Types of Units/ Features you would like to see in EndWar Devs read

[Mr.Hanky2005]

Post anything you would like to see in EndWar, whether it's units, equiptment, or features. Hopefully the devs will read this, and impliment some of the things we requested. Please keep this on topic.


Without any further delay here is your thread.

[Wikoogle]

First, it says on ign that currently, it's not possible for all three factions to be involved in a battle.

I feel that's a mistake. I think in those areas where all three factions borders intersect, they should be able to fight each other for control. How awesome would it be if you had to strategically fight against and defeat not just one faction but both?

That one thing itself I don't think has ever been done before, having to take on two different factions in multiplayer. It would be a whole new dimension of gameplay.

Second, in single player, it would be awesome if the game felt real time. For example, by the time you finish fighting a battle at one frontier, the borders should shift at random. This way, it would create the illusion that while you're fighting, there were also fights going on in all the borders. This would make the game feel like a real war.

Also, it would be awesome if there was a mode where your objective is to get to and take over a certain area by whatever means neccesary. One example would be a Capital mode. You pick a capital. So does the AI. The object is to capture your AI's capital while protecting yours.

You have the full freedom to take any route you want, to approach from any country to get to that capital. You can locate your capital at a choke point etc.

You could even set it not as a capital but a secret weapons project. That way, you don't know where your opponents weapons project is being developed, ie. which area you have to capture.

You must first gather intelligence by capturing key intelligence areas to figure out where the weapons project is being developed, and then capture that, before your opponent does the same thing.

In short, I want single player in EndWar to feel like a game of risk, but with the battles outcomes decided not by a dice roll but by actual strategy.

And as a last note. I think that if Ubisoft pulls this game off so that the combat/gameplay is fun, as fun as Halo for example. This has a great chance to be THE game of the generation.

It's so revolutionary, and it appeals to so many different people. It appeals to RTS players, RPG players who like to power up their characters and teams, FPS players in the games combat mode, and players of games like Brothers in Arms and such too.

So I don't want Ubisoft to get bogged down by a release date. The greatest games of all time were games where the developer worked for years to perfect it. Starcraft, Halo, every blizzard game ever made, Bioshock, these were all games that were delayed many many times and turned out to be masterpieces because the developer took as much time as they need to create their vision of the game.

Ubisoft should give this game the same treatment. It's concept is so incredible that if Ubisoft gets it perfect the first time, not only will they have created a hit just as profitable as Halo or Starcraft, but they will have created an incredibly profitable franchise too and change gaming and RTS games forever.

[atacms]

http://www.spacewar.com/images/thel-truck-art-200-bg.jpg

US Army's THEL - tactical high energy laser used to shoot down missiles, rockets, mortar rounds and artillery shells.

The US has the lead in this field, pls. don't give this to the Europeans.

http://www.spacewar.com/reports/US_army_awards_contract...aser_weapon_999.html (http://www.spacewar.com/reports/US_army_awards_contract_to_develop_truck-mounted_laser_weapon_999.html)

[john_chi]

Would it be too much too ask for Canadian locations to be featured? I mean the war is supposed to take place in the North Atlantic. It would make a good staging area for an invasion of the U.S. if either Russia or Europe controlled Canada. So I would suggest including Montreal, Toronto, and some of the Atlantic islands.

[spamonater]

could there be "levels" of your army. say you have 32 units in your army. these 32 units are split up into 2 regiments, each regiments is split into 2 battalions, the battalion is than split in to squads of 4 units. this would let a player do both smaller more accurate moves and larger quicker moves.

[spamonater]

you need some sort of skirm mode both for players that want to play competitively(clans and so they can ply the same "race") and so that people can tryout teams before the choose one.(the second one may be taken care of by the single player.)

[KJ_White]

oh they have like 6 missions before and after that u choose ur side after playing like 2 missions with each faction and they're going to put an ai faction in terrorists!

[MarcusCrasus]

I've seen this feature in Rise & Fall: Civilizations at War and thought it was really cool. You are able to take control of your hero so for EndWar you could take control of a captain or sergeant in you army and fight as him but also be able to zoom out and resume issueing orders.

[atacms]

Much bigger maps please.

Reading the IGN preview, I was saddened to hear that the 40 maps will only be "roughly one square mile maps spread out across the North Atlantic."

Finally we have a game that drops us into 3rd person view and allows true line of sight yet our vision and firing ranges is limited to only 1 mile? What happened to advanced sensors and being able to fire at extended ranges?

My inital concern about the screenshots showing tanks firing at what was the equivalent of a knife fight left me wondering if it was just for purposes of showing some action in the screenshot. Now, I wonder and think that it's because that's probably the usual and perhaps close to maximum firing range of the tanks.

can't we have bigger maps (ie at least 10 sq miles)this way artillery, missiles and other units can show off somewhat accurate realism in firing ranges? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sadeyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

[KJ_White]

yeah true that would be nice, but what you'll probs find is that they have just made the maps so all the fighting is at close quarters which is a bit of a shame, anyway with a square mile a comanche unit would be able to destroy just about anything as long as there were atleast infantry to laser the targets.

[Da_Costa1982]

Health bonus beign dropped by parachute. And with the Red Prism logo since the red cross and red crescent are planing to fuse in an universal aid agency...

Hell a a whole buch of stuff beign dropped by parachute: reinforcements, weapons, vehicles (like the French did in Indochina), bombs, gas clouds, booby trapped supplies, napalm... Use your imagination. It would be cool to have this in no man's land so that the armies could fight for it, like that movie "A bridge too far"...

Some heavy and loud artillery as well as some mortars would be cool. Some RPG's and mines would be very welcomed... Guerilla support and sabotages of whole buildings would give an hand to making the game interesting, You could put them bursting into the action driving today's auto models equiped with captured equipment in the back (a bit like african guerilla, driving a pickup FIAT or Ford by the Seinne, shooting everyone in sight, ahh how beatiful)...

And some videos like Command and conquer did help create a real environment. Some TV shots with real or look a like logos from the main TV stations. Propaganda videos to help you pick up your side. Publicity (just like Verhoeven did for Robocop and Starship Troopers).

Aerial dogfight in mid atlantic. Recapture the pilot, or you lost the aerial dogfight, you land "behind enemy lines" and you're only going home until you reach your side, so start shootin'. An Azores naval and coastal campaign, since it would be easier to render part of islands than whole cities. Subway fighting, mooving through underground tunnels, snipers shooting for the bell tower (a lovely cliché).

Just some ideas... (to be put in action before feb2008, yeah right?...) yeap got to stop smokin' pot...

And yeah I want the thing for PC too.

[KJ_White]

i nice feature would be to see with the euro enforcers is that a certain proportion of them have like french accents, others have british accents, scottish accents and german accents etc. to vary it. this would make snese since they are a multitude of countries fighting as one.

i'm also curious as to if this gae if it comes out on pc if it will be compatible with physics accelarators

[atacms]

Originally posted by KJ_White:
i nice feature would be to see with the euro enforcers is that a certain proportion of them have like french accents, others have british accents, scottish accents and german accents etc. to vary it. this would make snese since they are a multitude of countries fighting as one.

i'm also curious as to if this gae if it comes out on pc if it will be compatible with physics accelarators

Together with voice variations, I'd like to see variations in faces so that not all infantry look the same, or engineers, etc. They could use a random generator so that it picks from a list of faces and mixes and matches the units so that you can have different faces for infantrman, engineers, snipers, etc.

[Da_Costa1982]

And we could see what each troop is using while killing. So if we see someone moving like a snail, let there be because the guy is loaded with stuff.

Some termo vision as well as night vision would be cool. Gas masks in case of toxic coulds. Operating some buggies would be cool for co-op buddies. One shoots the other drives...

And spy infiltration teams to force the opponent to act like a real army and check for autenticity. The several languages the players use would be cool since each army would be tempted to recruit "traitors" and spies from the other side, in order to infiltrate... hum too surreal. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

And shotguns/hunting weapons please.

And I want the damm thing for PC too. (although mine is quite crappy http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif )

[MarcusCrasus]

This sort of fits in with accents and looks but is all of North America united in this game so that Canada, Mexico, and the U.S. are all one country and decided to stick with the name America cause its a super sweet name? Maybe even both the Americas (North and South) are united to form a super America?

Also what happened to China and Vietnam and Korea and Mongolia? Did they just disappear or did Russia just take them over in ten years lol? Not like it couldn't. And Africa. Africa is pretty big. I'm not qiute sure that that could disappear.

I guess a better question is why are the other countries not included as like buffer nations or something. lol "America liberated China, Rice and toys are now 45% cheaper" ROLFMAO!

[dirrydude]

I'm just going to get the the point. I think that this game should implement some kind of prisoners of war. And lots and lots of customization. So much that I can get lost in.

[GeneralTruth]

After reading through all of the articles, I was left with the assumption that each player will be creating and customizing their own General that they will be playing as. I really hope that is the case. Imagine having a one-of-a-kind General that you could play as online (and off). You pick his name, age, what he looks like, body type, accent, etc. That would be awesome.

[spamonater]

Originally posted by MarcusCrasus:
This sort of fits in with accents and looks but is all of North America united in this game so that Canada, Mexico, and the U.S. are all one country and decided to stick with the name America cause its a super sweet name? Maybe even both the Americas (North and South) are united to form a super America?

Also what happened to China and Vietnam and Korea and Mongolia? Did they just disappear or did Russia just take them over in ten years lol? Not like it couldn't. And Africa. Africa is pretty big. I'm not qiute sure that that could disappear.

This is the north Atlantic theater. if this games is good then they will make a Pacific theater game with China vs USA vs Australia( British).

[KJ_White]

australia would unlikely side with the british in a conflict such as this, ever since since the end of WW2 the brits have taken a back seat to being australia no.1 ally it would most likely be that australia would try to keep out of the fighting between us and eu and focus on our neighbours to the north.

[Da_Costa1982]

What if there'll be to many generals? That would be a mess. Maybe if the players could vote, and there would be some sort of promotion. Starting from grunt to oficer and to strategic officer. Those in charge must be few in order for an actual strategy works well. Besides those guys in charge could then condecorate those troops that did the defined objectives better. Some sort of merit system would be cool.

What about if there was some sort of a independent third party that would would watch the battlefield and started to make comments as many times the soldiers do. example: "Sniper Ally", "Tank Neighborhood", "No Man Land's Square"... That way the guys that played the game for longer would started to feel themselves more veteran than newcomers...

[atacms]

Naval warfare of course.

I know they said in the Q&A that there won't be any, but I'd hope they might add it as updated content even before an expansion or sequel comes out.

[KJ_White]

i wonder if they fill in the gap of where the UN disapeared to, or if they're still there and like usual no one is listening to them.

[Mr.War1990]

Maybe some sort of medical unit, or squad to heal or repair troops, so that its not a matter of their critically wounded and u cant heal them sorta thing.

[MSG_Urban]

Here's my list, based on stuff I was doing for my RTS similar to this before I found out about endwar and shut the project down.

- Support Units: Guys that do more than just fighting. Examples:
---Combat Medical Response Team
---Combat Engineers
---Political Officers (Russia Only)

- Morale System: If your guys are loosing, depending on their level of training, some might try to run away. If no escape routes are possible, the fleeing troops may just get on their knees and surrender. Surrendered troops can be interrogated and used to gather battlefield information (if fog of war is included, the captured troop will reveal the terrain they have traversed. If not, they could reveal unit disposition, movement paths, or even better: They could play back the voice commands from the opposing general (only the ones regarding them).

- Drone Command Center/vehicle: If the game is going to have drones, which I heard it is, I think there should be some sort of field post or secondary command vehicle for controlling the drones, that way if the enemy knocks out the command vehicle, the drones die

- Realistic Urban Combat!! (PLEASEPLEASEPLEASEPLEASE!!!)
Seriously. I have not seen a single game with realistic urban warfare. When battles are going on in a city, most of the fighting doesnt take place in the streets. It happens from room to room in each of the individual buildings. And please don't just do like Command and Conquer where you just post guys in buildings, and then there are certain units that can force the infantry out of the building, etc. Please actually make room clearing, door breeching, flashbang and frag use, and even hand to hand CQB for SF units trained well enough. Also note that vehicles can support CQB breeching efforts by demolishing enemy strongholds in the building and creating new entrances.

- Realistic and smart snipers - Unlike CnC, please dont make the snipers these rapid fire cloaked units that just pick off any infantry they see. Please make them smart so they'll take out officers, ncos countersnipers, and heavy weapons first. Also you could make the traditional sniper TEAM rather than just a lone wolf shooter.

Example for JSF:
Sniper Team:
-------------------
Sniper
Camo: Ghillie suit
Primary Weapon: AS50 Countersnipe
Primary Upgrades: Flash Suppresor, Silencer, Digital Scope
Sidearm: ICQB Pistol
Equipment: Radio, Digital Binoculars, C4 Charges

Spotter/Assist
Camo: Ghillie Suit
Primary Weapon: MR-C
Primary Upgrades: Silencer, 4x Scope, M320 AGL
Sidearm: ICQB Pistol
Equipment: Radio, Telescopic Spotting Scope, C4 Charges

Something like that.

[KJ_White]

Seriously. I have not seen a single game with realistic urban warfare. When battles are going on in a city, most of the fighting doesnt take place in the streets. It happens from room to room in each of the individual buildings. And please don't just do like Command and Conquer where you just post guys in buildings, and then there are certain units that can force the infantry out of the building, etc. Please actually make room clearing, door breeching, flashbang and frag use, and even hand to hand CQB for SF units trained well enough. Also note that vehicles can support CQB breeching efforts by demolishing enemy strongholds in the building and creating new entrances.

this is an rts not fps most of that wouldn't work, sure u could have hand to hand combat but its not going to be like a fighting game it would only be really a little more detailed than what u see in rome total war lol.

[Da_Costa1982]

I tell you RTS and FPS in one is a lot of trouble. Someone said that it would be preferable to delay the game to make a really good game. But has I said this type of game is terrably difficult to do in such short time. I want a RTS+FPS in one, I just don't know if with today's knowledge and technique that is possible... Let's hope for the best.

[PrinceCaspian5]

Originally posted by Da_Costa1982:
I want a RTS+FPS in one, I just don't know if with today's knowledge and technique that is possible... Let's hope for the best.
battlestations midway was similar to that, it wasn't a FPS, but you took direct control of one ship or plane in your fleet and told the other ones what to do, (just basic commands like where to go and who to attack)

[KJ_White]

well the closest idea we have of how the battle will be done is the total war games, then world in conflict comes out.

[Da_Costa1982]

You guys think this EndWar will actually be a RTS+FPS? A real one in wich you can control thiungs to a very microscopic level? Even the good old North vs South by Infogames (the one with the tatou logo) let you have a combat procedure as well as a strategical game.

