they should work gave me a thought. What about weapons reloading? This has been said ALOT, but, CoH had weapons reloading, so why not DoW?

I mean a Bolter has a magazine of what like 30 rounds right? So rather than just firing like mad without and reloading like we have now, how about after a unit fires its magazine then has to take some time to reload.

So what do you guys think?

[GJTFM]

would make it more realistic. If they added IG, the lasgun would be weaker but would fire for longer periods of time.

[Darkbladecr]

exactly although how would this be implemented for demon weapons or special weapons? Like the horror's flame? or the Possessed marines flame?

[Fish Of Doom]

infinite ammo. simple. or instant reloading when at half clip.

[s33k]

Well for Daemon weapons and the like, Horrors' fire for example, I like the way it fires now, I mean its not like they are on rapid fire, they just throw a fire ball every few seconds. PSM fire for example, something like that, I mean ya its a daemon, but its still gotta take a breath eventually.

[TheLoneKnight]

Just because some units have a reload function doesn't mean that it would be required by the engine. It would be easy enough to simply create a one-bullet clip that reloaded with whatever between-shot time you desired. Or, you could have a daemon throwing fire for a period of time before resting for a few seconds. Or you could ignore the reload mechanism entirely for that particular unit.

[Versian]

The way I see it, Horrors already "reload", or at least take their sweet time to fire again.

On topic: I'm not really a fan of the whole "reloading" idea. Sure it adds more realism, but I don't find it so necessary. I'm glad it will be a passive thing if put in the game, happening by itself. Otherwise I'd be a mad player.

[TheLoneKnight]

Why wouldn't it be a passive thing? Unless there's a combat advantage to having no ammunition in your guns, I don't understand why it would ever be anything but passive.

[jon_the_d]

lol @ infi.

I like the idea, it would add that littl ebit extra to consider when choosing weapons. Certain units and certain weapons shouldn't need to reload though, depending on the gun and what's holding it/what it's mounted on. Power weapons in particular, plasma cells could last a long time. flamer fuel bottles? not sure. But if they're on vehicles then they should probably not need to reload in the same way as a gun which uses a magazine or clip. Time between shots is separate from reloading of course, and should still be implemented accordingly for the different weapons.

and yeah, it should definitely be automatic. In company of heros, is there some sort of bar to tell you how much ammo each unit has left in their gun? cos if there is, and that particular weapon take sa long time to reload, you might want to be able to force a reload when you think is a good time, rather than them run out 2 seconds into a big fire fight.

So I go for passive, but with a force reload button on each squad/vehicle as well.

Also what about actual ammo? in CoH, do you have to get your troops restocked? are we considering this for DOW2 as well? I mean, how many missiles can a marine carry? (without looking like a big pile of missiles)

[Infidelicious]

In CoH it's completely passive, pretty much a unit will fire it's magazine, reload and continue firing. It's used pretty much to make there be actual differences between weapons, as well as to make each squad member have a different amount of damage output.

units never run out of ammo, it's assumed that they carried enough, or they restock when in your own territory.

[s33k]

Ya they never run out of ammo, but I guess mainly the thing I was worried about is like Heavy Bolters just firing a rapid stream of bullets constantly. I would rather have them burst like the MG's in CoH. Same thing with flamethrowers, they don't actually reload, they just fire in bursts.

[Techlology]

I like it, maybe implement it so that entire squads don't all reload at the same time, then it'll just be an annoyance.

[Versian]

Lone Knight: I meant to say I'm glad reloading is something that is done automatically. Of course it's obvious that it will be automatic and you don't have to remind your troops to load a fresh clip. But if it wasn't passive, it would be hell. if.

[Darac]

I like reloading the way it is: quick and automatic.

[Blackheart]

Reloading is fine as a balance tool. It allows for bursts of fire, then a pause, then another burst, etc.

[Riess]

I think it would be a nice touch to see a marine slap a new magazine into his bolter every so often. Burst fire, cooldown phases for energy weapons, recovery times for creature attacks, all good.
Maybe even a little button that removes cooldown and recovery, but leads to daemons losing health from exhaustion after a certain time of constant firing, or your energy weapons exploding if they're not allowed to cool down every once in a while.

[Mirage Knight]

This is certainly workable for weapons.

Bolters take 20 round clips, Storm Bolters take 40 round clips and Bolt Pistols take 10 round clips.

IIRC Lasgun power cells are good for 20 shots and Plasma Gun flasks about 10-15 shots. The fuel cannisters for Flamers are good for 5 shots.

Fluff info taken from 4th Edition Rulebook. I don't have it on me atm so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong :)

[Versian]

I have one question though:

There still is the whole idea of infinite ammo,

soldiers are reloading and stuff but, where is the ammo coming from? Even a Space Marine can carry around X amount of clips/magazines. Is this ok with the community? Infinite ammo? only reloading from time to time?

[Blackheart]

Yes, because otherwise it becomes too cumbersome to realisticly bother with. Even assuming the "six squads" thing is right, managing the ammunition of every member of six squads, esp when you get into imperial guard or orks, is too tedious. So, reload, but infinite clips.

[Mirage Knight]

I agree with this. Reality has to kinda take a backseat to playability on this subject.

[jon_the_d]

to simplify it partially, ammo could be done "per squad" (which just implies they share it, even with mixed weapons). Therefore (with possibly only 6 squads, or there abouts) it's not going to be too much hassle. but having to run back to restock, even if transports, or SPs counted, seems a bit of a detraction from the fun, with no real added bonus. just extra realism and hassle, for no increase to fun.

infinite ammo, but reloads. this way get's my vote

[dark frontier]

I think they should use the same system as in CoH
passive reloading by units. Heavy bolters would not fire constant streams of bullets. They would need to have ammo belts changed etc. Bolters need replacement clips. Lasguns are weak but can fire for a long period of time on a single energy cell

I dont think this is an issue - just keep the same system as in CoH

[Thuraash]

Yup, CoH got it pretty much right, it seems. Different weapons having different types of bursts are far better than a continuous stream of bullets with a given DPS, both in terms of gameplay (flexibility to differentiate weapons, as was brought up earlier) and visually. It definitely makes the game look far more interesting, and way more immersive to have your units fire in bursts, and quickly snap in fresh clips between every few bursts.

