+2

So this new webley

Yos 2 weeks ago in All Platforms / PC • updated by Mithril.Pigeon 1 week ago 20

From a game play standpoint how is this going to differ from the Webley we already have? Aside from it being slightly different visually and having a different animations what does this revolver offer? We all agreed we needed new content and 'new' is the keyword there. This gun is already in the game, like if you're gonna opt for a gun that wasn't even used anyway why not go for something even more obscure that is unique to the game? 


If the other guns in the new squad are just the same or slighter different variations of what we already have then how is that supposed to bring/keep players around? It will be the same as the scottish squad, a nice addition for sure, but ultimately something that didn't exactly add anything new to the game. 

Game Version:
.
Reproduction steps:
.
Output Log:
Gameplay

Also this new melee weapon, it is a copy and paste of the trench club. How much work was actually put into these new weapons?

"We need new content"


Adds Webley 2.0 with no differences and another melee weapon to throw onto our big pile of meme weapons.


Can't wait for this to turn into another P14/M1917 argument where we pretend this Webley is completely different to the one we already have. 

-1

it will have different stats and was purchased for use during the war just not state issued. If it's not "new" enough then no other weapons would be either.

I probably touched a nerve when I brought up your stupid argument on the P14/M1917. Anyway go back to the Tannenberg forums, you don't even play Verdun anymore so why do you still stroll around the forums trying to shoot down any idea you can? Like it's essentially the only thing you do at this point. I don't even know why I refer to you as a moderator when you don't even perform that duty. 


And if you're gonna claim you play unprivate that sweet sweet profile of yours mr moderator. Really I'd love to see how many hours you've invested into this game in the past two weeks, and how many you have on record, after all you've been playing since like 2013?


Aside from that why would the copy and paste revolver have different stats? It's the same gun. Once again if we have no issues throwing in guns that weren't used why not add something that's actually interesting? I know you don't give a shit about this game anymore, but some of us would prefer it to not die, hence our continued posts on this forum. In order to keep the game alive we need to keep players around and bring them back, answer me this all mighty moderator, what the fuck is some meme revolver that literally nobody cares about going to add to Verdun? Who's coming back for this? 


I'll save you time and answer the question for you, nobody, literally nobody is coming back for this or the meme shovel 2.0. Worst of all it's pretty much clear this squad will be the ANZACS or something related to the common wealth, which is most certainly a good addition at this point, much like our meme revolver and shovel we can throw the new squad onto our heaping pile of common wealth squads. Why add French squads, Germans, Austrians, or even a Russian squad when we can another common wealth one? You know that discrepancy in squad count that we have? Why address that let's just make it even greater by adding another one to the Entente, like I'm triggered about this, I can't imagine how the wehraboo whatamidoings are doing right now. 


INB4 You attempt to make some argument about historical accuracy or some shit. Only people who'd actually care about it are reddit and the x64 lobby, neither of which matter at all. Turns out some old man and a German larping as an Indian over the internet know fuck all about Verdun. Cool new and interesting shit would help this game, but instead yall push forward with this batshit crazy decision making process. You wouldn't even have to do any work for Austrians or Russians, just port them over from Tannenberg and suddenly Verdun players have access to loads of new content.


QUE the 


"keep feedback constructive!"

"No toxicity!"

"Be Civil!"


- "This account is now on moderation!"


"How can we find yet more ways to restrict peoples access from posting???"

Nope, not a nerve, just the simple point.


One of the roles as the Trench Rat/War Wolf is to answer questions, when they are things discussed countless times we have the default answers and the FaQs to go off but of course that's not really on topic here.


All guns will just be slight stat tweaks, that was my point to the complaint over it. It did see use however which isn't the same as ones we know that didn't.


If you don't care about historical details, why did you buy a game which emphasises it?

*Ignores most points made*


One of the roles? I guess it's the only role you do then. Why bother to answer these questions in a game you clearly don't care about? It's obvious you haven't cared about this for a long time now so why are you still here? You refuse to unprivate your profile because it would expose the fact you never play the game. 


If you don't care about Verdun, why are you for a moderator for it?


Maybe they'll be slight stat tweaks, but the devs could have at least gone for something that was interesting, with novelty and appeal, but instead they go for a gun identical to one we already. This isn't hard to understand, the game is dying, adding a revolver which is identical to one we already have isn't doing it any good. As I asked before Bishop, who is coming back to Verdun for a Webley clone Revolver? 