I would really like that! There is still so much specullation even about the units and weapons. I simply don't know.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif But hope this one takes the cake!!!

[PrinceCaspian5]

Originally posted by Da_Costa1982:
You guys think this EndWar will actually be a RTS+FPS? A real one in wich you can control thiungs to a very microscopic level? Even the good old North vs South by Infogames (the one with the tatou logo) let you have a combat procedure as well as a strategical game.

I would really like that! There is still so much specullation even about the units and weapons. I simply don't know.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif But hope this one takes the cake!!!
no, it won't be, this isn't a FPS i any way

[atacms]

I fear that ENDWAR might be a bit arcadish with no attention to weapon parameters in terms of:

1. how far they can shoot
2. how protected/tough they are
3. how truly lethal they'd be
4. and how mobile they would be

As I've mentioned this before on other threads, alot of this I believe is tied to the size of the small 1 sq.km maps.

So I hope or my proposal is that ENDWAR have a special setting:

1. arcade or non-realistic or not paying attention to the above details
2. realistic where the size of the map is larger, and lethality, mobility, protection are all as close as possibly modelled in the game.

What would that mean:

1. artillery, missiles, tanks, heck even sniper rifles that really show it can fire long distances. You wouldn't have tanks firing at each other at such silly close ranges, like in this pic, lol, a rifle can fire farther than the distance these tanks are shooting at each other! http://media.1up.com/media?id=3319852&type=lg

Sorry if I may be spamming, but I want to make sure this get to the devs' attention. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif

[F94jh7duj]

Originally posted by spamonater:
could there be "levels" of your army. say you have 32 units in your army. these 32 units are split up into 2 regiments, each regiments is split into 2 battalions, the battalion is than split in to squads of 4 units. this would let a player do both smaller more accurate moves and larger quicker moves.

Each faction will have 150 upgrades and six levels of experience. In the game, the number of unit types are limited to seven so I heard

[F94jh7duj]

Originally posted by Mr.War1990:
Maybe some sort of medical unit, or squad to heal or repair troops, so that its not a matter of their critically wounded and u cant heal them sorta thing.

They said if a soldier is wounded then
his squadmate will pull him out and you can ask for reinforcement in which they will be deployed from helicopter

[xbox360Rocs]

=Realistic Urban Fighting, Through buildings
and down streets, men taking cover, blindfiring
and doing what they can do to survive.

Also Realistic Ranking system to know the Real Generals from the Noobs.

(Ex. You start the game off as Luietenant and rank up as you win battles!!)

[PrinceCaspian5]

Originally posted by F94jh7duj:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by spamonater:
could there be "levels" of your army. say you have 32 units in your army. these 32 units are split up into 2 regiments, each regiments is split into 2 battalions, the battalion is than split in to squads of 4 units. this would let a player do both smaller more accurate moves and larger quicker moves.

Each faction will have 150 upgrades and six levels of experience. In the game, the number of unit types are limited to seven so I heard </div></BLOCKQUOTE>that has nothing to do with what he was saying

[F94jh7duj]

Originally posted by PrinceCaspian5:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by F94jh7duj:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by spamonater:
could there be "levels" of your army. say you have 32 units in your army. these 32 units are split up into 2 regiments, each regiments is split into 2 battalions, the battalion is than split in to squads of 4 units. this would let a player do both smaller more accurate moves and larger quicker moves.

Each faction will have 150 upgrades and six levels of experience. In the game, the number of unit types are limited to seven so I heard </div></BLOCKQUOTE>that has nothing to do with what he was saying </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's true, I read it from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia when I was look for information about the game

[PrinceCaspian5]

Originally posted by F94jh7duj:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PrinceCaspian5:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by F94jh7duj:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by spamonater:
could there be "levels" of your army. say you have 32 units in your army. these 32 units are split up into 2 regiments, each regiments is split into 2 battalions, the battalion is than split in to squads of 4 units. this would let a player do both smaller more accurate moves and larger quicker moves.

Each faction will have 150 upgrades and six levels of experience. In the game, the number of unit types are limited to seven so I heard </div></BLOCKQUOTE>that has nothing to do with what he was saying </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's true, I read it from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia when I was look for information about the game </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
firstly, i know it is true, second it still has nothing to do with what spamonater said, and third, although it is true in this case, just because wikipedia says it doesn't mean it is true

[atacms]

I'd like to see thermobaric weapons especially when one considers that there will be fighting in urban capitals like Mosow, Paris and Washington.

This is one area that it appears should be given to the Russians as a key technology lead. The US has some weapons now like the: AGM-114N Hellfire with MAC (metal augmented charge) warhead, or the SMAW-NE(Novel Explosive...what a euphemism), MOAB, and others, however the Russians have for years equipped their RPG's with the thermobarics:

http://images.janes.com/defence/land_forces/news/jidr/jidr010104_2a_p.jpg

and let's not forget the TOS-1 Buratino,http://warfare.ru/thumb.aspx?img=0702ey70/update/jan2003/2/tos.jpg here's a link to a video clip that shows the power of thermobarics. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=286_1186684174

and some background info: http://warfare.ru/?catid=240&linkid=1582

[KJ_White]

i'd like to see this http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

http://content.ytmnd.com/content/2/f/b/2fb81dfe1b257e3d874a29c089db4e0e.jpg

[wolfman921988]

Originally posted by atacms:
Much bigger maps please.

Reading the IGN preview, I was saddened to hear that the 40 maps will only be "roughly one square mile maps spread out across the North Atlantic."

Finally we have a game that drops us into 3rd person view and allows true line of sight yet our vision and firing ranges is limited to only 1 mile? What happened to advanced sensors and being able to fire at extended ranges?

My inital concern about the screenshots showing tanks firing at what was the equivalent of a knife fight left me wondering if it was just for purposes of showing some action in the screenshot. Now, I wonder and think that it's because that's probably the usual and perhaps close to maximum firing range of the tanks.

can't we have bigger maps (ie at least 10 sq miles)this way artillery, missiles and other units can show off somewhat accurate realism in firing ranges? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sadeyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

they cant make much bigger maps and stuff like that unless they favor a console. the ps3 can hold 50+ gigs of space on their blu ray disc while xbox can only hold around 9 gigs. So they going to make it fair unfortunatly... a game this intense must have alot of space. I wonder if this will even come out for xbox 360. They will probobly have add on pack of better mapps or something like that.

As for types of units i would like:
Hellicopters (leathal and transportational)
Tanks
4x4 (can be upraded with rocket luancher or machinegun)
Infatry-
A. Standard regular soldier with upgrades.
B. Scounts/Sniper (better have good A.I no ussual pickin off randome guys get officers first)
C. Special units/forces
D. Medics/Medivacs

Features:
PS3 favored version aka able to have alot more stuff.
Moral system
Air Strikes/Artillery
Good A.I.
Voice commands really work...(better make it work good)

[PrinceCaspian5]

Originally posted by wolfman921988:
they cant make much bigger maps and stuff like that unless they favor a console. the ps3 can hold 50+ gigs of space on their blu ray disc while xbox can only hold around 9 gigs...
...As for types of units i would like:
Hellicopters (leathal and transportational)
Tanks
4x4 (can be upraded with rocket luancher or machinegun)
Infatry-
A. Standard regular soldier with upgrades.
B. Scounts/Sniper
C. Special units/forces
D. Medics/Medivac

Realistic stuff.
battlestations midway has bigger maps, there isn't as much in them but they are about 18 square km (i think)
as for the stuff you want, we already know that all that stuff is there (except medics, and i don't know if you can put weapons on the 4x4, i didn't see any on the one in the trailer)

[wolfman921988]

well in war most 4x4/hummers have some wepon on them. and you could transport wounded...

[KJ_White]

well the hummers can be fitted with any thing from an m249 through to a remote firing 50cal as well as the tow missle and a remote firing 40mm grenade launcher.

[PS3pwns]

If they cant launch A-bombs or any other type of missile , how come they can fire those missiles from space ?

[atacms]

Originally posted by PS3pwns:
If they cant launch A-bombs or any other type of missile , how come they can fire those missiles from space ?

Presumably because they have the "high ground" so to speak and they were able to emplace the "Rods from God" before any attempts were made to destroy those orbital launchers.

It's a good question however because although the "Rods from God" orbital launchers may have protection against anti-satellite strike like ones the Chinese fired a few months ago, a question for the devs would be IF the orbital launchers can be damaged by ground based lasers? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

[Da_Costa1982]

No FPS vertent then this game wont be the thing I expected. I confess my desapointment, cause I tought that this one was going to be that one.

"Back to the drawing board".

[atacms]

Originally posted by Da_Costa1982:
No FPS vertent then this game wont be the thing I expected. I confess my desapointment, cause I tought that this one was going to be that one.

"Back to the drawing board".

Wait, are you asking if there will be an FPS mode? If so, third person is almost as good especially for an FPS. Also you have to remember the game is not about you controlling a single soldier. You're a general controlling thousands.

[PS3pwns]

how much soldiers wil you be able to control in a battle ? Im hoping at least 100 men.
Does anyone know ?

[atacms]

Originally posted by PS3pwns:
how much soldiers wil you be able to control in a battle ? Im hoping at least 100 men.
Does anyone know ?

This is from an IGN interview with Mike DePlater,

Also in EndWar, you don't actually micromanage individual characters, but you do give orders to Platoons of soldiers, Companies of Tanks, Gunships, etc. Your soldiers are smart and well trained enough to use cover, stealth and tactics on their own so you don't have to micromanage every action.


From a Eurogamer preview:
And de Plater says that with the potential for "1000 units" on the battlefield at any given time, it will scale up pretty menacingly as things develop. He also believes that the fact it does should help distinguish it from PC title World In Conflict, developed by Massive, which otherwise seems immediately comparable.

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=76854&page=2

[PS3pwns]

*drool* :O

[Da_Costa1982]

Originally posted by atacms:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Da_Costa1982:
No FPS vertent then this game wont be the thing I expected. I confess my desapointment, cause I tought that this one was going to be that one.

"Back to the drawing board".

Wait, are you asking if there will be an FPS mode? If so, third person is almost as good especially for an FPS. Also you have to remember the game is not about you controlling a single soldier. You're a general controlling thousands. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hope so! But beign among the anonymous masses is also very cool... well at least for me... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

[ice_on_fire]

i just hope that the soldiers die in like 1 or 2 hits cause i hate the computer rts where the stand and gun for like 5 min... and are there going to be updates on marketplace like new maps or factions???

[atacms]

Originally posted by ice_on_fire:
i just hope that the soldiers die in like 1 or 2 hits cause i hate the computer rts where the stand and gun for like 5 min... and are there going to be updates on marketplace like new maps or factions???

Very true, and I hope so too since I hate non-realistic military games! After all if we wanted some cheesy game that doesn't respect weapon parameters we'd stick with C&C Generals.

[dazaw05]

This is a list of what i would like to see in EndWar:

-EndWar will definatly need bigger maps, 1 sq mile isn't big enough for artillery or snipers firing long range. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif
-More than 12 units per battlefield.
-Also a lot of different unit types, i.e. tactical snipers, demolition experts, special forces like SAS or US Navy Seals.
-Alot of ground vehicles.
-Intelligent troops. That know when to fall back or flank heavy artillery or garrison inside in building and waiting until troops pass and attack.
-If your units can garrison inside buildings then i don't want it to be like C&C 3 when you can clearly tell that troops are inside.
-Air to air combat and Naval combat.
-Realisic looking maps.
-Everything is destructable
-Lots of real world locations.
-Airstrikes.
-Matches that won't end in 10 minutes.
-If one person is getting beat badly they can call for reinforcements from another player who is playing online.
-PS3 and Xbox 360 players playing against each other, make the war bigger.
-Lots of downloadable content.

Well thats all i've got at the moment. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[PrinceCaspian5]

Originally posted by dazaw05:
-EndWar will definatly need bigger maps, 1 sq mile isn't big enough for artillery or snipers firing long range. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif
i agree, it is way too small


Originally posted by dazaw05:
-More than 12 units per battlefield.
remember that each group is more then one unit, so you may only have 12 groups, but each one of those has many troops in it


Originally posted by dazaw05:
-Also a lot of different unit types, i.e. tactical snipers, demolition experts, special forces like SAS or US Navy Seals.
even though it says that there will only be 7 unit types, when you start upgrading your units there are many more unit types, for example, you have a rifle squad, you can upgrade them to be snipers or support gunners or some other specialty


Originally posted by dazaw05:
-Intelligent troops. That know when to fall back or flank heavy artillery or garrison inside in building and waiting until troops pass and attack.
it is your job to tell them to do that


Originally posted by dazaw05:
-Matches that won't end in 10 minutes.
that probably depends on how good you are and how good your opponent is

[kelthfire]

----Weapons----
Center Fuzed Bomb
An advanced form of cluster bomb ordnance, this 1,000-pound bomb deploys 10 rocket-powered submunitions that spin to disperse 40 "skeet" bomblets that use infrared sensors to achieve multiple kills on armored vehicles, tanks, ect. The "skeet" bomlets achieve this by firing a blob of molten copper at the target.

Metalstorm
Potentially the world's most powerful automatic weapon, Metal Storm uses a system that combines gun barrel and magazine, so that the only moving parts are the projectiles themselves. Other automatic weapons have a magazine with bullets that are mechanically loaded into the barrel, but in the Metal Storm weapon, ammunition is preloaded and stacked in the combined barrel/magazine.

The bullets are fired electrically to generate a torrent of lethal force (up to thousands of rounds per second), especially with systems using a multibarreled configuration. This technology can be used for all types of munitions, and with no other moving parts, jamming is never a problem. Seen above is Metal Storm's remote-controlled Redback 40mm weapon system, recently introduced as a devastating counter to all types of threats.



----Units----

Sniper Squad

Some method of laying mines or other explosive devices

[KJ_White]

Metalstorm is actually a smart weapons company, based in Brisbane, Australia the city i live in http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif but yeah thats something they are working on the concept of that weapon is used in the book scarecrow by matthew riley, the guns are used by the mercenaries from a group called ig-88 in the book

[PrinceCaspian5]

Originally posted by kelthfire:
----Units----

Sniper Squad

Some method of laying mines or other explosive devices
they are both in as upgrades to riflemen (they can be upgraded into snipers) and engineers (they can be upgraded to lay and clear mines)

[atacms]

Originally posted by kelthfire:
----Weapons----
Center Fuzed Bomb
An advanced form of cluster bomb ordnance, this 1,000-pound bomb deploys 10 rocket-powered submunitions that spin to disperse 40 "skeet" bomblets that use infrared sensors to achieve multiple kills on armored vehicles, tanks, ect. The "skeet" bomlets achieve this by firing a blob of molten copper at the target.