In CoH, I've never caught all the units in a squad reloading at the same time, so that's not really a problem.

[hylander25k]

I'd be happy with just a quick reload animation.

[Panama]

I think the reloading in DoW2 should be done like in CoH. A unit would fire off his whole clip, take a couple of seconds to remove the old one then whack in a new one then continue firing. I always thought it looked kinda of cool. Obviously weapons should take longer to reload depending on what they are for example a heavy bolter would take longer to reload then a bolt pistol.

[Mirage Knight]

In the case of Space Marines, Heavy Bolters are belt-fed and have an ammo feed linked up to a high capacity ammo cannister that's mounted on the backs of Tacticals and Devastators. So no reload there. The exception would be IG Heavy Bolter teams and SM Scouts which use ammo boxes. 6 second reload at most would be about right me thinks :)

[Blackheart]

However, space marine heavy bolters WOULD have cooldown times instead of reload times... in this case, literally cooldown times. Rapid-fire rocket launchers build up a lot of heat, and this means they'd fire a burst, wait a few moments, then fire another one.

[ImmortalChaos]

I quite like the idea of most standard infantry weapons having to reload. I'd especially like to make sure you can always order a squad to manually reload so an awere player would be able to keep from running out of ammo in the least oppertune moments.

[Blackheart]

I wouldn't mind that feature as long as they have infinte clips. Watching squad or vehicle ammo would take away from the action of the game. For some reason, manual reload makes me think of it being finite, dunno why.

[s33k]

Ya of course, I would not want to have keep resupplying my troops either, but I would just like to see it implemented, cause frankly I get sick when I watch my guardsmen line up like colonials and shoot forever. I figured since, DoW was going to use mechanics like CoH, why not have them reload like they do in CoH. It would make the battles seem more "real" for the 40k universe.

[Blackheart]

I agree. Just immagine guardsmen suddenly ducking behind cover in order to switch out a spent battery, and then popping back up and firing again-- not the whole squad at once, but one member at a time as they run out of ammo in that battery.

[Antics]

I'm almost 100% certain that there will be reloading for all weapons that take conventional ammunition, simply on the fact that DoW2 will be running on a heavily upgraded version of the CoH engine. If relic is implementing other ideas from CoH, like the cover system and being able to fortify buildings, then why wouldn't a simple facet like reloading be implemented as well.

[Thuraash]

As for manual reload, I'd say definitely not. Squads should do that on their own, topping off between battles by themselves. This was never a problem in CoH, so I can't see why it should be in DoW2

[s33k]

I've got to agree with Thuraash here, the whole manually reloading thing, would be too much babysitting for me. Imagine having 6 squads switching between them to make sure they reload. Squad leaders don't need to tell the squad to reload, so why should the commander(you) have to?

[Blackheart]

In that case it should be that after a certain amount of time not in battle, they should automatically switch to a fresh clip.

[Thuraash]

I think the system in CoH is fine, as it stands. No need to work out details if the devs just take that and go with it. I don't exactly know how it works, but it avoids such problems as half the squad reloading at the same time and stepping into battle with just one bullet left in the clip.

Blackheart, I do like the idea of members who are reloading to duck behind cover, if they can. That would look great and definitely add to the immersion of the game. It's these little details that really draw me in, and so far, all the Relic games have been full of them, with more goodies being added game after game. I really hope that trend continues.

[Exsequien]

Does the Necrons gauss cannon have ammo? How do they reload that thing?

But reloading could open a path for some neat features:
- veterans reload faster or techs allow weapons to be reloaded faster --> more dps
- plasma weapons could be forced to keep firing with the risk of the weapon exploding

[Thuraash]

I don't think they do... seem to be powered off the energy of the warrior... but I'm not terribly familiar with the fluff, and may well be wrong here. It just looks intimidating to see them marching slowly up, firing nonstop, though.

Vets reloading faster sounds brilliant! It makes perfect sense in realistic terms, as well. Vets would be less nervous on the battlefield than the less experienced warriors, and are also more adept at using their weapons.

Teching to reduce reload time... meh. I'm not too crazy about that one... would seem like a lame upgrade, IMO.

As for the plasma overload button, that's been discussed to death, in the "Gets Hot" rule topic, lol. I like the idea of there being a button, since sometimes odds are so poor without some boost to fire that it's worth the risk.

[ImmortalChaos]

Why the fuck would people be against having the option to do a manual reload? Seriously, WHY!? Units would still do it on their own in combat, you'd just have the ability to tell them to grab fresh clips when they weren't fighting. Wait, you want that to be automatic too!? WIll people not be satisfied untill DoW2 requires no skill at all and practically plays itself?

[Croaxleigh]

ImmortalChaos: Because people are allowed to have their own opinions, and to some people it might seem like an extra bit that was more or less unnecessary?

[Thuraash]

Well, that, and it would be downright irritating to force players to tell their oh-so-highly-trained Tacs that it would be a good thing to have bullets in their weapons... I mean, really, come on! That's not meaningful micro, or "skill," as you put it. It's a silly exercise that fulfills no purpose beyond giving players another thing to worry about, to make their units feel just a LITTLE stupider.

Not even SC, the king of clickspam, makes you tell your zealots to turn their blades on before you send them out to fight, or has you punch a button on your ghost's action bar to have them reload that single-shot canister rifle between rounds.

[yetanotherplayer]

The option to order a manual reload is all that the CoH system needs. As it is at present a machine gun team might, in its second engagement, only fire a handful of shots as the enemy close in because it didn't reload after the first time. Often that's enough for the other squad to run up and grenade or flank. It takes control out of the player's hands and occasionally arbitrarily nullifies a defense.

Of course, an automatic reload after enemies haven't been seen for, oh, five seconds would work, too.

[ErichTheGraham]

Here's another for the list of reasons a manual reload button would be unnecessary: because running out of ammo isn't going to be a problem. Why are you guys hysterically thinking that if you add this feature all your mans are going to suddenly be too retarded to reload their weapons? Guys, play CoH, if only for a little while, to understand the kinds of new features we can expect from DoW2. The reason a lot of these things are coming up is because of the CoH engine that DoW2 will be using. They already work, calm down. Bazookas in CoH have one shot and a long reload time, which makes it basically like a long firing time with a much cooler animation. This is what we can and should expect from dow.

