Bushka的最近内容

Austupaio 说:

I use Gamespot to see what's been released, maybe get some news, and to figure out what games are about. As for scores, they're pricks. They're biased, have odd opinions and most definitely favour games that hand them money.

点击展开...

I completely agree, but they were actually fairly honest on this one... I love MaB to death, but you've gotta take the good with the bad.  The original quest system is pretty bad, and theres not much else to do other than fight. While I think the unique combat system (something they did acknowledge) is enough to carry the game, others may disagree.

Well, good luck.  It's a great idea, but you should know it has already been tried and failed before. The last mod to try WWI was Calradia 1914, Gotterdammerung, which was a year or so long mod project.  Its failure seems to have created a bit of a stigma against WWI mods on the forum, so you may not receive much initial support here.  You could pm the creators or 1914, (I think Amigo was leading the project near the end) for access to the models.  However, I feel like it shut down because of a computer crash and loss of data, but no harm in trying.

Best of luck to ya!

Thats great news, I always loved using multi shot weaponry in Pirates by Yoshiboy.  But I thought you guys decided not to go for the multishot idea?

Spong 说:

Someone else is a fan of Appaloosa then?

点击展开...

Haha, you beat me to it.  I was going to suggest this as a new weapon, looks like you guys are way ahead of me though.  I assume the trade off is speed for power? Is accuracy affected?

Wait, did you actually get that to work? I've read about the LeMat, but I didn't think multiple shot types per gun were possible in MaB

Since Tull already made it in as an easter egg, perhaps a lovely pair of sandalwood .45's would be a more fitting prize in the chest there? Their advantage could be in a fast reload time, or perhaps power.  If you wanted a balanced easter egg, they could simply be reskined Walkers or something. 

Cruncher 说:

bushka sorry to say this but your avatar looks like a ballsack just saying

点击展开...

That was both relevant to the topic and astoundingly witty, kudos sir.

NaglFaar 说:

Ruthven 说:

NaglFaar 说:

Ruthven, how's the update coming? Any progress?

点击展开...

Nothing since I got into Warband. 

点击展开...

Hehehe, figures 

点击展开...

Thats understandable, I'd probably stop modding too if I got warband... and assuming I could mod.  How far along was the update? Any chance of a smaller release of any finished features?

Actually, I found that turning cheat mode on changed a few of my weapons in the quick battles; It gave me a pistol and ammo for farm defense, and actually switched the bow and arrows of the camp attack scene to that same pistol ammo set.  When I turned it off, the weapons returned to normal.  Dunno if thats just me though. 

He means you posted in a thread that hadn't been posted in for over a year.  It's generally frowned upon to necro threads, as they are no longer relevant.

Constantinus 说:

RATMdude92 说:

If I had to guess, I think this is more of an issue of rifles actually being crossbows and pistols being... well... pistols.  Rifle ammo is actually crossbow bolts and pistol ammo is bullets.  I'm pretty sure ammo types are hard-coded, making it impossible to mix and match ammos and weapon types (such as bows shooting throwing axes).  This is also why pistols and long guns have separate proficiencies; long guns are actually crossbows.  'Course I could be wrong, but that's my bet.

点击展开...

If both pistols and rifles use the same balistics mechanics, why not to make them all... say crosbows ... and forget about anything esle... so this is possible anyhow
Furthermore  I saw the mods, where you have bows, crossbows, and guns. So the skills system can also be tweaked with.

点击展开...

That might mess up the animations; currently, the pistols use the firearms animation, while the rifles use the crossbow one.  I'm not a modder, so I have no idea if these could easily be switched; either way, I'm against the merging of the two weapon sets and ammunition.  I think that the seperate ammuntion types forces the player to make some difficult inventory management choices. For example, a mounted rifleman has to make a decision between sacrificing extra ammuntion for a melee weapon, or relying on his gunnery skills.  In contrast, an infantry man might decide to opt for a sharps over a winchester; the point is the limited capacities force the player to make choices.  If ammo is lumped into one large pile, we may start to see players simply taking 3 rifles into battle, each to suit a different job. 

Limited inventory space is also crucial to keeping black powder charges fair.  Right now charges are relatively balanced because taking even one into battle takes up very precious inventory space.  If a player can carry 300 rounds of ammunition for any weapon, powder charges might become the norm. 

The other issue with increasing ammuntion was brought up earlier; right now U.S. troops are kept in check by their limited ammuntion capacities, and weak melee weapons.  This actually forces the player to make use of the hold fire command if they want to keep their men in the fight through a long battle.  It also makes troops like Zouaves have a purpose: their superior melee abilities afford your regulars some protection while your saving their ammo.  If troops are given access to large amounts of ammunition, then melee weapons will play an even smaller part than they do now.