 Perhaps I bought Verdun because it was a fun shooter? Unlike the realism spergs who are here to larp, I just enjoy playing the game for what it is. I'm not going to incessantly cry about 'realism' and 'historical accuracy' in a video game. When the devs go all out on historical accuracy they tend to lower the quality of the game, Fort Douaumont is the best example of this. Sure it's historically accurate but it's an awful map that is terribly unbalanced and hated by the community. Or continually adding Entente squads when there is a clear discrepancy that should be addressed. Only adding things that are deemed as historically accurate is just self restricting the game to a point where none of the content we receive will be new or interesting. This really shouldn't be so hard to understand, the content added needs to appeal to players in order to get them back/ensure they stay. A Mosin Nagant would be identical to many of the rifles we already have, but it would be far more interesting to use than copy and paste sliding revolver. 

Spending my free time still helping to answer questions, still providing feedback to improve the game and backing ideas that haven't been ruled out before shows I don't care? Account has been private since I found out that it was a thing.


There aren't anything mind blowing left, the big focus being more the new squad than the new weapons.


So a fun shooter that is based on the historical detail, games not aimed to be realistic but there's none that really are. Squad discrepancy, there's even less there than there is for this squad. Who's going to come back for a reskinned Landser squad?

So you give feedback on a game you don't actually play? You care about a game because you post on the forums? Your account is private because you don't want people to see that you don't play a game you supposedly care about and are a moderator for. 


French Colonials, Russians, Austrians, there are plenty of options available that introduce a squad that would be far more unique than ANZACS and could bring in new weapons.


Once again for the central powers the Austrians spring to mind. The resources are already there and the squad could easily be ported over from Tannenberg, giving Verdun players access to loads of new content. 


I don't think anybody would come back for a reskinned landser squad, you've pointed out the issue with this whole thing, people don't come back for reskinned items. That's exactly what another commonwealth squad is. 


If the content offers virtually nothing new then it will do nothing to bring players back or keep players around.

-1

ANZACs will keep people around just like the scots did. I mean, everyone loved the new and unique gameplay options provided by an already existing squad type with already existing weapons!


-1

My comment seems to have disappeared despite being well-liked so let me do it again, but in a more mod-friendly way I hope your hot pockets taste nice bishop:

"I can't imagine how the wehraboo whatamidoings are doing right now"


Boy this is exactly what I wanted M2H to do! I support reskins! It's great that Entente gets new squad after new squad while Germany gets nothing but Kar98AZ nerfs!
+1

What exactly could be a new squad type then, with new weapons+game play options to boot, in your opinion(s)? Just out of curiosity, first of all.

There's really nothing left in terms of actual new and different types of squads to add, in my mind. Or at least, I can't really think of any besides maybe a squad with explosive mines for call-ins, but that's really stretching it and likely overpowered. Also, a truly new squad type would in turn just keep the gap the same as both teams would have to have the same squad type shoehorned into the game. (especially for the Germans)

What the Scots added mainly anyway, was the option to have a different Entente Recon squad that wasn't French. The P14 was a bonus, easy and simpler, and then the MLE was the main justification for the squad. (Also, don't forget, they were a side project done during free time and could say a belated Christmas present.)


Of course, there's the French Sapeurs/Schilt Companies as a different option for the Entente's Engineer squad with a "reskinned" flamethrower, egg grenade, and semi-auto(?) pistol. (And then moved the US Marines to the Assault squad type) The Devs at least considered it beforehand, but I think they didn't want to deal with another flamethrower.


Especially when that the Wex is still on the rollercoaster of a debate that's: "Is it overpowered or underpowered, and how to balance it?", plus frankly it is just wonky. (Mechanically and visually, due to balance and apparent limitations) Maybe when/if the Wex is reworked and tweaked they'll reconsider it? The Devs have added things that were considered to be never added by the community. (e.g. the Ross)

What we don't have is a justification for the western front Austro-Hungarians, and at most they'd be a Sentry or Infantry squad btw. But, who knows they added the Romanians in Tannenberg, which caused team imbalance technically, so maybe the next squad will be for the Central Powers. If anyone can find some decent evidence that they might have had some unique weapons in the West, (and more than 50/50 possibility) then giving the Central Powers more options to have in Verdun would be a better possibility.