EDIT: Kushan you make valid points though. But yeah, I favor the no micro way of this.

[Thuraash]

Kushan, I actually never noticed that. I'd definitely be in favor of the automatic reload over a manual force, though. It shouldn't be something a player has to worry about.

[Versian]

He's not saying that manual reloading replaced automatic reloading. He means this:

Your Troops are engaging the enemy. They run out of ammo. They automatically reload fresh clips. They Keep engaging. They automatically reloaded without you telling them to

The enemy is dead, your soldiers are hanging around with less than full clips, here you actually tell them to reload so that the next time they face the enemy they don't run out of ammo immediately.

It makes sense, but this too will probably be automated, simple: Units reload by themselves when there are no longer enemies nearby (they were killed or they ran away).

I'm not against a manual option of reloading, ImmortalChaos's suggestion is good, but that feature will probably be automated as well. Tons and tons of micro does not define a good RTS game imo.

[Thuraash]

Versian, I'm not sure who your comment is directed to, but since it's right below mine, I'll assume.

Auto-reloading after battles is exactly what I was talking about. I was supporting the argument that the process should automated as well. Reloading after battles, just like during battles, should be a non-issue for the player. The unit should take care of it on its own. Sorry for being unclear.

[Colonel Brom]

All units that have a ammo gun will have a pre-set amount of ammo and when this runs out they auto reload but their is no ammo limit so you never run out. :spartaaa: :bump:

[creepiest dani]

I love the idea of units having to reload their weapons. I was thinking, wouldn't it be superb (visually) if units could use one-handed weapons in melee, especially if the effect of weapons (the "damage model") is closer to how one would expect it to be? Obviously a bolter would be much better than a sword in melee, since bolter rounds can't be parried with a melee weapon, unlike the sword. Why would a Space Marine not use only the bolter in melee then? That's where reloading comes in. It would not be possible because he would run out of ammo and he would be unable to reload the weapon while engaged in melee.

[Sturmtruppen]

im not sure if i understand, why would a space marine be using any ammo if hes in melee? i rather see the sword... then a melee-ranged bolter pistol

[Versian]

Because he has two hands.

It's actually quite smart, because if the enemy is focusing on blocking your sword, you can use your other hand to shoot him.

What he means is that ranged weapons don't become totally useless in melee. Which makes sense, in close combat, a weapon can still fire. This only works for small weapons, for heavier weapons you're kinda forced to club people with it, a la heavy bolter.

[Blackheart]

Obviously a bolter would be much better than a sword in melee,

Ranged weapons require much more accuracy and skill to use in melee than actual melee weapons do. Shooting a bolter in close combat would probably guarentee that you waste ammo against a capable melee fighter.

[creepiest dani]

How much accuracy do you need to shoot someone at point blank range? The idea is, if both are capable fighters, the one with the bolter can much easier and faster create a window to shoot than breach the opponent's defense with his melee weapon.

[Blackheart]

How much accuracy do you need to shoot someone at point blank range?

Against a fast moving target that's attacking you, immense, almost godlike accuracy to hit reliably. This compared to a chainsword, which has much more hit area, and you swing it in an arc-- it takes much, much less skill to actually hit with it.

[Ghost Sniper]

Not to mention bolters also fire high explosive ammuniton...

[ImmortalChaos]

Obviously a bolter would be much better than a sword in melee,
This is 100% true.

However, a chain or powersword simply wreaks a boltgun in melee. Much easier to hit with, much more stopping power, and you don't need to worry about magazines running out and having to reload.

[Sturmtruppen]

i dont mind having pistols in melee for looks and effects, but we dont need to over complicate them with reload and accuracy and all that other stuff... just let it be apart of the melee set...

[Croaxleigh]

We're starting to swerve a bit off-topic here, folks; while the first post about melee dealt with reloading, only one of the eight posts since then have even mentioned it. If you want to talk about the specifics of melee combat then please do it in another thread.

[Pseudonymn]

Here's a wrench in your cogs for you all:

Balance is tweaked at the DPS level, where combat in RTS/RTT games is truly abstracted. If a unit of Space Marines have a DPS value attached to them, what difference does it make whether or not they reload their guns? If they stop to reload their weapon, their DPS will not have changed any whatsoever and, accordingly, reloading weapons would have no bearing on overall balance.

At the end of the day, it's just an animation; a little bit of eyecandy. The question then becomes, "Is it worth the development overhead and will adding such features as these take resources away from more important concerns like, oh say, balancing and testing the game properly?"

[Blackheart]

DPS is not the whole picture. One must also consider pauses and burst damage if you want to truelly balance it. If you're focused on DPS and don't think about anything else, you will fail in balancing.

[Hive_Node]

All these 'realistic' ideas are seriously detracted from the fun factor of a game, which is all that should really matter to be honest. The only weapons that should reload are the ones that obviously only have a single bullet in them.

[ImmortalChaos]

Reloading would not be calculated into DPS- it's too dependant on the battlefeild situation. You could theoretically never once reload in the middle of battle with wise use of hit and run tactics and manual reloads after skirmishes.

Reloading would serve as a sudden, temportary halt in DPS- Punishing cerrain weapons for standing about and doing nothing but shooting without thinking.

It would be a big deal in gameplay- one more reason to upgrade to a backpack-fed heavy bolter other than just damage. Scout marines might be able to reload faster than regular ones (I know thats a bit of a reach for fluff), and with their fast run speed they would be able to take full advantage of the reload times of other units.

In my opinion the only things that could deter from the fun factor are making it too tedious: If every weapon had to reload, if reload times were long, and if they happened a lot.

Managing key things like that would make reload times a very interesting strategic element while maintaining the fun factor- we came to see things blow up, not guys constantly reloading.