Constantinus 说:

DamienZharkoff 说:

Well the thing is, you could make the larger ammunition rare, and far more expensive. So a case of 36 pistol rounds may cost 10 dollars, while a case of 50 rounds could cost upwards of 50 dollars (In a roleplay sense, you are basically forking out for a much more well made holder for said rounds) and give the larger bullet cases x5 the weight (So running with 150 things of lead on you could slow you down considerably)

点击展开...

Progressive ammo pricing could be used for the sake of balance, but is doesn't make any realistic sence. Winchester rifle weights around 4 kg.  1 Bullet weights around 17 gramms, so one rifle equals to around 200 bullets in weight. You can keep them around your body in bandoliers:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandolier

One of those can store up to 100 bullets. You can simply wear 2 across your chest + 1 as a belt resulting in 300 bullets total. The bandoliers  would cost no more than a dollar or two I guess. The only drawback is bullets weight. Those were widely used during the period. See? 20 bullets in one slot is an unrealistic outrage. =) I doubt large ammo packs would break the balance anyhow, unless you are a paranoid camper, who exploits "corner" trick during the siege.  =)

If it would be my decision I would furthermore elliminate difference between pistol and rifle bullets. There is no difference between calibers anyway. And all this micro-management is not adding to the fun this mod has to offer. In case bullets are universal and come in a large bunches - one can use the rifle + 2 colts and still have enough ammo for a long battle. Which is pretty realistic and a logical thing to do if your are a troublesome type.

点击展开...

I understand that it is physically possible to carry a lot of rounds, but I don't think it would suit gameplay balance well.  Large stocks of ammuntion reduce the already limited use of melee weapons in the game to near worthless levels, and allow players to abuse the system of inventory management.  Because while it may be possible to carry 300 rounds, it is much more difficult to carry two or three full length enfields onto the field, and keep them in your pockets with everything else.  The weight system has no effect on a mounted warrior, so increasing weight wouldn't solve any problems

Edit: I accidentally deleted my first few paragraphs while typing, so sorry if my thoughts are a little jumbled.

DamienZharkoff 说:

Bushka 说:

On the topic of bullet capacity, I'd actually have to disagree with most peoples thoughts here.  I think that the limited numbers, especially in rifle rounds, keeps the gameplay balanced.  If you actually want to be a dedicated rifleman, it forces you to make some sacrifices in other weaponry.  I think bullet numbers are also one of the few things that keeps pistols balanced; rifles seem to be much more efficient in most situations.  By giving pistols a greater capacity, it keeps them in the game longer, and frees up a slot or two for a melee weapon.

点击展开...

Yes, it is perfectly fair, especially when there is a glitch in the engine that doesn't register 60% of your hits.

点击展开...

I personally haven't noticed a lot of the phasing shots people talk about, but I suppose thats a valid point.  However, I don't think increasing bullet capacity is the way to solve that.  If it really is a huge problem, perhaps a large decrease in bullet velocity would help? Obviously that would hurt gameplay, but I don't really think having more lead to spew is really a solution to that particular problem.

On the topic of bullet capacity, I'd actually have to disagree with most peoples thoughts here.  I think that the limited numbers, especially in rifle rounds, keeps the gameplay balanced.  If you actually want to be a dedicated rifleman, it forces you to make some sacrifices in other weaponry.  I think bullet numbers are also one of the few things that keeps pistols balanced; rifles seem to be much more efficient in most situations.  By giving pistols a greater capacity, it keeps them in the game longer, and frees up a slot or two for a melee weapon. 

Actually, thats a good point. Though the constant fighting is fun for this beta/test plateform, the world map will have to come in at some point... I really like the idea of having a limited fight cycle, then a building period.  Since your time in a fight would be limited, you'd be forced to take more risks if you wanted to earn enough "money" to build good fortifications.  If you spent your time avoiding zombies and playing it safe till dawn, you'd be put in an unfavorable position for the next day without any defenses. 

Khorne 说:

So i downloaded the mod and played it for some time. it is really good. I had it to the point where there were no zombies around. Do they re-spawn like a regular game or something else?

And my post earlier about the fort building would work (in my opinion) with what you have. there are plenty of cars and objects that you could find and pick up or move. Make a temporary safe zone/stronghold for forward operations in the city. have a radio man, supply quartermasters, possibly a mission/ quest to save a supply convoy/caravan from zombie attack or rescue a lost crew.

点击展开...

At the simplest level you could probably do something dionesia style; simply save up enough "cash" (probably materials in this case?) and then spend a certain amount of time on construction.  This would require you to leave the battle ground, so it might not fit the spirit of the continous battle I suppose.  Actually doing in battle construction seems rather ambitious for the MaB engine.

Ha, I actually named my first character Eddie Dean... I'll be sure to check this out.  I'll try and kill em in a nice line too.