Metalstorm
Potentially the world's most powerful automatic weapon, Metal Storm uses a system that combines gun barrel and magazine, so that the only moving parts are the projectiles themselves. Other automatic weapons have a magazine with bullets that are mechanically loaded into the barrel, but in the Metal Storm weapon, ammunition is preloaded and stacked in the combined barrel/magazine.

The bullets are fired electrically to generate a torrent of lethal force (up to thousands of rounds per second), especially with systems using a multibarreled configuration. This technology can be used for all types of munitions, and with no other moving parts, jamming is never a problem. Seen above is Metal Storm's remote-controlled Redback 40mm weapon system, recently introduced as a devastating counter to all types of threats.



----Units----

Sniper Squad

Some method of laying mines or other explosive devices

Welcome Kelthfire,

It's nice to see someone else who knows their high tech weapons, altough it's actually called the Sensor Fuzed Weapon. US used it in the beginning of the Iraq War when some B-52's dropped a set on an Iraqi armored battalion I believe. They later surrendered (those that were left.)

Not to steal Endwar's thunder check out the upcoming game, Frontlines: Fuel of War as they also have done their homework with advanced military tech.

[dazaw05]

They should include MOAB (Massive Ordance Air Blast). It is touted as the most powerful non-nuclear weapon ever designed with a blast yield of 11 tons. This was taken from wikipieda. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massive_Ordnance_Air_Blast_bomb

[atacms]

Originally posted by dazaw05:
They should include MOAB (Massive Ordance Air Blast). It is touted as the most powerful non-nuclear weapon ever designed with a blast yield of 11 tons. This was taken from wikipieda. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massive_Ordnance_Air_Blast_bomb

Yeah, even C&C Generals: Zero Hour had the MOAB. What I liked about the Daisy Cutter they had was the animation and sounds. World in Conflict also does a great job with the Daisy Cutter, plus their use of physics showing the blast effects is pretty AWESOME. Let's hope Endwar raises the bar on that area including hi tech weapons.

[PrinceCaspian5]

Originally posted by atacms:
Yeah, even C&C Generals: Zero Hour had the MOAB. What I liked about the Daisy Cutter they had was the animation and sounds. World in Conflict also does a great job with the Daisy Cutter, plus their use of physics showing the blast effects is pretty AWESOME. Let's hope Endwar raises the bar on that area including hi tech weapons.
but if they scale down the MOAB like they did the rods from god it would be more like a 250lb bomb

[S.V.A.R.O.G.]

The MOAB is not the most powerful conventional bomb anymore. Search in Google for the "vacuum bomb".

[atacms]

Originally posted by S.V.A.R.O.G.:
The MOAB is not the most powerful conventional bomb anymore. Search in Google for the "vacuum bomb".



There's already been a post about the "father of all bombs" cmon guys you're not telling me anything new http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif, I get news update for all the latest in defense news. In any case it appears that a unit like that is not a precision guided munition like the MOAB is.

[tylniles]

as far as infantry type weapons, will the javelin be the AT missile for infantry? and do the troops within infantry squads/platoons have different roles(rifleman,grenadier,automatic rifleman"SAW")? i'd like to see the USMCs EFV/AAAV in the game.

[atacms]

Originally posted by tylniles:
as far as infantry type weapons, will the javelin be the AT missile for infantry? and do the troops within infantry squads/platoons have different roles(rifleman,grenadier,automatic rifleman"SAW")? i'd like to see the USMCs EFV/AAAV in the game.

We don't know yet about grenadier, but HMG's are in and here's some more info on the upgrades to the regular grunt:

from the developer: "Riflemen are light infantry and they can be upgraded to included special forces, demolitions, heavy machine gun and marksman units. Strengths include making effective use of cover and concealment of the terrain. They can use stealth and sniping, can plant demolition charges or booby traps on cover and can forward deploy or 'deep strike' on the battlefield. They're slow if not embarked on transports, vulnerable in open terrain and their light weapons are ineffective against heavy armour like tanks."

Engineers are heavy infantry and combat engineers, they can be upgraded for combat support and technician roles. Their strengths include anti-armour weapons, they can place minefields and area denial weapons, can garrison buildings and use cover, fastest capture and upgrading of strategic points, they can also place sentry robots. But they're vulnerable to riflemen and slow."


For the rest of the interview, check here:
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=170555

[carnotrankine]

This is suppose to be for new systems only , so for pc does that mean only 64 bit vista or will we get it in 64 bit for Linux also .

[KJ_White]

my guess would be xp and vista compatible

[tylniles]

What will the infantry anti-tank weapon be? Javelin AT missile? or maybe the ZeusMPAR since it was in GRAW? Will there be light AT and heavy AT? and also how about LMGs for the rifle squads? like the MK48 SAW or the MG version of the M-8? As far as IFVs/APCs will there be Strykers and the EFV(i alrdy know about the bradley). I think active armor defense would be pretty sweet for armored vehicles and tanks. like maybe shtora or arena-1 for the russians? or kaktus-5 reactive armor? will infantry use frag grenades?

[john_chi]

Indoor/CQB combat. I don't know why this did not come up earlier, but it's something missing in so many (or almost all) so-called 'modern' RTS games. See my thread to discuss it further - http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=89110...621079495#7621079495 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=8911019745&m=7621079495&r=7621079495#7621079495)

[KJ_White]

i just think indoor would be a little to difficult, the only way i could see it working is if u garrison troops in a building and then the enemy enters the building and u have some sought of inside visual maybe like a satelite infrared view top down of the building anything more detailed would be to graphics hungry with the rest of this game.

[atacms]

Originally posted by KJ_White:
i just think indoor would be a little to difficult, the only way i could see it working is if u garrison troops in a building and then the enemy enters the building and u have some sought of inside visual maybe like a satelite infrared view top down of the building anything more detailed would be to graphics hungry with the rest of this game.

Kind of how Act of War represented indoor combat?

[KJ_White]

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif really i never got to play that game coz my pc blows not upgrading till early next yr

[atacms]

Originally posted by KJ_White:
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif really i never got to play that game coz my pc blows not upgrading till early next yr

KJ, unless your PC specs really suck, I think you should be able to play it, plus it's really the first game to showcase future weapons realistically and it has great cut scenes that really pull you into the storyline.

[KJ_White]

i have an amd 3000+ 2.16ghz processor, geforce4 mx440 64mb 8X agp and 512mb ram. my pc sucks http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

[atacms]

Originally posted by KJ_White:
i have an amd 3000+ 2.16ghz processor, geforce4 mx440 64mb 8X agp and 512mb ram. my pc sucks http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

You're right about your video card, sadly it does kind of suck as your RAM, but you could spend just $150 or so and upgrade to some decent specs or are you saving up for the huge upgrade?

[KJ_White]

huge upgrade

i.e. quad core, 2gb ram minimum, 768mb graphics card etc.

[myrsnipe]

Would love to see units utelizing the Metall Storm technology. Currently its been tested to fire 270 rounds in 1/100th of a second. Readup on it on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_Storm

[atacms]

Originally posted by myrsnipe:
Would love to see units utelizing the Metall Storm technology. Currently its been tested to fire 270 rounds in 1/100th of a second. Readup on it on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_Storm

That is a nice system.

[XLK_Shooter]

You know how in battlestations: midway you can issue orders from the map like a normal RTS or switch to your units and fight as them yourself? Id like to see that in EndWar.

[Jimjemael_796]

I'd like to see draws kind of like two armies both falling back for another day, I just like the idea (like stalingrad) where opposing sides fight over and over on this one un-obtainable spot.

[KJ_White]

well u could have something like that where u have one battlefield continually going backwards and forwards between 2 factions in the game.

[Jimjemael_796]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by KJ_White:
well u could have something like that where u have one battlefield continually going backwards and forwards between 2 factions in the game.[/QUOTE
yes but all the bodies, wrecks etc stay from the one previous battle, although that might be hard 2 do http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

[IKM]

I think the russians should have this for there primary assualt weapon. The AN-94 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN-94

[spamonater]

it would be cool if different areas of the give you the option of building different units. so a city or area would have a specialty unit that would either be better for being built there or could only be built there.

[KJ_White]

Originally posted by IKM:
I think the russians should have this for there primary assualt weapon. The AN-94 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN-94

by then the weapon will have been in production for nearly 30yrs. so i'd say the russians would use something a little more effective by then

[tylniles]

i remember watching one of the interview videos and the guy said that if you wanted to, you could actually order all your troops to assault the map and just watch, and they'd do their best. now last time i checked there's not much you can do against a tank with an assault rifle, besides put a few scratches on it, so if you have a basic infantry squad with no ATweapons that encounters heavy armor, will they do something other than just put scratches on it, like maybe use satchel charges to immobilize it.... i remember seeing in the new Q&A that if tanks encounter helos, they will pop smoke and hide, since they can't do much against them, unless they can use the mounted machine guns against air? man this game is gonna be so sick!

[cobacc]

I would really love to see more of air power. After all, air superiority plays important role in current war. It is kinda awesome if you have various type of aircrafts like F-22, F-35, F/A-18, F-15, Su-30, etc. After all, I believe most of the current aircrafts with simple modification in their specs will still be used 40 years from now . It would be lovely if some of the older aircraft too is included like F-14 that was decommisioned not because of capailities but only because of cost issue). The aricrafts should have different roles like long-range bomber, fighter, etc and different maintanance + capital cost (I fact it applies to all military units). This is just an idea but it is kinda awesome if you can somehow apply different modifications in each aircraft (or other units) such as what kind of missile you can buy, different type of aircraft (e.g F-15A versus F-15E), etc.

It would be awesome too if you can steal other technologies from the black markets especially since in the real world, espionage is important (like US bought MIG-25 from third country).

[IKM]

To KJ_white:

The AK series has been around for quite a long time and is still quite effective. Yes there have been new iterations of it but they all still hold to the same basic design. By then it would be mass produced and obvisouly have been upgraded, say different muntions and bottom and top mounts.

[Greg006]

I'd like to see characters in the game with different physiques. A tall yet slim soldier or fat and short. Different combinations to make the infantrymen realistic. I'd also like to see infantrymen breakdown in the middle of the battlefield in tears or just unable to operate due to PTS(post-traumatic-syndrom). I'd like to see live soldiers burning and still walking. Saving Private Ryan has alot of ideas.

[atacms]

Originally posted by Greg006:
I'd like to see characters in the game with different physiques. A tall yet slim soldier or fat and short. Different combinations to make the infantrymen realistic. I'd also like to see infantrymen breakdown in the middle of the battlefield in tears or just unable to operate due to PTS(post-traumatic-syndrom). I'd like to see live soldiers burning and still walking. Saving Private Ryan has alot of ideas.

Good suggestion. At the very least they could have different textures that the computer could switch around so they would have a mix of different looking soldiers.

Especially now that we're down in the ground and the camera is pinned to units, after a while it'll look like we have a CLONE army.

Look at this pic, imagine seeing a bunch of ground units all with the same face as this guy on the right. http://xbox360media.ign.com/xbox360/image/article/813/813560/tom-clancys-endwar-20070817012346162.jpg

It seems like a minor issue but the point is other RTS games could get away with it because you never really got to see their faces cause the camera was so high.

[LordTenacious]

They do have different faces. Dont you notice the guy with blood coming out of his?

I guess the JSF employs zombies http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif.

[LordTenacious]

Originally posted by Greg006:
I'd also like to see infantrymen breakdown in the middle of the battlefield in tears or just unable to operate due to PTS(post-traumatic-syndrom). I'd like to see live soldiers burning and still walking. Saving Private Ryan has alot of ideas.
Uhhh, this is supposed to be a game, which means fun. Seeing soldiers break into tears does not equal fun.

[TheHunter_07]

i wanna see shotguns!! my favorite meapon in any shootin game. especially at close range

[kennywu1005]

new here, has this been discussed, fixed winged aircraft and offmap support. In a HaloWars fourm they had an idea that you couild build an airbase, or maybee missle silos on global map for off map support. Therefore you could customize your off map support, you could build fighters to stop enemy from sending in bombers for certain amount of time, or maybee have different types of aircraft and customize there payload like how you customize your infantry and tanks.

[SARGEAJQ54]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jimjemael_796:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by KJ_White:
well u could have something like that where u have one battlefield continually going backwards and forwards between 2 factions in the game.[/QUOTE
yes but all the bodies, wrecks etc stay from the one previous battle, although that might be hard 2 do http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif[/QUOTE they discussed this in halowars and they said it would be more realistic AND u could use it for cover

[KJ_White]

booooo don't bring halo wars here lol only messing with. welcome to the forums kenny.

and to kenny yes there will be off map support, the level of off map support is determined by the number of strategic points held i believe, so there will be super weapons and airstrikes they are 2 confirmed off map supports.

[SARGEAJQ54]

im just wonderin will they have recks of tank and helos and mabe the bodies of soldiers stay instead of disapearing because it would make it mor realistic and just like in hw(halo wars)u could use them for cover and maybe when a transport helo crashes just like in trailer it could go threw a building like in real life and destroy it or get stuck in the top of building or it could crush some unfortunate soldier(s). http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

[frenzy89]

i hope so considering that they can hide behind blown up civilian cars and craters caused by firing tanks and off map support

[tylniles]

will the B-2 bomber be featured in the game? that would be very cool. if i'm correct i believe it's supposed to stay in service until at least 2020. and it'd be cool if Stealth was portrayed in the game. i just don't know how that would happen.... maybe the F-35 fighter or F-22(if it's in it) won't be detected until they're very close? and AA missiles won't be able to lock if they haven't be upgraded.... any ideas on stealth guys?

[SARGEAJQ54]

Originally posted by LordTenacious:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Greg006:
I'd also like to see infantrymen breakdown in the middle of the battlefield in tears or just unable to operate due to PTS(post-traumatic-syndrom). I'd like to see live soldiers burning and still walking. Saving Private Ryan has alot of ideas.
Uhhh, this is supposed to be a game, which means fun. Seeing soldiers break into tears does not equal fun. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
YES IT WOULD BE FUN and theres another topic that i discussed this and it would make it more realistic and i would KILLLLLL to have it put in......I MEAN IT!!!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

[NAPALM75]

I'd like to have a saved replay feature in the game. I've been having so much fun watching my old games in Halo 3 and even Full Spectrum Warrion. I'd be awsome to watch a full scale war you just made in End War.