[creepiest dani]

@Hive_Node

All these 'realistic' ideas are seriously detracted from the fun factor of a game, which is all that should really matter to be honest. The only weapons that should reload are the ones that obviously only have a single bullet in them.
"Fun" is such a subjective notion. Do all these "realistic ideas" really "detract from the fun factor of a game", or just for you? I think it's the latter. What's fun for you may be chillingly unthrilling for the next guy. The question here is: does it really add anything to the game? I agree that my idea of units using single-handed weapons in melee, other than a "wow" factor, does not. It fits in the category of "sync kills" and other eye candy.

Pseudonymn on the other hand poses an interesting question: does reloading have any bearing on overall balance? I think it can have. It can be used as an alternative method of balancing certain powerful weapons, such as the Heavy Bolter: either you have them deal a lower damage without any pauses, or have them deal greater damage but with considerable pauses when reloading. In both cases you could have the same average DPS within a certain time frame, but which one creates the most interesting scenarios?



we came to see things blow up, not guys constantly reloadingI for one would like to see brief reloading animations for most weapons, even if it's just eye candy. But, as someone mentioned, CoH already has it, so I expect DoW 2 will have it as well.

[Sturmtruppen]

as good as an auto-reload when not in combat sound, its really not a huge problem in CoH, yes it sucks when it happens, when machine gun fire 3 rounds and starts the reload cycle, but generally speaking its not game breaking, its a nice feature to have bit not required...

i dont see why they wouldnt introduce normal reload cycles tho... it looks cooler too, can be as short as the cooldown between bursts, so DPS wont have much of a difference... if you are really concerned about DPS, you have a billion other variables to worry about anyway

[_vertinox_]

"Fun" is such a subjective notion. Do all these "realistic ideas" really "detract from the fun factor of a game", or just for you? I think it's the latter. What's fun for you may be chillingly unthrilling for the next guy.

If a Space Marine stands there like a zombie and shoots until he dies with infinite ammo and no reloading then its "ho hum". Adds nothing to nobody.

If a Space Marine acts like a living breathing being, ducks behind cover, shoots until he empties his clips, reloads, and then fires some more then it adds quite of bit of fun to watch as long as you don't have to baby sit him. Now Relic said, the AI will be smart enough that you don't have to.

And you don't even have to be a "pro-realism" player either. You can be an average gamer seeing the Space Marine do something very cool looking and get immersed into the game and actually connect with the character in the battle rather than just some clone meat for the grinder.

If reload times are factored in depending on the weapon, it only adds more gameplay features and doesn't take away. It adds more depth and as long as it doesn't cause you do have to micro or bang your keyboard in frustration at the stupid AI then its still better than the zombie bots.

I think there goal is to create an RTS that no one has attempted to do so before. If nothing else they are trying to avoid the "Starcraft with 40K model" syndrome and want to break the mold.

[Pseudonymn]

Blackheart, that is patently untrue. Take a good look at Starcraft. I say that only to point out a game that is reported to have nigh perfect balance, not to turn this thread in to another DoW vs SC argument, so let's all not go that route.

Immortal Chaos, the thing is the whole squad won't all be reloading at the same time, unless you have your way and a manual reload button is supplied. That being the case, the drop in DPS in a 6 man SM squad (no HW upgrades) will only be 1/6th of the total DPS for the 2-3 seconds it would take to reload a bolt gun for every gun not firing. That's not a lot to worry about and so balance really hasn't been altered. All that's happened is the average min/max DPS values that the squad will output may widen slightly, and we're back to base DPS values anyhow. Sure there's a brief lull in a single marine's firing phase, bur reload animations are still little more than eyecandy when you have the rest of the squad busy doing their thing at the same time.

I'm not suggesting that they not be included, I just don't feel that they would have the net effect on balance that people suggest they would. The odds of having an entire squad stop firing to reload at the same instant, such that they are doing little to no DPS, work against the argument for balance.

Does it add tactical depth? Perhaps. It would depend on the weapons load-out. A 2-man IG HWT squad, for instance, would have a definite break in their DPS while they reload, allowing for Sluggaz to assault them and close to melee. I doubt very much you'd get such a reprieve from any SM squad, however.

[Blackheart]

Blackheart, that is patently untrue. Take a good look at Starcraft. I say that only to point out a game that is reported to have nigh perfect balance, not to turn this thread in to another DoW vs SC argument, so let's all not go that route.
Don't point to SC, it's boring, and this game is, thankfully, not going to be like SC.

Burst damage, pauses, and DPS ar eall factors in the Essence Engine, along with range and cover.

[Croaxleigh]

Please don't let this get dragged off into another argument about DPS.

[Sturmtruppen]

i think people are overreacting with the "while my super weapon is reloading, hes ganna charge me" thing... its really not an issue, play CoH a few times and pretent its DoW2, and you'll notice that this isnt possible 99% of the time

[Pseudonymn]

With respect, how can there be discussion about using weapon reloads as a balancing tool without at least making mention of DPS? If you insist, I'll shut up about it though.

[ImmortalChaos]

I honestly did not take into consideration whatsoever that squad members would reload sperately...

I suppose if they did reload seperately, than reloading would simply introduce wonky DPS drops that didnt make too much an impact on gameplay.

Everyone shooting and reloading at the same time obviously opens up more tactical depth in what I was suggesting earlier, but it would look kind of retarded and not worth it to be honest... :lol:

[Sachiel]

Rather than reloading in the middle of a fight, perhaps as a liitle squad graphic, they reload and check their weapons.

[Blackheart]

It's not a DPS drop, that's a shitty way to describe it. What it is, as I said, is a burst then a pause. It does not ahve the same effect as flat out DPs.

At the risk of annoying the mods, take "City of Villains"'s "Stalker" and "Scrapper" archetype.

They are both offense-oriented melee attackers, however, the scrapper has much better DPS than almost all stalker builds, and more durable as well.

The Stalkers, however, make up for this with huge amounts of burst damage-- In the first moments of combat, they can rapidly kill almost any enemy the party may face except for the very upper tiers which take an entire party to take on. Between these bursts of huge amounts of damage, the Stalker can only do minor to moderate amounts, as their attacks do much less than a Scrapper, but in PVP this makes stalkers very useful, as they can instantly take down all other archetypes except the very strongest defensive one in two attacks (as one-hit-kills are disabled in pvp)

Burst damage, thus, allows a large amount of damage to be put out over a short period of time, then a pause, and then another large amount. DPS on the other hand is a constant flow of damage, and is usualyl much smaller than burst damage.