At the end of the day though, what does the "reskinned" revolver and shovel/club bring to the table? More options for whatever squad the players would like to play in Verdun. That's more to offer than a revolver for the US squads frankly. (Even tho it'd be nice)


I'm sorry the Devs appear to have decided (more than likely) to actually take a stand, put their foot down, etc. on something and keep with/to their historically inclined planning however? (Even tho, they're willing to and have stretched what's accurate) Especially when it comes to adding Russians and the Austro-Hungarians complete with their own set of weapons from Tannenberg.

Wish the same could've been said for other things the Devs planned for and tried, to be completely honest.

-1

I'm going to assume this is directed at me since it seems to be, but I can't know since you didn't hit the reply button.

"What exactly could be a new squad type then, with new weapons+game play options to boot, in your opinion(s)?"

I don't know, but then if you had asked me to come up with new squad types pre-how I wouldn't have come up with the assault and sentry squads.

"What the Scots added mainly anyway, was the option to have a different Entente Recon squad that wasn't French."

So essentially nothing, from a gameplay perspective. The rifles don't add much either. They're not very different from existing rifles.

"Of course, there's the French Sapeurs/Schilt Companies as a different option for the Entente's Engineer squad with a "reskinned" flamethrower, egg grenade, and semi-auto(?) pistol."

Actual new weapons opening up new ways to mess around? Sounds good to me. We're already dealing with one horribly broken flamethrower anyway, maybe that would give them the motivation to fix the thing.

I never asked for anything in the rest of the post, but I will say it'd be nice to have a mod representing the large chunk of players who don't want the game to go down the immersion shitter like the hit game Tannenberg.

Basically this. Also what do you mean? I heard Tannenberg was a great success because we removed all the exploits and made it mega realistic???

Russians, Austrian Hungarians, French Sappers, German Seebataillion. I'm completely opposed to adding any new squad types at this point, I don't see any obvious new ones that could feasibly be added and the balance of the current squad types is non-existent. The meta has always been Recon, so don't throw in another squad type until the current balance problems are addressed. 


Any and all new squads should just be Recon or Arty. People like these squads and from a game play standpoint they're the only two worth a damn. 


"I'm sorry the Devs appear to have decided (more than likely) to actually take a stand, put their foot down, etc. on something and keep with/to their historically inclined planning however? (Even tho, they're willing to and have stretched what's accurate) Especially when it comes to adding Russians and the Austro-Hungarians complete with their own set of weapons from Tannenberg." 


And it is this delusional way of doing things that continues to screw over the game and will ensure it does not recover. Sticking to "historical accuracy" will achieve nothing and the refusal to add any kind of new and interesting content will result in Verdun continuing to decline. When you refuse to give up this gimmick, you're right, there's not much left to add, hence why it's time to abandon this pointless push for complete historical accuracy. This is even more pointless when you consider that you have everything to gain by adding new content into the game (even if its not historically accurate), while you stand nothing to gain by refusing to add it. 


The Scotts were a good squad, but they didn't exactly doing anything for the playerbase. In the end they were just appreciated by veterans/dedicated players because they're a recon squad with access to the most powerful rifle in the game. If they were a defensive or smoke squad nobody would even care about them. 


A new commonwealth squad will see the same fate. Some people might come back to check them out, but they'll quickly get bored cause they don't really feel all that different from squads they've already played. 

I suggested the Lee-Speed as a new Commonwealth weapon as an alternative to the Ross since the Stosstruppen can choose between an MP-18 and Arty Luger (or as a specialist weapon for a new squad), since it did see use in the war as an officer's private purchase weapon, but it would be more unique in that it uses a detachable magazine as well as a bayonet, whereas the sawn-off SMLE doesn't. Too bad it got shot down because the devs ruled it out.


I do appreciate the new revolver and melee weapon, but I just wished that the new squad was a bit more unique.

The rtluger is on pioniere, not stoss

According to the most up-to-date balance sheet, its getting moved to stoss. The Webley with a bayonet is also getting moved to the Canadian NCO.

Yellow = Suggestions


Orange = Implemented Suggestion


Green = Approved


Red = Denied


Doesn't entirely mean that loadouts will be changed, but some things might be changed some with the addition of the new squads and other suggestions on here. (e.g. A bayonet for the Observer roles)

My mistake then. I still feel like the Lee-Speed would've been a better (and easier) addition, though.