[LordTenacious]

Originally posted by SARGEAJQ54:
YES IT WOULD BE FUN and theres another topic that i discussed this and it would make it more realistic and i would KILLLLLL to have it put in......I MEAN IT!!!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif
Anyone who ends a post the way you did proves to me that they are a buffoon. You may ask why I don't even bother to respond to what you said. The reason I do not respond is because I have not spent my life talking to brick walls and I am not about to start now.

[LittleSniper05]

i am wondering if the only armored vehicles are tanks, or if there are some lighter armored vehicles.

[Gromit]

there are others like apcs and stuff

[SARGEAJQ54]

Lord that was quiet rude and unnessasary and if u dont have anything nice to say go to a different forum and i was only havin a bit of fun so dont judge a book by its cover immediatly.
Will the bradley be considered a tank or apc?

[tylniles]

well the Bradley IS an apc....well actually technically it's an IFV(infantry fighting vehicle). but basically the same. if i'm not mistaken APCs refer to wheeled infantry carriers, such as the US stryker or LAV-25, or the Russian BTR-90. and IFVs are tracked infantry carriers like the Bradley or Russian BMP series, for example.

does anyone know if it's possible for vehicle crews or aircraft pilots to survive after their vehicle is destroyed? and then they could keep their experience and rank and you could use them to fight the next mission. unless they're killed before you can get to them of course. obviously the crews might not survive EVERY time, if they're a tank crew, "catastrophic turret separation" is impossible to survive, but i don't think it would happen everytime a tank is destroyed. just a thought.

[SteelEagleStan]

I read an interview where it said the developers might interfere if one said gets too big for their briches. I encourage that. It'd be lame if your enemy won despite your best efforts. Realistic? Yeah, perhaps, but I'd liek to continue playing for years.

[SARGEAJQ54]

i think having the pilots survive is a little difficult and not that nesassary. it makes me feel a little bad knowing that you should be the most feared general but still have a weak army i know the rookies need help but still they need to learn the game themselves because ur basically sayin that theres difficulty limits. the could maybe make the effect of ranked squads a little down or when u search for matches u can choose what levels of the people u want to play though u couldnt look for level 1 players to prevent pwning but u cant look for higher levels until ur level 2 or 3 to make an unlockable.

[tylniles]

i don't know, i think it could be pretty cool. maybe if someone was really caught up in a battle, on the other side of the map and couldn't focus on the downed pilot or tank crew(of course the headset would help). maybe have the crew's/pilot's morale be extremely low. and i think being able to keep that unit's experience for future battle's would be motivation enough....obviously it'd be harder to save the pilot than a vehicle crew. because the pilot would be in enemy territory. and the crew would be right by friendly vehicles.

[xStratOcasterXx]

I really hope to see a combo of RPGs,flame throwers(on vehicles as well as infantry),and
some serious vehicle power. Though not enough to produce steamrollers like C&C3 i traded that game because there was no strategy, just steamrollers!

All-in-all the game looks great though i'd love to see a playable demo on Xbox Live Marketplace soon.
I'd also love to see the game in February,but not if its not finished.Take your time on this wonderful game! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

[SARGEAJQ54]

i dont think they should have flamethrowers thats way to sci-fi though they did use them in world war 2. if they made vehicles like that it would be steam rollers al over again and would destroy the balance if theres one though they may say there is but u never know until the game comes out and i forget doesnt it come out feb jan march or dec?

[frenzy89]

march im assuming http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[xStratOcasterXx]

Gamestop says march and Michael De Platter says February so i have no clue. but i think your right sarge flamers would be OP and steamrolling would come out of that.

[tylniles]

do you think that rocket assisted projectiles will be included? i know they make them for extended range on artillery and the russians also use them on their tanks. i think it's nicknamed SNIPER by nato. and i'm assuming that there will be quite a variety of artillery round selections. since it said in the Q&A that primary and secondary ammo types could be selected. i'd like to see illumination rounds by artillery for night levels and airburst rounds would be cool too.

[ImperialDane]

Epic music is a must i would say.. Otherwise a fun feature for the Eu would be different accents for the soldiers.. to represent all the different nationalities within.

[xStratOcasterXx]

rocket assisted projectiles sounds awsome and i like the illumination rounds idea too. maybe they'll read that http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

[MaverickSpartan]

I really wish that there was naval battles too. how cool would it be having a convoy moving troops across the Atlantic and having to defend it from air raids, submarines, or battleships? It would be a good way to move troops and equipment to different continents and also aircraft carriers could play a good role.

[xStratOcasterXx]

That sounds sweet. I vote for it. LOL

[xStratOcasterXx]

How do u think reinforcements will come on screen?
APCs,helicopters, or even a parachute drop would be cool. maybe that'll be one of the upgrades

[frenzy89]

Originally posted by xStratOcasterXx:
How do u think reinforcements will come on screen?
APCs,helicopters, or even a parachute drop would be cool. maybe that'll be one of the upgrades


that would be a pretty cool upgrade..like say every couple levels of exp gained you get faster ways to deploy that particular unit.

anyways they said that the units would have to be brought in realistically so using paradrops and apc the and heli drop offs are most likly whats going to happen

[xStratOcasterXx]

That'll be really cool. another thing to crave for 3 more months http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

[tylniles]

hopefully the Stryker apc will be in game. considering it's pretty new. it would fit very nicely with the whole upgrades system too. considering that there are many variants to the stryker.

[Dontl00kback]

I would like to see for the EU side british SAS. As this specail ops is very well know in games and could be interesting. The RAF harrier is very nice piece of aircraft i would like to see in game. Also like different skilled generals to pick to start off the campaign. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

[KJ_White]

Originally posted by Dontl00kback:
I would like to see for the EU side british SAS. As this specail ops is very well know in games and could be interesting. The RAF harrier is very nice piece of aircraft i would like to see in game. Also like different skilled generals to pick to start off the campaign. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

the harrier is a good aircraft but is a little outdated now, much the reason why the US replaced it with the vertical take off and land varient of the f-35. its an aircraft much like the a-10 where it has its area which its good in but it's old also. Oh and its not like rome total war where u have multiple generals in this game u play the general and u command your units.

and in response to tylniles the stryker design isn't actually that new the design of the vehicle has been around since the 60's if i'm not mistaken. i would like verification if i'm wrong please http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif i'm too lazy to check it my self.

[tylniles]

well yah, the LAV-25 used by the US marines, the Canadian LAV-3, and the Swiss designed MOWAG pirahna are all vehicles of the same family and origin of the US Army's Stryker. but the US Army variant is quite recent. i get what you're saying though. oh Dontl00kback, i'm pretty sure the Brits side with the US in the game.

[Dontl00kback]

Oh i would of thought that the British would be in th EU as we are now but we're still not sure of it =p
anyway thanks for the feedbackhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[BOSSNASTi]

I would like to see a new revamp Siege mode from C&C3:TW where instead of the wall being around your base where you were isolated in a small area. Instead their would be two walls in the middle of the map extending arcoss from left to right, but they'd be a little ways aways from eachother. This way both sides can have more area to expand their overall base. This would also allow them to capture more capital's to make more income and then it would be a race to see who can capture caps the fastest to get the best income off the bat for Seige mode. This would be something interesting to see. Or even if they just made it where if your playing with teammates that you can go in eachother's bases and do stuff. This would be great.

[KJ_White]

huh? what are u on about?

[tylniles]

uhhh..... dude, there's no base building or resource gathering in EndWar.

[BOSSNASTi]

Unfortunately i've just found this out a little while ago.lol. But thanx for info cuz. And siege mode is nothing like i would've expected it.

[SARGEAJQ54]

ooooooook? Back to the subject, though this is a bit different from actual topic. why is there artillery when it is a two mile oops i mean ONE map? ubi truly, truly, disappointed me when they did that. it actually makes me question their all knowing wisdom......it just makes me....so..sad http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif..knowing that they would do such a thing. guess everybody sooner or later gets to big and bold for their suit and destroys their reputation to the world, i really that this big shot company truly was a devoted one but ...now *sigh* http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

[PrinceCaspian5]

Originally posted by SARGEAJQ54:
ooooooook? Back to the subject, though this is a bit different from actual topic. why is there artillery when it is a two mile oops i mean ONE map? ubi truly, truly, disappointed me when they did that. it actually makes me question their all knowing wisdom......it just makes me....so..sad http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif..knowing that they would do such a thing. guess everybody sooner or later gets to big and bold for their suit and destroys their reputation to the world, i really that this big shot company truly was a devoted one but ...now *sigh* http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif
we have been over the range issue many times, they just scaled back the ranges to fit the map

[CadarnofJeal]

I'd like to see which ever side has the UK join it have an influx of new upgrades to develop there forces along a more british line if you wanted (even if it was just the look of the vehicles I suppose). Especially as britain is one off the leading countries in AFV technology at the moment.

[tylniles]

well from what i've heard the British take sides with the US. and the US in this game specialize in a balance of mobility and firepower, stealth tech, and un-manned drones/UAVs. i guess thats some pretty good tech. and if they end up taking sides with the EU in the game, then i guess you will still be pleased considering the EU in the game focuses mostly on high mobility, electronic warfare, and non-lethal energy weapons...etc.

[Shattered24]

-I so see the European forces having riot shields.

-Mix a set of faces, skin tones, tank emblems, helicopter side art. (im sure you have)

IMPORTANT
-"Withdraw points" Instead of retreating to the edge of the map, be able to select a random point for a unit or units to go when they are experinceing a minor retreat. Maybe use this idea as a reason to auto deploy smokes(Example: line is broken, smoke current location, fall back to a point futher back to attempt a 2nd stand.)

[Deathtastic]

I'd like the ability to capture the last one or two enemy infantry if I have an overwhelming force, then find out their orders and where a couple of there teammates are at.

[T00NSUK]

quick bulletpoints http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/typing.gif
more than 40 maps, doesnt seem like enough

if not already, being able to see inside of buildings (in realtime)

nightime battles would be cool, NV as well

civilians would be good, realistic

distruction of buildings, of fires that can spread.

[shovauk]

i know they already said this in one of the previews about how different ef units will having varieing tactics, i think this is a great idea i think they should expand on this idea, like other people have said have a unit based on different country's

[Spetsnaz_Sniper]

Multiplayer Rank System so you can see whose good and bad
Differnt weapons i read the all russian riflemen carry modified Ak-74 and OSV 120

[tylniles]

it's probably gonna be the Ak-101. but thats pretty much the same as the ak-74. so yah you're right.

[Spetsnaz_Sniper]

Since when your soldiers reply it supposed to show there morale (screaming panic bad calm confident good) do things to break countries morale (execute american president)
Also use hostages and go to exchanges try to kill other side or play it cool watch the enemy has it own tricks

[Earlydawn]

I'm just hoping for deep gameplay. I hope that every unit fulfills a specific niche, and has interesting and diverse customization paths. I'm defenitely more of a support / coordinator typed commander, so I hope it's viable to operate just command vehicles in support of allies.

Also, most strategy games pin infantry as the softies of the battlefield. To a degree, I suppose this is true. There's a tabletop wargame called Flames of War that has my favorite depiction of infantry in any strategy game ever, as it feels completely accurate to me; if you catch them in the open, they're dead. If they dig in, they can become very well-fortified, well concealed units that can potentially be harder to neutralize then armor.

[Commissar]

I always wanted a rts/fps game, but I would like some things in this game.

-I want to create my own unique country with its own army or at least a special regiment for one of the three factions

-I also want quick battles, for online and split screen

-I so want map editor, this is always a fun thing for multiplayer

-This game better have a tech tree, like something from modern day to star wars would be nice

-I want the vehicle editing to in-depth, i dont want every tank to be simular, you should be able to make a tank as big as a house or a one maned mini tank, we should be able to put legs on it and call it a walker.

-I dont want stupid aircraft AI, jet fights should come of map from a airport from another region, and helicopters should be able to use tarran to its atvantage.

-One thing has bugged me for every rts game, the lack of interactivity between soldiers and buildings, want to tell my soldiers to take position on the 3rd floor or advance into that enemy building.

Its sounds like a lot, but i would like some of these fetures in End War.(At least for the PS3)

[tylniles]

Originally posted by Commissar:
I always wanted a rts/fps game, but I would like some things in this game.

-I want to create my own unique country with its own army or at least a special regiment for one of the three factions

-I also want quick battles, for online and split screen

-I so want map editor, this is always a fun thing for multiplayer

-This game better have a tech tree, like something from modern day to star wars would be nice

-I want the vehicle editing to in-depth, i dont want every tank to be simular, you should be able to make a tank as big as a house or a one maned mini tank, we should be able to put legs on it and call it a walker.

-I dont want stupid aircraft AI, jet fights should come of map from a airport from another region, and helicopters should be able to use tarran to its atvantage.

-One thing has bugged me for every rts game, the lack of interactivity between soldiers and buildings, want to tell my soldiers to take position on the 3rd floor or advance into that enemy building.

Its sounds like a lot, but i would like some of these fetures in End War.(At least for the PS3)

- you can't make your own country, but you are given a battalion to customize and use for the game.

- i'm sure there will be fast paced matches

- pretty sure there will be a map editor

- as far as a tech tree going from modern day to starwars, thats not happening. game takes place in 2020, i'm sure it'll stay in that area.

- vehicle editing, i doubt thats happening. this is clancy not george lucas. you wont find any AT-ATs here.

- jets will probably come from off map. helicopters will as far as i know, be able to use terrain as cover.

- soldiers will definitely be interactive with buildings as far as we know right now

[TaSniper]

My biggest question right now has to be how troops are going to fight inside of buildings. We know it will be possible but thats about all we know.

[drew-]

i want to see flamethrowers included in endway not just on tanks but also as infantry weapons

[Xero993]

For Endwar to be realistic it Must include Metal Storm (a new set of weapons systems, the large pod versions could be turrets for the US faction -even though it's been created and owned in Brisbane Ausralia-)

F-35c There's no doubt they'll add the F35 but i desperatly hope they use the f35c as it's VTOL version (hover). I hope it also has the 3rd laser system onboard it. (see below)

Laser tech I've forgotten what the current gen version is but the decendent of the HEL system <it's on 3 systems 1. On a modified 747 2. A land based system that looks like a big 10 meter squared box with a mirror/lens turret on top. 3. The smallest version which is designed to go on jets like the F35 but can still take out missiles and hopefully by 2020 bigger stuff.

Basically if you watch the show Future Weapons on Discovery channel Endwar should have more advanced versions of everything on that show. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

[rzgrz]

I dont know if this has been posted but I would like to see sat. lasers

[tylniles]

there will be satellite mounted lasers. i'm pretty sure thats the super weapon for the EU.

[FlyingDeLorean]

I know it's been said many times, many ways... give us a choice over the map size. Urban combat is great. Really. But you're going to get a very high player turnover rate once people start realizing that their only option is merely urban combat. Throw in an epic battle, the likes of which have never been seen before.