To bring this back on topic, and to relate what I'm saying about the game... depending on how close the enemy is, bolters would fire in short bursts of three to five shots , and wait a moment, another burst, etc, until they've fired twenty shots. If the enemy is closer, they'd fire more often, almost to the point of being fully automatic, again until twenty shots... making charging a space marine squad somewhat risky, so strategy needs to be used.

This suits Space Marines' bolters much better than a constant stream of low-damage fire, and it just looks better besides.

[ImmortalChaos]

I see what you're saying but it kinda gets muddled up by each member in the squad reloading on its own.

Honestly it will be near completely impossible to use reloading to your advantage unless the entire squad always fired the same ammount of bullets and always reloaded at the same time, and that's obviously not going to happen.

I don't have a problem with having reload times anyways, but it'll end up being something that just ...happens... Not much tactical advantage/micro oppertnities there.

[Blackheart]

It's mostly an issue for things such as tanks, heavy weapon teams, and turrets. Squads make up for it by not reloading at the same time, but an Imperial Guard HWT with a heavy bolter would have to let their bolter cool down as they hooked up another ammo box. A tank does a lot of burst damage as well, firing once and taking several seconds to reload, as do some heavy weapons (missile launchers come to mind).

This would allow a vehicle to get in close after a missed missile launcher shot and do more damage before the next shot., and then back up to try and gain range again-- thus increasing the micro needed as opposed to the missile launcher firing once a second and doing steady damage per second.

[ImmortalChaos]

It would still have an impact on single-entity units, but honestly I'm kinda sad that it won't really work for squads :p

[Pseudonymn]

@Blackheart:
No, a DPS drop is not a shitty way to describe anything. I'm afraid you're dead wrong on that point. And here is the flaw in your argument:

Scout Marine Sniper Rifle (http://wiki.reliccommunity.com/Scout_Marine_Squad#Sniper_Rifle)
Ranger Squad Long Rifle (http://wiki.reliccommunity.com/Ranger_Squad#Long_Rifle)
Vindicare Exitus Rifle (http://wiki.reliccommunity.com/Vindicare_Assassin#Exitus_Rifle)

While each of these weapons have high min/max base damage values per shot, or burst fire as you have put it; coupled with their reload time (the irony is delicious, isn't it?), they are rated against other weapons using a DPS value. Accordingly, all damage tables in the community Wiki are listed in "Damage Per Second".

It's simple math really.

If a 300 HP rifleman has a rifle that does 200 damage per shot every 3 seconds and goes up against another 300 HP rifleman who has a rifle that does 150 damage every 2 seconds, that rifleman is going to be removed from the map. Period.

It's easy to assume that the first rifleman has the better weapon, and he does if everything he did only required one shot. But as soon as he needs more than one, the second rifleman takes the spotlight. His is the better weapon because his weapon is doing more damage over time - to the tune of 50 points more for every two shots that the first one can muster. It's just that simple.

DPS doesn't get thrown out the window simply because one weapon's rate of fire is faster or slower than another's.

I've already pointed out the flaw in assuming that reload times are going to affect balance in any drastic way. Apart from things like HW teams, we'll only notice a slight drop in their overall DPS (hah, I used that word again :p) for every weapon that reloads. We could abstract that further on the damage tables (since we know the ROF and the length of time it would take to reload a single weapon) by widening the margin between the average min/max DPS that any given squad will do over time. And just as they do now, people will plan their strategies accordingly.

Weapon reloads are eyecandy.

The rest of your comments were subjective, and you're certainly entitled to your opinion. Personally, I don't have a problem with marines firing on full auto for a constant stream of fire. Reloads? Sure. But burst fire is just another piece of eyecandy and really has no discussion value.

[Ogra_Chief]

Why over complicate the game? :moefixed:

[Pseudonymn]

Those are my thoughts precisely.

[ImmortalChaos]

He didnt really overcomplicate anything. In fact he simplified like fruiting mad for his example :p

Anyways, I'd really like to see units ducking behind cover for a quick reload here and there, but as said, on squads it will be mostly eye-candy. Its just impossible to control every squad member at once, and taking advantage of reloading becomes impossible.

[creepiest dani]

Pseudonymn, let us imagine the following cases: a weapon that does 350 damage every 5 seconds, one that does 210 damage every 3 seconds, and one that does 140 damage every 2 seconds.

A: 350 dmg / 5 sec
B: 210 dmg / 3 sec
C: 140 dmg / 2 sec

All these weapons have the same average damage per second (DPS), namely 70. But does it really tell us anything relevant about them?

Let's see how much damage they deal in 9 seconds, and in how many shots:
A: 350 dmg, 1 shot -- 8 seconds idle time
B: 630 dmg, 3 shots -- 6 sec idle
C: 560 dmg, 4 shots -- 5 sec idle

[Blackheart]

DPS doesn't get thrown out the window simply because one weapon's rate of fire is faster or slower than another's.

It becomes more and more worthless the slower the fire rate, and on that, I will not budge.

Take two weapons that fire 100 DPS.
One fires one shot every ten seconds, the other fires one shot every second.

The missile launcher does 1000 burst damage, but takes ten seconds to reload and then fire again.
The bolter does 100 damage per second, firing one shot per second.

If you worry about DPS, the weapons are the same, and you are ignoring an important aspect of the game and you will either fail in balancing the game or you will be incapable of actually understanding the game itself.

Reloading allows for even more difference as well as simply making the game look better.

[ImmortalChaos]

The problem with all that, is that nothing ever really has low enough HP for burst damage like that to do anything.

If a missle laucncher in DoW2 has 1000 damage per hit and a reload time of ten seconds (holy SHIT that is massive :p), chances are most vehicles will end up having 6000+ HP. Burst damage that actually kills things instantly is almost always considered far too unforgiving, thus it is very, very rare that burst damage is a factor because units are given such HP that even weapons with long reload times will have to make several shots to kill a target.
Which in the end, means that DPS is almost always usable.

PS: We are way off topic again

EDIT: Now that I think of it, reloading DOES give burst damage a chance to be a factor without being too unforgiving: The damage a unit delivers in one BURST could be enough to kill targets in that short ammount of time, however the reload time would be such that it's damage stream was far less than that of another weapon. Thhis means weapon A could have 1000 damage per burst, but such a long reload time that weapon B only doing 500 damage per burst would do better in the long run (if the target actually survived).

This is, of course, also ruined by the fact that squad members would reload individually.

[Blackheart]

The problem with all that, is that nothing ever really has low enough HP for burst damage like that to do anything.
In DoW, this is true, but DoW is very slow-paced compared to what they've been doing recently with CoH.

In CoH, the more modern game that uses the Essence Engine, yes, it does. A single missile launch from a panzerschreck will instagib an infantryman, as well any tank cannon shot and indeed any artillery that directly hits them (rarely, you'll find entire squads instantly destroyed by artillery, but that's bad luck). However, because of their low rate of fire, they are not overpowered, and generally cannot wipe out entire squads quickly... instead they are best used against high defense units like tanks, which can be crippled very quickly even if they are not dsetroyed... forcing the tanks to retreat or die.

And yeah, it's off-topic, but not too much. The entire idea of reloading is, aside from adding a sense of "realism" to the game, to allow for different ways to balance the units in question and their damage dealing capabilities.

[stopgap]

chaos, i wouldnt worry about that to much, COH has a much deeper combat mechanic than DOW, and i have played both extensively, its a very different and bold type of gameplay that tends to work very well with creativity, it does however lack in numbers crunching.

[Pseudonymn]

Creepiest Dani makes an interesting argument. Indeed, at first glance it would appear that these weapons are distinct from each other. But as he points out, a snapshot view of these weapon's strengths doesn't show us anything particularly relevant. We need a larger sample size to truly get a feel for the role that reloads are playing on the DPS value of these three weapons.

For that, I've selected a standard 8-man Space Marine squad, with no sergeant and no attached leader unit. Their combined health, as we all should know, works out to 3120 HPs. Now, applying the damage table in Dani's post we can observe the following:

To find out the time that it would take each weapon to completely kill off the SM squad, I'll use the following formula,

(SM_Health / Damage_perShot) = Number_shotsRequired
(Number_ShotsRequired) * (Reload_Seconds) = Time_toKill

or

(SM_Health / Damage_perShot) * (Reload_Seconds) = Time_toKill

A: (3120/350)*5 = 44.57 seconds
B: (3120/210)*3 = 44.57 seconds
C: (3120/140)*2 = 44.57 seconds

The number of individual shots each weapon required in order to finish off the squad is interesting but ultimately irrelevant, so I'll let you all work that out on your own.

But an interesting thing happened when we increased the sample size: Though the weapons are delivering distinct units of damage per shot, over time they will all do (nearly) the same exact amout of damage, and in this case killing off 8 Space Marines in the exact same legnth of time. The average DPS may show us some disparities over the short term, but over the long term, the margin of difference between these weapons is reduced to the point of being insignificant. That is to say that, in some arbitrarily large unit of health points; 350, 210, and 140 damage per individual shot doesn't make much of an impact.

The bottom line here is that reloads didn't play a significant role in killing off the Space Marines and were just eyecandy over the long term (broken record, I know), adding no particular tactical depth whatsoever (an 8-man squad will not all stop to reload at the same time). A weapon's DPS remains its defining factor, which reloads will affect but ultimately not replace.

[Blackheart]

Because you're only looking at the long term. You also don't keep in mind that killing one space marine reduces that squad's power dramatically, making burst damage more useful against something like a Space Marine with small squad counts. The faster you get down the first, second, etc marine, the less damage they can do to your own squads. Against an Ork mob with lots of boyz, however, this burst damage isn't quite as good because it overkills. Five marines in a squad, and the first one goes down... that's 20% of their firepower. 20 boyz in a mob, one goes down.. that's 5% of their firepower.

Think of it like a sniper rifle versus a machinegun. A trained Sniper is great against low numbers of elite soldiers as each individual shot will usually kill one enemy, and the machinegun is great against high numbers of poorly trained soldiers because they can cover more ground and pin them down while continuing to fire. That's basicly the essence of the difference between burst and dps style damage schemes.

You won't necessarilly be destroying their squads with each conflict anyway, but rather, pushing them off the victory point in order to grab and prepare for their counter-attack.




... let's get back on topic. I fear the mods will close this thread soon.




Regardless of all the debates, reload is important for another reason... a sense of realism. Watching an Imperial Guard conscript duck behind cover, toss aside the battery and replace it with a new one before popping up and firing again... that just sounds awesome. Same for Space Marines. Other races would be different, but not all of them. Some races wouldn't reload at all with their primary infantry weapons-- tau and necron come to mind, although I don't know much about the Tau weaponry... and these would behave much differently, adding distinction between the races/factions.

[ImmortalChaos]

Tau would reload, their pulse rifles can only carry so many charges.

Necrons would not have to reload as far as I know. Another means to counter their rediculous slowness, and perhaps the fact that they might not use cover.

[Blackheart]

Plasma guns used by the Imperium of Man don't have to reload, but rather, recharge. The way I immagine plasma guns used is one shot, recharge, antoher shot, but perhaps I'm strange in thinking that (I prefer the mkII variant to the dangerous mkI).

[LoneWolf666]

As long as reloading is implemented as it is in CoH, I'm for it. Several weapons in WH40k universe do need reloading, some don't. It shouldn't affect balance as it cuts into the RoF uniformly. With the level of detail available in DoW2, it would be a sin not to throw in some extra animations. :p

[Pseudonymn]

Blackheart, if you are suggesting that I am making my argument within a vacuum (admittedly, I am) as though to invalidate my comments, don't turn about and do the same in yours. As often as there are space marines lost in a squad, so too are there going to be losses on the other side. The things that will count are the comparative DPS and toughness of each squad in combat, and whether or not they've been set up to hard/soft counter their opponents. The reloads in between hardly factor in at all. Do the math for yourself and see.