Oh, and a beta'd be nice too http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

[TaSniper]

But urban combat isn't the only option, not even close. There are going to be 40 different maps with varying locations. It just seems like all the maps will be urban because all of the screenshots thus far have focused on either Paris or NYC harbor.

[FlyingDeLorean]

Ah. I was just confused by the Q&A where the devs said that you would immediately start staring down the barrel of a T-90. Heh.

I still do think that there should be at least a few maps larger than one square mile. I know that it's multiplayer suicide to attempt massive maps like in Battlefield with an engine like this. But there should be some maps a bit (I'm not saying 20 km or anything like that) larger. Just to breathe some life into the tactical components of this game. At 1 square mile, there's a plethora of micro-strategies and neat little tricks, but it needs more than that, and maps that small would just lead to cheap strategies like fortifying a building with an arseload of Javelin missle soldiers and snipers.

[codybaker]

Originally posted by FlyingDeLorean:
Ah. I was just confused by the Q&A where the devs said that you would immediately start staring down the barrel of a T-90. Heh.

I still do think that there should be at least a few maps larger than one square mile. I know that it's multiplayer suicide to attempt massive maps like in Battlefield with an engine like this. But there should be some maps a bit (I'm not saying 20 km or anything like that) larger. Just to breathe some life into the tactical components of this game. At 1 square mile, there's a plethora of micro-strategies and neat little tricks, but it needs more than that, and maps that small would just lead to cheap strategies like fortifying a building with an arseload of Javelin missle soldiers and snipers. Your little fortifying trick wouldnt work to well because there are componets of this game like um ARTILLERY and an average house isnt going to survive more than a few shells or a couple 2,000 lbs bombs from an air strike.

[ice_on_fire]

I think the map editor sounds great and all but, from what i know from other games with it its going to be hard to use unless its user friendly like the Forge in Halo 3. i would also like to see things like portable turrets or something like that, something that is automated and you could leave inside a key building and bring hell to your enemies.

[atacms]

Originally posted by PrinceCaspian5:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SARGEAJQ54:
ooooooook? Back to the subject, though this is a bit different from actual topic. why is there artillery when it is a two mile oops i mean ONE map? ubi truly, truly, disappointed me when they did that. it actually makes me question their all knowing wisdom......it just makes me....so..sad http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif..knowing that they would do such a thing. guess everybody sooner or later gets to big and bold for their suit and destroys their reputation to the world, i really that this big shot company truly was a devoted one but ...now *sigh* http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif
we have been over the range issue many times, they just scaled back the ranges to fit the map </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Let him show his discontent over this issue to the devs. Lol. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Seriously though I think this will be a big issue that they are not taking into account enough.

[TaSniper]

Yes, but Atacms I don't think I need to remind you that the last time we heard any new information from the devs about anything was around 3 months ago haha.

[fuglewarrior]

It think that realistically Russia shouldnt be the horde faction because Russia only has under 150 million now the EU has 400 million and America by that time 350 mil and the only reason the EU and Russia dont change and maybe shrink is because of their countries dismal birthrates

in summation Russia if horde should be into robotics (with all that oil money)

[blackbaron06]

1. vehicle crews to be able to get out of their vehicles say if they become immobalized and pick up guns from dead soldiers and become soldiers but maybe not highly trained soldiers

2. CIVILIANS-in the defending countries there should be pockets of resistence that you do not control but make it that much harder for the enemy and realistic

3. emp traps- engineers should be able to set up emps maybe on the sides of streets to immobalize enemy tanks and they will immobalize friendlies but friendlies have an indicator to where they are

4. ammo and fuel-tanks and helicopters should not have unlimited amounts of fuel and ammo, but you can supply drop and have fuel and ammo trucks that can rendezvous with them to resupply for copters they have to go back to base and same for the soldiers they start out with ammo but have to pick some more up as they go along or get some more from drops or trucks

5 explosions as already mentioned explosions should cause damage to everything around them same with helicopters crashing and planes crashing hopefuly they just dont pop like a bubble

6 for a fun thing maybe be able to award squads medals or individual soldiers but they actually have to do something significant and they really dont do anything but look cool

[vazquezlax]

larger map - 1 sq. mile is too small (think World in Conflict size)
house fighting like that of Act of War

I would love to see the Stryker combat vehicle or a varient of it for the JSF - those things just came out in the last few years so they would def. be around in 2020
some sort of conventional transport helicopter for the JSF, not just V-22 and V-44 VTOL transports - they wouldnt be that numerous to be used as a battlefield transport
the Ruskies should be able to scavenge armor for their tanks and Ivan's helicopter's shouldnt be able to carry an MBT - aim for realism right?
the EF - they sound all set lol - just keep the UK, Canada, and Australia neutral i guess...

[vazquezlax]

i would also love for the ability to personally be able to name your units so instead of saying "bravo team secure alpha" you could say "Red Suns secure the dog house" use callsigns etc...being able to personally name your units would also bring the player much deeper into the gameplay to the point that they could actually feel regret that they have to send "Wolverine team" to take out the fuel depot with no back up and hear the team's crys for help when they're ambushed or something...

[fuglewarrior]

To vazquezlax, i think that given the common bonds amung the former british subjects, and her rebellious daughter http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif, are very strong and Britain was traditionally not considered part of Europe and Austrailia, Canada, New Zealand and the like would very likely want a shield against Russian agression elsewhere in the world and would naturally go to America who is not only the closest would likely still retain the strongest Navy in the world. Plus Europe isnt in any state to help the commonwealth. And if we are going to bring China and India into this here is my reasoning why China wouldnt be in the conflict
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/8911019745/m/9971073665/p/5
and on India they would be unlikely to Ally with Europe because they cant project power as well as the Americans plus after reading Robyn Meredith's "The Elephant and the Dragon" which i highly reccomend to anyone wishing to understand India and China's economic policy and growing affect on the world. I can say that cultural, buisness and military ties with America are much much stronger than with collective Europe or Russia and given the choice between the 3 India would obviously go America, giving America solid control of their Pacific Flank with obviously a strong defence in Alaska, with Taiwan, Japan, and S Korea obviously American

[vazquezlax]

another thing about the custimization - supposedly you only control about a Battalion's strength of men so you should, along with designing your own general to lead your troops - you should be able to create your own battalion like the "37th "Were Wolves" Battalion, JSF" and within it you would then have say "Gryphon squadron" - gunships, "Red Sun squadron" - attack jets, "Wolverine team" - spec ops, "Rhino company" - MBTs, etc...
with that level of custimization players would really feel like they were leading THEIR troops and teams into battle not "im part of the JSF and i want charlie to capture alpha"

[fuglewarrior]

Numbered Battalions based on your specialty perhaps, like the 44th Urban Combat Battalian, and based on your skill level given a rank starting at Captain, perhaps the 44th Urban Combat Battalian under Lt. Colonel Salty "Bleeding Gums" McHaggis

[wolfnoy1993]

HEY ANY1 TLKING

[wolfnoy1993]

HI

[Mr.Hanky2005]

Originally posted by wolfnoy1993:
HI

This is a forum. Not a chat room. Stop making useless posts, and posting in all caps.

I also advise that you read the Forum Rules (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/8911019745/m/4891097385)

[warlord40]

I'm sure there are alot of first person shooter players here, but when i first heard it was military based... i was a bit sadened, I thought it might of been a bit more Dawn of War styled regarding placing new buildings with a variety of different units to upgrade etc. etc.Does anyone out there agree... or am i all alone on that one? P.S. Still think it'll be beaut game!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

[Toxic82nd]

I'd deff. love to see the Stryker in its many forms also maybe some MRAPs (awsome vehicles),Humvees, F-22, F-35, NLOS Cannon, BMDs, AA12 (pretty awsome gun) idk. pretty much anything coming out from now till when then game is set

-Paxton-

[Toxic82nd]

Also, i think it would be awsome if there were real time units like 101st, 82nd, 3rd Infantry division, 10th mountain division, 30th infantry brigade, 278th cavalry regiment, 155th armored brigade, 172nd...... you get the point :P

[tylniles]

i'm sure there'll be some MRAP type vehicle. considering that the US military is starting to outmode the humvees from combat use and replacing them with the MRAPs. strykers will probably be in the game as well. as far as real life units, that probably won't happen with the US JSF considering the JSF is a seperate unit from the regular military. but perhaps in the campaign there will be NPC players who are those units. like maybe you'll have an objective like "link up with troops from 82nd airborne division to launch a counterattack". or something like that.

[vazquezlax]

wait, maybe the JSF is just like the Ghosts in Ghost Recon who only uses the newest tech. i mean, Scott Mitchell is the JSF commander right? so maybe the JSF just gets all the new toys before anyone else...

[vazquezlax]

oh, the ability to, in between battles, go to a "Battalion map" and be able to select individual units under ur command and rename them or upgrade them so you dont always have to upgrade them in the middle of a battle - because in real war a group of engineers would not suddenly become a sniper squad, they would be changed between battles

[vazquezlax]

persistant ground deformation as well! i want to be able to fight in area A, drop a nuke (creating a big crater) win (or lose) the battle, go fight in area B, cause havoc there while my teamate goes to A to fight and the crater from teh nuke is still there! eventually most of the battlefields would be nothing more than total wastelands - which is exactly what a large war would look like - craters from WWI and WWII still are all over europe and the US still has holes and trenches (albit overgrown) from the civil war

[Mr.Hanky2005]

vazquezlax, in the future, please use the edit button. It can be found in the bottom right of your post box. It is the button with the little eraser.

Thanks

[vazquezlax]

oh...thanks
uh....yeah - can infantry take cover behind vehicles? like a squad of rifleman hide behind an MBT for protection against small arms?

ill remember the edit button from now on btw...

[Toxic82nd]

yes, if you look at some of the pictures ubi h as put up theres men taking cover from vehicles http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

also those special forces units (JSF) are prolly equipt with the future "Land Warrior" outfits

[Toxic82nd]

also. i think that if a battle draggs on for a wile that troops should start to get PTSD from explosions and the long dragged out battles(sure that wont happen but it would be intresting)

[vazquezlax]

do you think tanks and other fighting vehicles (like bradleys) will use their turret mounted machine guns or coaxial machine guns on infantry like in real life instead of just blasting away with their main gun?

[tylniles]

Originally posted by vazquezlax:
do you think tanks and other fighting vehicles (like bradleys) will use their turret mounted machine guns or coaxial machine guns on infantry like in real life instead of just blasting away with their main gun?

no reason why they wouldn't use both. if the troops were in a building the tank or ifv would probably fire HEAT(high explosive anti tank)rounds with it's main gun. or maybe both. machine gun to keep the troops inside suppressed while the vehicle is reloading(tank or bmp) to prevent them from firing an AT missile. if there was a large group of infantry, i see no reason why an IFV, more particularly a Bradley, wouldn't use it's main gun. if they were at close range or in an urban area, obviously the MG would be the best choice.

[Toxic82nd]

i've seen the Bradly shoot its 25 mm cannon in urban areas and its TOW missiles :/

but i suppose the M240C (7.62 rounds) would be a good choice 2

[vazquezlax]

i supposee - though according to the screen shots it looks like the Bradleys only have a 25 - 30 mm gun...whats with that? where'd the TOW go?
haha...that rhymed...
I have a question about how the devs. are gunna put Active Defense (ADS) into the games - it's sick idea, but wont that make some units almost invincible? imean, the Israeli Trophy ADS system in service today defeats all RPGs, Tank rounds, and AT missiles - and it's only gunna get better - how do you counter that with another tank?

[warlord40]

Will this game be slightly like "world in Conflict" in relation to moving troops around? (without mentioning voice command) P.S.they havent updated the official web site for awhile... are they all still on holiday? or are they just trying to stress us out?

[Reconning_GRSC6]

They should add behavior like if you kill a whole enemy unit and theres only one guy left he or she would either charge at you or flee. The idea of surrendering enemy sounds great too.

[t3t011]

I want to see AI smart enough to automatically take cover within their immediate area as a default

[TaSniper]

I'm almost positive they will be, so no worries there http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

[t3t011]

the ability to take cover inside building like Ground Control 2

[Kreig_Gear]

I'm not sure if this suggestion has been covered but I think the inclusion of other
Tom Clancy characters/unit in the field of battle would be great. I know they've made mention of the Ghost Recon unit being part of the american forces but what about a Rainbow Six unit for the EU forces? Being a big fan of Rainbow Six it'll be great to see these guys really ripping it up when they storm buildings to clear out the oposition. Unfortunately I'm not too well versed in the whole mythos of Tom Clancy's stuff but I'm sure there are other characters and units you can put in there to really give the game flavour.

[TaSniper]

Specefic characters will be in the game. Scott Mitchell is a General for the JSF. Certain members of Rainbow are going to be generals for the EF as well. In terms of the EF getting actual Rainbow units on the field, I don't think so. There has been no mention of this but also Rainbow is an anti-terrorist unit so it wouldn't make much sense to see them fighting on the front lines of world war III.

[Kreig_Gear]

I actually think Rainbow would fit in well as a 'unique' unit for the EF, if the game features
combat in heavy/rough terrain or buildings (due to it being fortified/entrenched) they'd be great as a shock troop type unit. Granted that Rainbow is a anti-terrorist unit but I hardly think that the EF would not use them since 'the European Federation Enforcers Corps is made up of veteran elite counterterrorist and peacekeeping forces from throughout Europe' and I quote that from the actually description of the EF faction article. Not to mention that many of it's founder and ranking officers are former Rainbow Six members, and in a war that will no doubt feature urban combat an anti-terrorist type unit would make complete sense with the type of troops and tactics that they use. I don't know about you but it sounds like they'd easily have Rainbow or a equivalent unit with the type of troops that they sport.

Plus Rainbow rock. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[TaSniper]

Yes, but at the same time Rainbow isn't just made up of soldiers from the countries that make up the EF in Endwar. About half of Rainbow comes from the U.S., China, Great Britain, and I'm sure there are more than that, hence the name Rainbow. I'm pretty sure this is why the devs are only making key Rainbow personell generals in Endwar. They are probably only picking the ones that are from countries in the EF. I wouldn't go so far as to say that there wouldn't be enough Rainbow members left to form an efficient fighting unit, but there deffinatly wouldn't be enough to match up to the Ghosts.

[vazquezlax]

i dont believe team rainbow has anyone from china...i believe it's composed of NATO members only...

[Myke08]

I wanna see suicide bombers and watch the fireworks.