I think we must all inherently know this on some level, as people often conclude their remarks with how "realistic " or "awesome" looking it would be to see their troops duck into cover to reload or whatever.

In that regaard, I'm not saying reloads shouldn't be added - I'm all for eyecandy in my games, but not at the expense of gameplay. I'm simply arguing from the standpoint that reloads won't have as significant an affect on the battlefield as has been suggested (or even hoped by some), except for cases where you have one or two-man heavy weapons teams.

Adding reloads for eyecandy's sake is win-win. Adding reloads under the assumption that they will be the deciding factor is false.

[Blackheart]

I never said they'd be the deciding factor, only another way to balance. As my argument pointed out, they're just another way to balance things, adding another layer of diversity and allowing for more damage over a shorter period of time while still keeping it balanced by making it overkill.

Like using a tank cannon to kill a conscript. It's super effective, but a heavy bolter would work better because it has more shots in before it reloads and each shot won't overkill. Much the same, a wall of lasguns would fire in single shot bursts, as opposed to, say, a bolter, which might fire in three to five shot bursts. The bolter would do more damage quicker and thus be able to deal with stronger enemies, but the lascannon doesn't overkill because it's semi-automatic.

And reloads could further balance this, by making the lasgun able to fire longer before reloading. They might have the same clip size, but the bolter reloads more often because it uses burstfire. And this assumes they take the exact same time to reload. A Space Marine might reload faster on the move than a Guardsman (probably would actually) for example, while a guardsman standing in a firing line might be trained to very quickly switch out their clip while they're still and reload much slower on the move. And the fact that there's less marines per squad amplifies this effect as each moment spent reloading has a much larger effect on a marine squad than a guardsman squad.

If there was no reloading, then the balance of the two guns would be much different, comprende?

[Pseudonymn]

A tank cannon will likely kill more than just a single conscript in and through its area of effect (the Leeman rus was nerfed in that respect). But anyway, I get the examples. I really do. I just choose to ignore/not read most of them after seeing the first one about burst fire.

You said in another thread that, essentially, you were not in favor of adding complexity for complexity's sake. Have I misinterpreted you? Because that's what all of this sounds like. More to the point, the concept of "overkill" on weapons is already understood in DoW without having to resort to reloads to reflect any of it. It just isn't adding the tactical depth that people are suggesting.

Now, I've already proven this mathematically without resorting to contrived examples. Granted it was in a vacuum, but the principle is sound nonetheless. If you or anyone else disagrees, come up with something a little more salient than yet another meaty example or, worse, some unsubstantiated opinion like, "It would look cool," because, honestly, they are getting wearisome.

[Blackheart]

This isn't adding complexity for complexity's sake. The concept of reload is already in the game-- rather, I'm arguing that there's no need to take it out, which is what you appeared to be arguing about.

[Pseudonymn]

Not at all. I've said - repeatedly - that it's great for eyecandy, just that it doesn't add as much tactical value as some suggest.

[Blackheart]

I haven't been arguing for tactical value, just a balancing effect.

I would argue there's a definite tactical value for heavy weapons and anything with a particularly long reload time though. The example I gave of the stalker archetype in City of Heroes-- enough damage to seriously injure a unit very quickly, or take it out in just a few seconds, is very tactically valuable. The tactical value comes in for things such as missile launchers, lascannons, etc. It also depends on how they do burst-- do they fire the whole burst at one member of the squad, or at the squad itself? The former would mean burst weapons aren't as good against high number units like Boyz and Conscripts, while the latter would mean that they're a bit better because they offer more quickly taking down the number of guns that the enemy force can fire.

So by all technicalities, it really does have tactical value, just not an immense amount. You can't just look at raw damage per second when you're dealing with multiple enemies, that's misleading. A weapon that does 1000 DPS, but only activates once every ten seconds, is quite useful against vehicles with large amounts of HP. A weapon that has 50 DPS, but fires multiple times every second, is very useful against numerous light infantrymen.

take the difference between CoH's Panzerschreck and a .30 cal MG. Assuming 100% accuracy, a panzerschreck can easilly cripple a light vehicle in one shot, while a .30 cal will do very poorly. With the long reload time of the anzerschreck though, the 30 cal will far surpass the Panzerschreck's usefulness against infantry.

[Pseudonymn]

On those points, I would say that we have an understanding and, if you review my posts, it is indeed essentially what I've been saying all along. The heart of my argument has been directed to those who felt reloads at the squad level could somehow be used as a significant balancing tool or would provide tactical depth in any but the examples already mentioned.

There is one other point of interest that I would like to note, however. If we turn our attention to cartridge-fed autocannons used in WW2, we can observe large-caliber guns, such as AAA flak autocannons, being fired continuously at a high rate of fire, with fresh rounds being loaded in through the top of the weapon.

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-6467131817054500369

The IG's autocannon-upgraded HW team in DoW also shows this mechanic in action. We have both realism and the eyecandy of reloads, and the weapon's specific DPS (or burst fire, if you like) all wrapped up in one neat and tidy package.

Just thought I'd throw that out there.

[MagosMechanicus]

Small problem with your calculations, Pseudonymn - a squad doesn't share its hitpoints in one pool. Though you've mentioned overkill you haven't taken it into account properly. Now assuming 3120/8=390 HP for each Marine, how long will these weapons take to kill a squad?
[Shots required per 390HP Marine †]*[Time between shots]*[Total Marines]=[Time to kill]
A: 2*5*8=80
B: 2*3*8=48
C: 3*2*8=48

So against a squad of 8 390HP Marines weapon A needs a good 80 seconds because it spends 44% of its damage ((700-390)/700~0.44) on overkill.
Another thing to consider is how damage output is a function not of HP total but of the number of members still alive.

So yes, reloading does have some tactical effect and raw DPS does not give the full picture. Still, the effect isn't that major - both B and C will take the same amount of time, for instance.

†: Calculated using ceil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceiling_function)(390/[Damage Per Shot])

[Pseudonymn]

Point taken.

[Thuraash]

I'm going to hazard to jump in here, with, I believe, a different perspective:

It's all well and good to crunch theoretical DPS values, or shot damages and reload times, but I don't think this is a complete or valid way to go about analyzing the Essence engine, here's why:
AFAIK, DPS isn't a great guage of damage in the new engine, simply because of how huge an effect accuracy and cover have on gameplay. A weapon can have a wide range of effectiveness, and behave completely differently at long range or short. Calculating time-to-kill for various damage per shot and refire rates is all good, but there are a lot of other factors. Generally speaking, accuracy vs. infantry is pretty low, especially for higher-yield weapons (with the notable exception of sniper rifles), and this tilts the scales in favor of lighter damage per shot with higher ROF and/or more accurate weapons. Also, as Blackheart said, squad members have distinct life-bars, so overkill is also a major factor.

[Sturmtruppen]

i dont know why reload needs 100posts to discuss... is accuracy next? its just 1 out of hundreds of elements in a weapon, yes it does have balancing effect, but so does 99 other things in that same weapon :P

[ImmortalChaos]

AFAIK, DPS isn't a great guage of damage in the new engine, simply because of how huge an effect accuracy and cover have on gameplay.
Unless a weapon's accuracy is under 40-50%, or if reload times over 3+ seconds, DPS will be a very good way to gauge a unit's damage reliability.

If it gets to a point where a weapon's accuracy is so low that you cant get a resonable idea of that unit's usefulness through DPS, the unit will be so horribly luck based that games revolving around it would be more like elaborite coin-tosses.

Not fun at all.

[Blackheart]

Unless a weapon's accuracy is under 40-50%

At long range, most weapons are under 50%.

[ImmortalChaos]

Mabey in WW2 with an ancient garand/equiv, yeah. But a tactical marine with a boltgun? A dark reaper, who can see out the barrel of his weapon? Just about anything that isn't an ork with something blasty?

Damage being reduced over long range works fine in CoH, however I do hope that it's effect is much smaller in DoW2. We do have melee to balance in, after all.

[Infidelicious]

Balancing in Melee makes it even more likely weapons will have reduced long range accuracy. Especially since it's been stated that ranged weapons against targets not in cover have been significantly increased in lethality.

Nobody is going to pick foot slogging melee troops if units have very high accuracy against them from their max range when they are closing unless you hop from cover to cover, giving the enemy time to kite / bring additional forces to bear.

[timlxq]

Reloading in DoW won't be as simple due to the squad system. If I had a taq squad with one rocket launcher, 1 plasma gun, 1 flamer, 1 heavy bolter and 4 more normal bolters, how am I gonna reload all of them without using every weapon to its full capacity?

[Border Patrol]

every individual unit has its own reload timer adjusted to its particlar weapon. squads dont all fire in unison nor do they decide "hey guys we should reload in sync with each other, it would look badass!" a rocket launcher would have a different reload time and a different clip capacity from a heavy bolter.
why is there honestly any speculation going on about this at all?

[Mullertime]

@Border Patrol

I think he's referring more to manual reload
In which case, it's an extremely good argument against manual reloading

However, to be really honest, I agree, this is pretty pointless and is basically adding little detailed extras, following the logic that the more complicated and intricate a game is, the more fun it is to play.

What will mad DoW fantastic and stand out from others, were things that were major, yet simple. Reinforcement was an absolute joy to see. The unit basically teleported onto the screen with your troops. No funny "run back to base to reinforce" or wasted animation of them arriving. Teleport: And that was it. But for such a simple plan, it added a whole level of style to the game. (This reall neat nitty gritty edge of a squad desperately holding on and trying to regain strength. So you have this nitty gritty fight and can try to replenish losses without having to run back an forth or leave battle. Much more fun! And that's what this game should be: Fun. If you lose any fun to make it more realistic, then you're ruining the game)

All we have here with these speculations and plans for the game, are basically minor and very complicated additions. And that is indeed the impact these changes will make: minor
Sorry, but the idea of extending reloading is pretty pointless if you ask me. The basic set-up seems pretty good the way is is. Okay, maybe add a quick pause here and there. But don't overcomplicate things.
Basically, a little animation to see the reload will suffice. Therefore, reloads should be more realistic (if the animation is done correctly) and not just "Let's add this reload for balance sake!" or "Let's force a set amount of ammo/reload...blah blah blah"

And that's it. Reloading is too unimportant to require the player to expend any added attanention on

The thing is, IMO, what made this game so fantastic was that it was fast, nitty-gritty, yet simple
We did not see the awful mistakes made in Empire Earth 2, a prime example of what happens when you overload a game with little gimicks and extras for the sake of being realistic (In this case: combat and fun suffered heavily)
Supreme Commander is a great game, but sometimes too complicated an too macro at times. So much is based on bases and teching... no simple: get troops and rush in for a good, nasty, drawn out fight

DoW is micro-intensive already, and you can put energies into some great fights, even in Tier 1. Yet it's simple! The strength of the micro is taken up with things like CC/ranged, flanking, breaking morale and keeping reinforced. (Depending on what we see in DoW2, some of this or it's impact might change)
These things are major and really make-or-break stuff. Useful too.
Adding extra micro of other, smaller and utterly pointless things will kill the simple fun. I'd rather win a skirmish by good troop management, movement and reinforcement... than reloading faster.
Any new additions: add passively.

So if you really want to work with ammo supplies, maybe have a sorta 'supply line' sorta thing based upon the ground you've captured and LP's. If a squad is broken from this line, then there's a dps penalty or something.
Any new addiitons... Keep it as something the player will need to be aware of and take into account. If it requires any additional micro, you've made it too complicated

[SM DAWN]

if we go with that idea then u should give the IG and option on the bar for full auto and power settings to change the efficiency of the lasgun. burning out the power cell accordingly

[Blackheart]

Mullertime: Reloading is already in the game, and you don't have to pay any attention to it at all. It doesn't involve limited ammo, that's a different thread entirelly... rather, it's just a certain amount of shots, before the unit pauses and reloads.

[Border Patrol]

which is why i have no idea why there is still any speculation on this subject at all...

[Pseudonymn]

Actually, the thread somewhat started out being one of those, "Wouldn't it be cool if..." type of threads, even if it wasn't stated in those terms precisely. The speculation and all came later.