[Vth_F_Smith_]

I wanna see giant killer robots that are shooting laser beams out of their eyes...uh...no wait, I DON'T! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

@vazquezlax

I believe you're right about Rainbow composed of NATO members, because so far I've seen members of Spain, France, Germany, Great Britain, U.S., South Korea...! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[Kreig_Gear]

Vazquezlax is right, Rainbow didn't have personnel from China and nearly all of it's members are troops that are part of NATO (only in the games does it introduce other members from countries outside NATO and even then these troops are a minority).

May I also point out that while the Ghost are more numerous you're comparing them to a multi-national group that draws it's members from many different countries and back grounds. Rainbow only take in the very best which means you won't have a lot of troops to start off with (unlike the Ghost), also just because they can't/don't have US troops to making up Rainbow doesn't mean they won't have one. You seem to miss the fact that Rainbow is a multi-national task force, just because the US isn't part of it does not mean that it will cease to be. Of all the factions the EF is the most able (not to mention most in character) to have a rainbow unit, again as mentioned in my other posts if your troops and your commanding officers were part of Rainbow and the army itself specializes in counter terrorism then it's only a natural progression to have an elite unit such as Rainbow or have a unit similar to it.

Having said all that and considering the actual structure of Rainbow, it'd be nice to see them in the game as a limited unit. It's quite common for RTS games to have those bloody hard units that you can only have a certain amount of (games like Command and Conquer and Warcraft to name a few). Having a maximum of two Rainbow units would be both in character and I think rather balanced.

Final while I do appriciate feed back from other members I think TaSniper may be taking the point of this thread the wrong way. The thread states "Types of Units/Features you would like to see in EndWar Devs read" , and that's what I'm doing. I'd like to see Rainbow Six as a unit in the game. While I can accept that you don't agree I certainly don't think it's right to try derailing my suggestions simply because you don't agree. Remember I'm participating in the way that is meant for this threat. We're not here to nitpick at each other's choices, I'm also sure they don't appriciate this thread turning into a troll/flame war. The stuff people input here is a great resource for the developers, lets keep it at that shall we?

[TaSniper]

Ok, first of all I would just like to point out that he's right in the respect that I forgot the point of this topic, in my defence it was created a long time ago and I've gotten to the point now to where I generally don't look at the topic names in the stickied portion because I know what they all are from memory. Or I should say that I thought I did at least.

Next, "You seem to miss the fact that Rainbow is a multi-national task force, just because the US isn't part of it does not mean that it will cease to be." Never once in my post did I suggest that Rainbow wouldn't make the cut as a unit in Endwar due to the fact that it wasn't from the United States. On that note, you mentioned that the U.S. isn't a part of Rainbow, which is false. Rainbow has several members from the United States, Ding Chavez and Homer Johnston to name two.

Lastly, I simply stated that the devs have already said that key Rainbow members are going to be generals in the EF army. This tells me that Rainbow being a playable unit as the EF is unlikely, because otherwise they would have just said, "hey, pick EF because you can have Rainbow units." Now I appologize if I seemed to be discrediting your "wish" but I am simply trying to state facts here. With so many people not bothering to read any information on Endwar and then posting questions here I am to the point now where it seems that all I do is try to give people the facts that the devs have given us. That as all I was trying to do with my post.

[t3t011]

MR-C LW

(A.K.A. the gun cam from GRAW 2. mebbe.

[Kreig_Gear]

On the statement of 'You seem to miss the fact that Rainbow is a multi-national task force, just because the US isn't part of it does not mean that it will cease to be' allow me to rephrase that as I used a wrong word which lead to this misunderstanding. What I actually meant to say was '...just because the US isn't part of it anymore does not mean that it will cease to be...'. I'm quiet aware that Rainbow had a fair amount of american personnel, but what I meant to say was even if the US did pull it's resources from Rainbow it doesn't mean that Rainbow would cease to be.

On the basis of informing others of information that's already there, it is admirable to point information to others but it is presumptuous to assume that they have not been doing up some reading. In fact a fair few people would have been reading up information on EndWar, otherwise they wouldn't be aware of this awesome game coming out. If by chance they do post something that will already be included in the game then they're in for a good surprise, if they do mention something that hasn't been spoken off before then all the better for the devs. Now while I understand why you're stating that it's unlikely for Rainbow to be part of the EF since the devs haven't mentioned it, you must also remember the fact that this thread is here for things that aren't in the game (or at least haven't been mentioned). This thread is essentially a 'wish list'.

I do apologize if I myself have come across too strongly in this, I do get carried away some times but it's always the case of things you're passionate about isn't it?

[TaSniper]

Originally posted by Kreig_Gear:
On the statement of 'You seem to miss the fact that Rainbow is a multi-national task force, just because the US isn't part of it does not mean that it will cease to be' allow me to rephrase that as I used a wrong word which lead to this misunderstanding. What I actually meant to say was '...just because the US isn't part of it anymore does not mean that it will cease to be...'. I'm quiet aware that Rainbow had a fair amount of american personnel, but what I meant to say was even if the US did pull it's resources from Rainbow it doesn't mean that Rainbow would cease to be.

On the basis of informing others of information that's already there, it is admirable to point information to others but it is presumptuous to assume that they have not been doing up some reading. In fact a fair few people would have been reading up information on EndWar, otherwise they wouldn't be aware of this awesome game coming out. If by chance they do post something that will already be included in the game then they're in for a good surprise, if they do mention something that hasn't been spoken off before then all the better for the devs. Now while I understand why you're stating that it's unlikely for Rainbow to be part of the EF since the devs haven't mentioned it, you must also remember the fact that this thread is here for things that aren't in the game (or at least haven't been mentioned). This thread is essentially a 'wish list'.

I do apologize if I myself have come across too strongly in this, I do get carried away some times but it's always the case of things you're passionate about isn't it?

Haha, yes I know exactly what you mean about being passionate about certain things.

On the subject of me informing people of facts about the game, I just do it when I see that it's necesary. Have you seen some of the topics that some of the new people have created? "What type of game is this?" "Is this a first person shooter," ect. Anyway, I don't mean for it to seem like I'm trying to be a "know it all" so to speak, I just like to keep certain individuals informed if they are unclear about a particular bit of information.

On the subject of Rainbow, yes that does make more sense now. I was a little confused with your previous statment.

[Mr.Hanky2005]

Get back onto topic.

Thank you

[vazquezlax]

back on topic

you're welcome

[DartzXX]

I don't know if this question has been addressed already, but in any case I was wondering how will the teams be divided? Is a player able to change factions every match or do you pick a side when you create your general and stick with that faction? And if so what will be done to keep the factions balanced?

[Inquisitor_Zeal]

Originally posted by DartzXX:
I don't know if this question has been addressed already, but in any case I was wondering how will the teams be divided? Is a player able to change factions every match or do you pick a side when you create your general and stick with that faction? And if so what will be done to keep the factions balanced?

I believe that for the global campaign, once you choose a faction you have to be them until it finishes and a new game starts. But i think if there is a quick match type place, you should be able to choose who you want to be for each match

[Inquisitor_Zeal]

Why has this become unstickied? It seemed so popular and was stickied for quite some time.

[TaSniper]

If you noticed one of the mods made a sticky post with links to all of the other sticky threads that they unstickied. I don't think I've ever used that word that much in one sentence before.

[Mr.Hanky2005]

It was unstickied due to a Ubi forum-wide cleanup. Ubi is trying to fix up the forums so they look more uniformed and neater. It also makes stickied threads a bit more noticeable when they do go up.

TaSniper, it was a Forum Manager who made that thread. Not a moderator.

[TaSniper]

Originally posted by Mr.Hanky2005:
It was unstickied due to a Ubi forum-wide cleanup. Ubi is trying to fix up the forums so they look more uniformed and neater. It also makes stickied threads a bit more noticeable when they do go up.

TaSniper, it was a Forum Manager who made that thread. Not a moderator.

Ah, ok sorry. My mistake

[vazquezlax]

what i really want is durable buildings - my one prblm in WiC was that when you had infantry garrison a building the other player would just call down an arty strike and level the building with your men inside! the buildings were too flimsey...a good combination of Act of War building combat and WiC would be good....

[t3t011]

To get back on topic, I would like to see the ability to choose the weapon loadout and amount of people. (i.e. Rifleman = XM8 #of Rifle men = 20 Grenadier = MRC/AGL # Of Grenadiers = 15)

There would be a max and a min of the number of soldiers of said class per platoon, so you couldn't have ALL Granadiers of Marksmen. but just slightly vary the kit and number of troops per class which can't be changed after Camaign has been started. I'm tired so this might be very confusing.

[vazquezlax]

i want helicopters to go in on strafing runs when they attack like in real life - no helicopter just sits there in a hover when attacking units like in most RTS games - strafing runs!! and then the helicopter should either hover or circle around a bit when not being used...

[The_Real_Azrael]

Here's a few things i don't think have been mentioned yet...

1. Rail guns (kenetic weapons fired through magnetism)
-------Americans already have a working prototype, it just isn't practical yet because of the massive amount of power needed to accelerate the projectile has yet to become reasonably downsized for mobile operations

2. The "Rods from God" are easily made now....... by 2020 they would be outdated by rail guns..... (the rail gun would only need power, not fuel....thus able to hold MUCH more ammunition, and also able to make smaller, more precise attacks)

3. I'm assuming this will be very arcade like considering a typical military base can span a couple square miles.... and with current technology we would only need a 4-5 plane drop each holding 2-6 bombs to obliterate the base.............................. so i ask that when downsizing air support/artillery barrages that you still make them effective in doing massive damage.

4. As previously mentioned concerning the lack of space in maps.....it's obvious that there will never truly be attacks on enemy HQ's.....so this specific war could never realistilcy "end", or even won....................... please implement something worth achieving other than pushing the enemy back 3-4 miles.

5. Communication jammers. This is an absolute MUST..... with technology on the rise as it is, and communications becoming so much more advanced..... armies at war very much want to disable enemy generals communicating with their units. It creates panic and dissarray(in the less seasoned troops) and gives the other side a HUGE advantage when they know ALL communications will be jammed. (giving out orders then temporarily jamming communications)................ this would also be a reason to implement an FPS mode (players would still have some control of gameplay, but in this case it would be limited to a single person putting in their two cents.....)

6. A "pep-talk" feature..... I'll just lay this one out as a scenario based example.
---------------- You see multiple squads closing in on a infantry unit capable of holding the enemy in position until reinforcements arrive.... but it would take above average fighting.... General gets a private comm line with unit commander, gives him the pep-talk of the century, then player takes over control of that unit (trying to defy all odds and hold the line while being severly outnumbered) and depending on their skill in small squad based command.....they could succeed, (thus earning that unit some sort of upgrade) or they could fail horribly (sadly this is more often the case in real-life scenarios.....but they could do a significant amount of damage).........



Not to beat the dead horse with a stick.....but your goal is to creat THE next-gen game. Your not going to do that by adding in an effective and complex voice-command system. (Company of Heroes already has a VERY similar gameplay system in place.... at least according to the descriptions i've seen thus far) Every commander out there knows that the battles are not truly won by having the biggest army. A battle is one by knowing the battlefield, knowing your enemies strengths and weaknesses.....and most importantly knowing how take advantage of your enemy with your own strengths and weaknesses...................... BUT (this is the the BIG "but" here.....) all the planning and intelligence in the world still cannot win a battle..... it's the troops that do it. A tank that shoots down a helo with a one-in-a-million shot. The soldier who shoots the helo pilot causing it to crash into the oncoming battallion and causing significant damage.

It is these little things that help win the wars, and it is these little things that can't be achieved through programming......they can only be accomplished through that "last-hope" action.



All in all.....i say the game looks awesome.... and i'm somewhat tempted to purchase it.............. but sadly i cannot guarantee it being a THE next-gen game.....definitely inventive, definitely well designed, definitely fun to play...... but there are some key elements either lacking, or just a bit dissapointing.

P.S..... rail guns are the way of the future...... if we haven't figured out how to downsize (like tank size) their needed powersources in 20yrs then we probably would be stupid enough to attempt a WWIII...............

[LoST-CAUzE1978]

I'd love to see Spec Ops, especially the British SAS and Italian 9 Reggimento d'assalto paracadutisti. They would be stealth focused and quietly clear a path for ground and air units to advance. Another idea would be all three aspects of warfare to be fighting at the same time: land, sea, and air. Sea = Subs, boats and mabye carriers? Air = fighter and bomber jets, choppers (specifically the Comanche and V-22 Osprey, the one from Splinter Cell) And land, Infantry, Tanks and mabye even Strykers or Humvees?

[TaSniper]

Originally posted by The_Real_Azrael:
Not to beat the dead horse with a stick.....but your goal is to creat THE next-gen game. Your not going to do that by adding in an effective and complex voice-command system. (Company of Heroes already has a VERY similar gameplay system in place.... at least according to the descriptions i've seen thus far) Every commander out there knows that the battles are not truly won by having the biggest army. A battle is one by knowing the battlefield, knowing your enemies strengths and weaknesses.....and most importantly knowing how take advantage of your enemy with your own strengths and weaknesses...................... BUT (this is the the BIG "but" here.....) all the planning and intelligence in the world still cannot win a battle..... it's the troops that do it. A tank that shoots down a helo with a one-in-a-million shot. The soldier who shoots the helo pilot causing it to crash into the oncoming battallion and causing significant damage.

It is these little things that help win the wars, and it is these little things that can't be achieved through programming......they can only be accomplished through that "last-hope" action.



All in all.....i say the game looks awesome.... and i'm somewhat tempted to purchase it.............. but sadly i cannot guarantee it being a THE next-gen game.....definitely inventive, definitely well designed, definitely fun to play...... but there are some key elements either lacking, or just a bit dissapointing.

P.S..... rail guns are the way of the future...... if we haven't figured out how to downsize (like tank size) their needed powersources in 20yrs then we probably would be stupid enough to attempt a WWIII...............

You do know that there is no base building right? So there will be no HQ's per se. I would personally feel safer comparing this to a Total war game rather than CoH.

[The_Real_Azrael]

Originally posted by TaSniper:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by The_Real_Azrael:
Not to beat the dead horse with a stick.....but your goal is to creat THE next-gen game. Your not going to do that by adding in an effective and complex voice-command system. (Company of Heroes already has a VERY similar gameplay system in place.... at least according to the descriptions i've seen thus far) Every commander out there knows that the battles are not truly won by having the biggest army. A battle is one by knowing the battlefield, knowing your enemies strengths and weaknesses.....and most importantly knowing how take advantage of your enemy with your own strengths and weaknesses...................... BUT (this is the the BIG "but" here.....) all the planning and intelligence in the world still cannot win a battle..... it's the troops that do it. A tank that shoots down a helo with a one-in-a-million shot. The soldier who shoots the helo pilot causing it to crash into the oncoming battallion and causing significant damage.

It is these little things that help win the wars, and it is these little things that can't be achieved through programming......they can only be accomplished through that "last-hope" action.



All in all.....i say the game looks awesome.... and i'm somewhat tempted to purchase it.............. but sadly i cannot guarantee it being a THE next-gen game.....definitely inventive, definitely well designed, definitely fun to play...... but there are some key elements either lacking, or just a bit dissapointing.

P.S..... rail guns are the way of the future...... if we haven't figured out how to downsize (like tank size) their needed powersources in 20yrs then we probably would be stupid enough to attempt a WWIII...............

You do know that there is no base building right? So there will be no HQ's per se. I would personally feel safer comparing this to a Total war game rather than CoH. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I wasn't 100% sure on the base/HQ properties of End War.... but as far as actual gameplay (fighting, unit creation/upgrade, viewpoint) it is very, very close to Company of Heroes. At least in a broad analysis (it's obviously not WWII era)........


My one major request that i have completely forgotten is that you please make the "matches"/battles more of a "deathmatch" type scenario. I'm referring to deathmatch definitions from my previous RTS game "Age of Empires".... where all civilizations start out at the same class(era/advancement) and cannot move higher(this is suppose to be like commanding a "real-life" army...so the armies not going to magically learn(and produce) 5 new tech levels in the span of 10minutes)....

And also that we do not start out with a minimalistic troop count to start obtaining resources so that in 20-30 min we can start fighting. As i stated previously... this is suppose to be a new type of RTS, so i ask that we start out with a set amount of resources....approximately enough to fully create a full population army(not fully upgraded though) and the rest can be earned from there.

I ask these things because I have been discussing this games release with a friend of mine who just happens to be a brilliant strategist. He lives and breathes RTS's, and he's very excited about this game. But there are some major components that could be missed, but based on previous information I have read about End War..... it does not look like they will. Just to be sure though, I wanted to put in my requests........if anything, just so I can tell the Dev's "I told you so" after release.

Trust me Dev's....it's better to delay the game's release and make it great......than to rush it and make it merely decent. Your releasing amongst Rainbow Six:Vegas 2 and The Force Unleased(new star wars)....(those are at least the two big ones i'm concerned about).... so if your not putting something out that's worth buying more than those two games(most gamers don't have $150 to drop down every month....or they need a REALLY good reason to).... then maybe just clean everything up for the next month or two.

[Myke08]

Originally posted by The_Real_Azrael:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TaSniper:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by The_Real_Azrael:
Not to beat the dead horse with a stick.....but your goal is to creat THE next-gen game. Your not going to do that by adding in an effective and complex voice-command system. (Company of Heroes already has a VERY similar gameplay system in place.... at least according to the descriptions i've seen thus far) Every commander out there knows that the battles are not truly won by having the biggest army. A battle is one by knowing the battlefield, knowing your enemies strengths and weaknesses.....and most importantly knowing how take advantage of your enemy with your own strengths and weaknesses...................... BUT (this is the the BIG "but" here.....) all the planning and intelligence in the world still cannot win a battle..... it's the troops that do it. A tank that shoots down a helo with a one-in-a-million shot. The soldier who shoots the helo pilot causing it to crash into the oncoming battallion and causing significant damage.

It is these little things that help win the wars, and it is these little things that can't be achieved through programming......they can only be accomplished through that "last-hope" action.



All in all.....i say the game looks awesome.... and i'm somewhat tempted to purchase it.............. but sadly i cannot guarantee it being a THE next-gen game.....definitely inventive, definitely well designed, definitely fun to play...... but there are some key elements either lacking, or just a bit dissapointing.

P.S..... rail guns are the way of the future...... if we haven't figured out how to downsize (like tank size) their needed powersources in 20yrs then we probably would be stupid enough to attempt a WWIII...............

You do know that there is no base building right? So there will be no HQ's per se. I would personally feel safer comparing this to a Total war game rather than CoH. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I wasn't 100% sure on the base/HQ properties of End War.... but as far as actual gameplay (fighting, unit creation/upgrade, viewpoint) it is very, very close to Company of Heroes. At least in a broad analysis (it's obviously not WWII era)........


My one major request that i have completely forgotten is that you please make the "matches"/battles more of a "deathmatch" type scenario. I'm referring to deathmatch definitions from my previous RTS game "Age of Empires".... where all civilizations start out at the same class(era/advancement) and cannot move higher(this is suppose to be like commanding a "real-life" army...so the armies not going to magically learn(and produce) 5 new tech levels in the span of 10minutes)....

And also that we do not start out with a minimalistic troop count to start obtaining resources so that in 20-30 min we can start fighting. As i stated previously... this is suppose to be a new type of RTS, so i ask that we start out with a set amount of resources....approximately enough to fully create a full population army(not fully upgraded though) and the rest can be earned from there.

I ask these things because I have been discussing this games release with a friend of mine who just happens to be a brilliant strategist. He lives and breathes RTS's, and he's very excited about this game. But there are some major components that could be missed, but based on previous information I have read about End War..... it does not look like they will. Just to be sure though, I wanted to put in my requests........if anything, just so I can tell the Dev's "I told you so" after release.

Trust me Dev's....it's better to delay the game's release and make it great......than to rush it and make it merely decent. Your releasing amongst Rainbow Six:Vegas 2 and The Force Unleased(new star wars)....(those are at least the two big ones i'm concerned about).... so if your not putting something out that's worth buying more than those two games(most gamers don't have $150 to drop down every month....or they need a REALLY good reason to).... then maybe just clean everything up for the next month or two. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

One thing to say...

No one will listen to you if you talk before you do any research. Like seriously, ALL your questions have been answered. Look around the forums and sites like Gamespot or IGN

I'll be nice:

No magic rule
XP, not tech
Control up to 12 units

[Tolarius2007]

first of all im sorry if this has been posted but i dont have time to read 11 pages of posts so here goes.

id like for the units to have stances. if u say 'weapons free' then they fire at will and if u say 'return fire only' then they hold there fire unless fired upon or u give them authorization to fire which would work very well with the JSF since they have the most advanced stealth tech.

i would also like to see a 'secure perimiter' command were ur infantry will secure the immediate area and setup to cover all roads, alleys, etc.

also since the snipers will be part of the riflemen squads i hope that when they garrisson a building that the sniper takes the highest possible position with a good line of sight. i hate how in company of heroes u put the sniper in a tall building for him to have a good spot to shoot from but he sets up on the first floor by a window facing the bushes.

[Vth_F_Smith_]

Originally posted by Tolarius2007:
id like for the units to have stances. if u say 'weapons free' then they fire at will and if u say 'return fire only' then they hold there fire unless fired upon or u give them authorization to fire which would work very well with the JSF since they have the most advanced stealth tech.

i would also like to see a 'secure perimiter' command were ur infantry will secure the immediate area and setup to cover all roads, alleys, etc.

also since the snipers will be part of the riflemen squads i hope that when they garrisson a building that the sniper takes the highest possible position with a good line of sight. i hate how in company of heroes u put the sniper in a tall building for him to have a good spot to shoot from but he sets up on the first floor by a window facing the bushes. As EndWar's Creative Director has stated in one of these "thousand" interviews he's been giving to online and print press (poor Michael), you will even be able to issue one command "all units, attack enemy, at will" and then lean back in order to observe what happens (pretty much like what every general is doing http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif). http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

[The_Real_Azrael]

Yea.....so much of my previous threads have been answered through research (i'm slow at it, i'm very sorry).... I still haven't found a definitive answer/interview/article on the resource thingy. I know that it will change based on gametype....

more specifically.... in the "Total Annihalation" mode, i think that's what it was called, do you just start out with your entire army? Or do you start out with a basic army and you can "purchase"/call-in more.....and obviously if you can get reinforcements how exactly do you go about earning that unit purchasing power?

As far as what I'd like to see in End War....I would like to see everything that has been stated in interviews about End War to be put together very smoothly.

Granted....I would like to see a real-life nuke that has a small enough radius to not affect friendly troops 1/2mile away...... but hey, i understand the whole "console limitations/ detrimental to the fast-paced action" concept..... somewhat...........

Sometimes I feel that this game is going to bring WAY too much realism to video games for them NOT to make the maps bigger. But then again.... who wants to sit there and stealth 2miles to get behind your enemy to surprise them...... eek.... that'd be like a 2hr game....2hrs of waiting for your opponent to just do SOMETHING!!!!

I do hope there are MANY commands available....everything I've seen has confirmed this, but i'll never know until i actually play.

I can't wait to do the cliches...."Wait for it....wait for it.....check your range.....everyone select your targets.....wait for it.....FIRE!" then the entire enemy unit drops dead. That is....if this doesn't turn out to be TOO arcadey..... or even lack the greatness that is the headshot.


HEADSHOTS are a MUST!!!!! every infantry unit i've seen have some type of opening in their head....weather it be neck, eyes......nose...... they all have weak spots, and those MUST be exploitable when a stealthed/hidden unit has the jump on an enemy.



One specific command for infantry(specifically snipers) should be target heli pilots.

And for tanks, fire main guns at helo's.

Both are very possible (halo, battlefield:MC) and those are just the ones i've personally played. I'm sure there's a marine/navy seal/army ranger whose seen it done before. It should at least be possible to order your units to attempt it.

[SteelEagleStan]

I'd hate it if the tanks could fire at the helos, mostly because by then the helicopter will have destroyed a tank(Not the one that is firing), the shell could miss, and many other factors. I'd think it'd just be a cheap way to try to get kills against helicopters.

[vazquezlax]

i want units to sometimes miss their target when firing, like a tank lines up for a shot at another tank while on the move and hit the building next to its target

i want missiles and stuff to fly realistically - if you fire a javelin, i want it to pop out, and then rocket skyward before coming down on its target
i also want friendly fire - a misscommunication night caude an airstrike to fall on your team
and finally: i want the units in every fireteam to have their own name - not like "this is sergeant rule of alpha" but somthing like "roger, sgt. rule out - hank! get a c4 charge on that tank!"

[The_Real_Azrael]

Originally posted by vazquezlax:
i want units to sometimes miss their target when firing, like a tank lines up for a shot at another tank while on the move and hit the building next to its target

i want missiles and stuff to fly realistically - if you fire a javelin, i want it to pop out, and then rocket skyward before coming down on its target
i also want friendly fire - a misscommunication night caude an airstrike to fall on your team
and finally: i want the units in every fireteam to have their own name - not like "this is sergeant rule of alpha" but somthing like "roger, sgt. rule out - hank! get a c4 charge on that tank!"

Michael DePlatter did you one better on that one buddy..... they all have names....AND.....different voices. So you even know whose talking to you.


One specific command for infantry(specifically snipers) should be target heli pilots.

And for tanks, fire main guns at helo's. +
I'd hate it if the tanks could fire at the helos, mostly because by then the helicopter will have destroyed a tank(Not the one that is firing), the shell could miss, and many other factors. <STRIKE>I'd think it'd just be a cheap way to try to get kills against helicopters.</STRIKE> =greatness

I'm sorry i didn't clarify, but that order would be a "last stand" type order....where you either don't have any air defences, or it is still out of range and you wanted to make whatever stand you could against the enemies massive onslaught of flying death. In other words.....i don't want to be stuck with the normal restrictions of an RTS.....

Yes a tank doesn't normally fire at airborne targets....but that doesn't mean it can't. Granted....it's going to have a very low success rate as far as making contact with enemy vessel.....but the fact that I am still able to offer some sort of resistance would be nice.

And please, do everything you can to accurately portray the accuracy of the modern army. I know that sadly there are few soldiers who understand the concept of aiming, and that accuracy goes even further down the drain when they are surprised and have to make shots purely on reflex action.......... But I don't want to see A.I. firing like my teamates in Call of Duty 4 do...... or even Rainbow Six Vegas..... If I order them to use selective targeting(make sure they have a good shot before taking it) then I want them to have a higher kill:shot ratio.

And if I order them to use suppressing fire (while my other squad is about to flank them from behind) then i want them to just shoot all out. And obviously i don't want my flanking squad to just give away their position with bad shooting.

[Tolarius2007]

Originally posted by Vth_F_Smith_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Tolarius2007:
id like for the units to have stances. if u say 'weapons free' then they fire at will and if u say 'return fire only' then they hold there fire unless fired upon or u give them authorization to fire which would work very well with the JSF since they have the most advanced stealth tech.

i would also like to see a 'secure perimiter' command were ur infantry will secure the immediate area and setup to cover all roads, alleys, etc.

also since the snipers will be part of the riflemen squads i hope that when they garrisson a building that the sniper takes the highest possible position with a good line of sight. i hate how in company of heroes u put the sniper in a tall building for him to have a good spot to shoot from but he sets up on the first floor by a window facing the bushes. As EndWar's Creative Director has stated in one of these "thousand" interviews he's been giving to online and print press (poor Michael), you will even be able to issue one command "all units, attack enemy, at will" and then lean back in order to observe what happens (pretty much like what every general is doing http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif). http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

i know about the command 'calling all units assault enemy at will command' but i was talking about stances like in Rainbow six vegas.

[The_Real_Azrael]

i know about the command 'calling all units assault enemy at will command' but i was talking about stances like in Rainbow six vegas.


The answer to this question is....from everything I've read and seen.....YES.

I've seen multiple statements declaring that you can successfully play End War without touching the controller(not counting the "give orders button")........ this could all be rumor.....but from what I gather, anything that you can possibly do in the game, can be done with voice control. And given that I have never seen an RTS without some type of "stance" modifier on units..... I'm sure that End War will have it too.

If anything theirs will actually be much more in-depth and intuitive.... don't engage enemy unless fired upon, fire at will, use selctive targeting(take out high priority units 1st), suppressive fire, etc.... The great thing though is that for the first time the A.I. will actually be able to do a decent job. Instead of just changing the physical representation of their stance.

[TaSniper]

Michael DePlatter did you one better on that one buddy..... they all have names....AND.....different voices. So you even know whose talking to you.

I'm pretty sure that De Platter said that the sergeants of every platoon would have a name, not every unit. You are right that every unit will have a different voice though.

[The_Real_Azrael]

Originally posted by TaSniper:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Michael DePlatter did you one better on that one buddy..... they all have names....AND.....different voices. So you even know whose talking to you.

I'm pretty sure that De Platter said that the sergeants of every platoon would have a name, not every unit. You are right that every unit will have a different voice though. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank you for the correction on that one.....it is the sergeants that will have a name........

that makes me curious though.....say you have a platoon with a sniper, a gunner(carries a bipod SAW), a rifleman with anti-artillery weapon, a medic, and 2 basic rifleman........would there be a way to have your sniper and gunner fall back to support while the rifleman take flanking positions? Because that would be great tactical maneuvering........

or even have a support unit of an engineer squad hold back in a defensive/support position while the rest of the squad lay's down mines.

[Myke08]

Originally posted by The_Real_Azrael:
Yea.....so much of my previous threads have been answered through research (i'm slow at it, i'm very sorry).... I still haven't found a definitive answer/interview/article on the resource thingy. I know that it will change based on gametype....

more specifically.... in the "Total Annihalation" mode, i think that's what it was called, do you just start out with your entire army? Or do you start out with a basic army and you can "purchase"/call-in more.....and obviously if you can get reinforcements how exactly do you go about earning that unit purchasing power?

As far as what I'd like to see in End War....I would like to see everything that has been stated in interviews about End War to be put together very smoothly.

Granted....I would like to see a real-life nuke that has a small enough radius to not affect friendly troops 1/2mile away...... but hey, i understand the whole "console limitations/ detrimental to the fast-paced action" concept..... somewhat...........

Sometimes I feel that this game is going to bring WAY too much realism to video games for them NOT to make the maps bigger. But then again.... who wants to sit there and stealth 2miles to get behind your enemy to surprise them...... eek.... that'd be like a 2hr game....2hrs of waiting for your opponent to just do SOMETHING!!!!

I do hope there are MANY commands available....everything I've seen has confirmed this, but i'll never know until i actually play.

I can't wait to do the cliches...."Wait for it....wait for it.....check your range.....everyone select your targets.....wait for it.....FIRE!" then the entire enemy unit drops dead. That is....if this doesn't turn out to be TOO arcadey..... or even lack the greatness that is the headshot.


HEADSHOTS are a MUST!!!!! every infantry unit i've seen have some type of opening in their head....weather it be neck, eyes......nose...... they all have weak spots, and those MUST be exploitable when a stealthed/hidden unit has the jump on an enemy.



One specific command for infantry(specifically snipers) should be target heli pilots.

And for tanks, fire main guns at helo's.

Both are very possible (halo, battlefield:MC) and those are just the ones i've personally played. I'm sure there's a marine/navy seal/army ranger whose seen it done before. It should at least be possible to order your units to attempt it.

There will be over 80 voice commands http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[The_Real_Azrael]

There will be over 80 voice commands Smile

if they're going to continue to postpone launch I hope they make that impressive 80 number to an insane 100......those extra 20 random commands could be the difference between an amazing game, and a Game Of The Year game......granted I don't know how much Ubisoft is going to want to compete with their own title for that type of recognition, but it would make sense to me.

[Raide]

It would be great to put in hundreds of random comments but there is really no need to add in commands that have no tactical or gameplay benefits. You will be shouting all manner of random commands at people when you get online, so don't worry too much http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Remember, in EndWar you are the Commander, not the grunts on the ground. Your actions are exact, tactical and clinical, you want the job to be done as swiftly and efficiently as possible. Therefore, voice commands reflect your position as Commander and give you control over all of your units, what they are doing and where they should be. There are plenty of available commands for you to utilise in EndWar but there also has to be a sensible and manageable amount of them, so it is easier to remember commands when you are deep in combat.

[The_Real_Azrael]

Oh i know....i know....i was just kiddin around.....I imagine the commands will be easy to learn though, everything i've read about them seems like there very simplistic and straight-forward. Even more important is the high quality of command recognition that everyones complimented End War for. I know i don't want to sit there for 30 seconds repeating the same command over and over again.

The real skill though will be when players are able to give one unit a voice command, and at the same time another unit button commands.

As i've said before though....I won't mind waiting 6months, as long as that extra time was used to make this game Top Quality......as in no one else will make a game like it for another 5 years.....when the Xbox900(no I don't know anything about what microsoft is doing behind the scenes) comes out....HAHAHHA

[The_Real_Azrael]

I would definitely like to see the ability to Commandeer enemy vehicles (most likely the special forces type units for these tasks) that have not been completely incapacitated..... that way it would give you the ability to travel into enemy territory openly, but if you blew your "cover" in any way(shot at the enemy, got out of vehicle, broke radio silence) then you would be discovered and unable to return to concealed status while in the commandeered vehicle.

Even a tank could be commandeered by EF forces....considering their specilization in non-lethal weaponry, I'm sure they have some type of knock-out gas.....or even a super-powered stun(concussion) grenade they could drop down a hatch, or throw into a window.

[TaSniper]

Originally posted by The_Real_Azrael:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TaSniper:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Michael DePlatter did you one better on that one buddy..... they all have names....AND.....different voices. So you even know whose talking to you.

I'm pretty sure that De Platter said that the sergeants of every platoon would have a name, not every unit. You are right that every unit will have a different voice though. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank you for the correction on that one.....it is the sergeants that will have a name........

that makes me curious though.....say you have a platoon with a sniper, a gunner(carries a bipod SAW), a rifleman with anti-artillery weapon, a medic, and 2 basic rifleman........would there be a way to have your sniper and gunner fall back to support while the rifleman take flanking positions? Because that would be great tactical maneuvering........

or even have a support unit of an engineer squad hold back in a defensive/support position while the rest of the squad lay's down mines. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know that in some of the video interviews, De Plater has stated that the unit AI will be good enough to move up from cover to cover, try to outflank the enemy, etc. So I imagine that providing cover and/or suppressing fire will be programed in there as well http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif. Like most things these days, this is a question that can best be answered by a gameplay video.

[The_Real_Azrael]

Like most things these days, this is a question that can best be answered by a gameplay video

like most things, it could very easily be explained in a gameplay vid....... but i didn't know if someone possibly read something I haven't that might've briefly touched on the subject.....that was kinda a shot in the

[The_Real_Azrael]

Celebrating......after defying all odds, or making the enemy retreat....or even winning....I'd like to see my units at least put their hands up in the air and cheer....

A celebratory campfire and singing "We are the Champions.....OF THE WORLD!!!" would also be nice....but i understand how that's not feasible

[vazquezlax]

(not so seriously but it would be amusing)
so i know that somewhere out in the world some kid is going to be like "Get me a burger and a shake" to the EndWar thing b/c you're "talking" to it - as the kid would be a smartass
i would love it if when you said that if the game would respond "would you like fries with that?"

[classicleon]

MTHEL system, Trophy system, etc.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/8911019745/m/9021057336

[Tolarius2007]

hey guys, me and TaSniper were talking last night and we thought it would be really cool if say ur controlling a group of tanks and on the other side of the map ur infantry were engaged by the enemy. well it would great if a small picture in picture like screen would appear in the corner of ur riflemen sergeant telling u whats happening and that it is show his perspective in the first person so the view would shake and u could see what he sees for i bit while he reports the situation. and if u could here the realtime gunfire through the radio also.

[The_Real_Azrael]

Originally posted by Tolarius2007:
hey guys, me and TaSniper were talking last night and we thought it would be really cool if say ur controlling a group of tanks and on the other side of the map ur infantry were engaged by the enemy. well it would great if a small picture in picture like screen would appear in the corner of ur riflemen sergeant telling u whats happening and that it is show his perspective in the first person so the view would shake and u could see what he sees for i bit while he reports the situation. and if u could here the realtime gunfire through the radio also.

I'll agree with that.... obviously in the 3rd person views when your watching a squad.....your not going to see EVERYTHING else that's going on..... but it would be very helpful if they did make something a little more attention grabbing then a little blinking red dot. I imagine that the real-life command centers of the FFW project have TV screens ALL along the walls. Where-as we'll only be able to focus in on one image/perspective at a time.

[classicleon]

I agree with that as well. It'll be awesome if hear the sergeant reporting the situation..."General (or Commander)! we're under attack!"; "Enemy in my sight"; "we're taking heavy fire"; "enemy tank's shooting at us!"...
And, we are generals or commander, so each of us does not need to control every single unit...instead, we just need to have direct contact with different sergeants.

[XFulgrimX]

a video system that would allow u to watch a battle u already played before would be pretty cool, kinda like the theater system from Halo 3. If u lose a battle u can rewatch the battle after it to see wat u did wrong and improve ur strategy next time.

[The_Real_Azrael]

Originally posted by XFulgrimX:
a video system that would allow u to watch a battle u already played before would be pretty cool, kinda like the theater system from Halo 3. If u lose a battle u can rewatch the battle after it to see wat u did wrong and improve ur strategy next time.

I'm pretty sure that they will have this, at least for the top players. I've seen through multiple interviews that there will be new videos of the top players in action so everyone can watch and learn from them.

[fufuhammer]

now im not sure if this has been posted but my friend had a good idea if you have looked at Hanky's sig he has a sniper in that camo and i would think you could buy that as a upgrade to snipers, like it would slim the chances of getting caught by the enemy

[Inquisitor_Zeal]

Originally posted by fufuhammer:
now im not sure if this has been posted but my friend had a good idea if you have looked at Hanky's sig he has a sniper in that camo and i would think you could buy that as a upgrade to snipers, like it would slim the chances of getting caught by the enemy

Well now your in luck! There is some sort of Ghillie suit in the game. Now we dont know if it will actually do anything like make it harder for enemies to see the guy wear it but you should be able to see it detailed on the

Concept Art Showing Ghillie Suit Face (http://xbox360.ign.com/dor/xbox360/902336/images/tom-clancys-endwar-20071130040034482.html)

[atacms]

Originally posted by Inquisitor_Zeal:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by fufuhammer:
now im not sure if this has been posted but my friend had a good idea if you have looked at Hanky's sig he has a sniper in that camo and i would think you could buy that as a upgrade to snipers, like it would slim the chances of getting caught by the enemy

Well now your in luck! There is some sort of Ghillie suit in the game. Now we dont know if it will actually do anything like make it harder for enemies to see the guy wear it but you should be able to see it detailed on the

Concept Art Showing Ghillie Suit Face (http://xbox360.ign.com/dor/xbox360/902336/images/tom-clancys-endwar-20071130040034482.html) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I believe that the devs used the Saab Barracuda's SOTACS camo system to base their sniper head gear.
http://products.saabgroup.com/PDBWebNew/GetFile.aspx?PathType=ProductFiles&FileType=Images&Id=10118



You can see that the breakup and materials appear to match that of the Endwar's EEF sniper. http://xbox360media.ign.com/xbox360/image/article/838/838889/tom-clancys-endwar-20071130040034482_640w.jpg

If anyone's interested in the Saab's camo system they can find more info here:

http://www.saabgroup.com/us/ProductsServices/Capability..._management_html.htm (http://www.saabgroup.com/us/ProductsServices/Capability/signature_management_html.htm)

[fufuhammer]

thanks so much http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

[Tolarius2007]

i hope that there is no time limit at least on the conquest match types. i love to fight some drawn out battles sometimes were neither side can get an advantage. this is when the actuall players are tested. some will get impatient and others reckless and that is the only mistake that the their enemy needs to gain the upperhand. plus if u have played company of heroes then u can get an idea of what the map would look like after over and hour of fighting. sometimes there isnt a single blade of grass left.

[TaSniper]

Originally posted by Tolarius2007:
i hope that there is no time limit at least on the conquest match types. i love to fight some drawn out battles sometimes were neither side can get an advantage. this is when the actuall players are tested. some will get impatient and others reckless and that is the only mistake that the their enemy needs to gain the upperhand. plus if u have played company of heroes then u can get an idea of what the map would look like after over and hour of fighting. sometimes there isnt a single blade of grass left.

There wont be time limits, at least not for the global conquest battles. The devs stated that the battles can potentially last for months. They might have even mentioned that players can swap in and out, from the same clan I'm assuming, if the battle is taking to long for a player. The reason I gave the disclaimer in the beggining of my comment is that you might still be able to set a time limit for things like skirmish mode.

[FPR]

i would love to have a sniper team in ghillie suits. with silencers on their snipers..

[Inquisitor_Zeal]

Originally posted by TaSniper:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Tolarius2007:
i hope that there is no time limit at least on the conquest match types. i love to fight some drawn out battles sometimes were neither side can get an advantage. this is when the actuall players are tested. some will get impatient and others reckless and that is the only mistake that the their enemy needs to gain the upperhand. plus if u have played company of heroes then u can get an idea of what the map would look like after over and hour of fighting. sometimes there isnt a single blade of grass left.

There wont be time limits, at least not for the global conquest battles. The devs stated that the battles can potentially last for months. They might have even mentioned that players can swap in and out, from the same clan I'm assuming, if the battle is taking to long for a player. The reason I gave the disclaimer in the beggining of my comment is that you might still be able to set a time limit for things like skirmish mode. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are you sure that they werent talking about the Global Campaign taking months to finish? When i read that article way back, thats how i took it. In my opinion if a single battle can potentially take over a month to finish many people wont likely keep playing the game. I expect the battles to go on for a couple hours max,2-3 hours would be pretty cool i guess, but if your are having to yell voice commands for that long you may need to start thinking about getting a huge stash of beverages together http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

[Vth_F_Smith_]

Originally posted by FPR:
i would love to have a sniper team in ghillie suits. with silencers on their snipers.. According to De Plater we'll get stealth units, sniper units and commando units in EndWar! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
Originally posted by Inquisitor_Zeal:
Are you sure that they werent talking about the Global Campaign taking months to finish? When i read that article way back, thats how i took it. In my opinion if a single battle can potentially take over a month to finish many people wont likely keep playing the game. I expect the battles to go on for a couple hours max,2-3 hours would be pretty cool i guess, but if your are having to yell voice commands for that long you may need to start thinking about getting a huge stash of beverages together http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif You don't have to yell voice commands for that long - even if you logout the war is still going on without you. There's a simulation running in the background that each time calculates the new frontlines and takes the results of every multiplayer battle into account basically using them as a base for these calculations. It's supposed to be a persistent battlefield. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[Inquisitor_Zeal]

Originally posted by Vth_F_Smith_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FPR:
i would love to have a sniper team in ghillie suits. with silencers on their snipers.. According to De Plater we'll get stealth units, sniper units and commando units in EndWar! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
Originally posted by Inquisitor_Zeal:
Are you sure that they werent talking about the Global Campaign taking months to finish? When i read that article way back, thats how i took it. In my opinion if a single battle can potentially take over a month to finish many people wont likely keep playing the game. I expect the battles to go on for a couple hours max,2-3 hours would be pretty cool i guess, but if your are having to yell voice commands for that long you may need to start thinking about getting a huge stash of beverages together http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif You don't have to yell voice commands for that long - even if you logout the war is still going on without you. There's a simulation running in the background that each time calculates the new frontlines and takes the results of every multiplayer battle into account basically using them as a base for these calculations. It's supposed to be a persistent battlefield. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know how the persistant battlefield works and all but i was more talking about if an individual battle took months to finish.