Thoughts and ideas Thread - WIC: Modern Warfare Mod for World in Conflict

First off I want to say what an amazing mod, I played the original game for a short amount of time and have aleady played this mod more than the original game. Also I love the radar systems they are fantastic.

I do have some problems with it how ever, and they are as follows
1. How come the anti-air hmmwv can't see helicopters, nor can the anti-air m113, I have had these two anti air vehicles drive right under where the spiral missles originate from yet I can't engage or see the enemy choppers, this to me is very odd and it seems stupid to have heat sinkers only able to be used if I have some sort of scout in the area.

2. mh-60 and ah-60, I would like to see a return of the mh-60, until further notice, nobody really cares about ah-60 especially because it has the mh-60 model, I think until ah-64 model is made you should just keep a mh-60 with miniguns and the chaff/flare combo.

3. btr-90= I know people will not like me even saying this but, shouldn't you wait until you get a btr 90 model? I'm guessing this is to balance striker, correct? Also why is the btr-90 not amphibious it is in real life.

4. 30mm cannons to weak, I was hopeing that the 30mm cannons would be able to destroy apc's rather effectivly, such as useing machine guns on havoc or apache to destroy btr-80's or lvtp7's, just an idea that would make attack choppers something to truley fear if anti-air is not up.

5. I would like to see an eventual revamp of the russian tank tree to have a t-72b and bmp3, I know that the t-72 is being removed from the russian arsenal, but it will be quite some time till this is finished, and a t-72b would be a better than a t-64 which if I'm not mistaken was ment as more of a anti-tank tank rather than a Mbt.

6. A system could be done for american armor where you have M1A2 sep tusk (With Army markings) as heaviest tank costing 2500 or something, then have a M1A1 (If marine Core markings if possible), then have a stryker mgs as light tank, after that have a bradley with effective tow missle(reports are that the bradley had more vehicle kills than any other vehicle in Desert storm), then a bradley line backer for Anti-Air like the Russians have( I know you can buy the other aa in support forces), then have the amphibious lvtp7, stryker transport, and finally a hmmwv scout car(it could be doorless, and have less armor with increased speeds)

7. I'd like to see the nato team be renamed to the EU and be given their equipment back instead of abrams and apache (i'm betting this was just your way of making the release quicker but i'm just saying)

8. I have some ideas for the infantry doctrine
* First off make 2 types of infantry elite and normal, instead of just elite, this would make infantry a more intresting doctrine to play, have the normal infantry cost much less like 200-300 reinforcement points with light anti-tank(single at-4) and rifles without grenade launchers on every weapon, and have the elite infantry have carl gustav's and scoped rifles.
* Make the Anti tank infantry have a javelin(would look much like the hell fire on the offensive helicopter) instead of tow missile(would be more fun and more effective for price)
* Make the anti air infantry not have a grenade launcher attack instead have them set up something like an igla nest, it would be much more effective against choppers.
* Sniper teams should have 2 types a cheaper anti infantry sniper, then a anti-material sniper capable of taking out helicopters and apc's with a couple shots.
* Some other ideas I had was make infantry harder to spot(they are way to easy to eliminate) just if possible would be nice.
* Give the infantry doctrine 3 types of hmmwv's 1. 50 cal hmmwv 2. mk19 hmmwv 3.tow hmmwv
* Add a forward radio operator team that can call in smoke howitzer barrage and jdam strike with 180 second recharge, just to add a little fun

9. I think the offensive helicopter should be useing the laser guided ffar's ( not in use but have been developed and would be cool if the most advanced helicopter used them.

10. Would like to have a ah-6 helicopter with mini guns and ffar rockets.

Now I know that this can not all be implemented but just wanted to get my idea's out, I also know this will take many models that the mod team does not posses at the moment and may never posses, this is simply some ideas I would love to see added.

Thanks, your suggestions have been duly noted.

Thank you for making suggestions!

1. This is probably intended to make the radar more useful, but it may be a bug.
2. The AH-60 is the one with miniguns...
3. They can't get a model without donations, and yes it is to balance with the Stryker.
4. Not sure what you mean...
5. No the T-72 is no longer in service, but the BMP-3 is a possibility for the future.
6. Interesting... but they are too similar (the M1A2 and M1A1)
7. You are confused. The EU is a economic and political union, not a war union. NATO is the modern war union that includes Europe.
8. Interesting ideas... if you could propose how this would be balanced, and not just "cool", then it could be considered.
9. Hellfires are much better.
10. There already is... but with hellfires. Its called the "Infantry Transport Helicopter"

2. I know it has miniguns but it also hellfire missles a 20mm cannon and that's cool, but it should wait for a model, until then the default uh-60 would be nice to have, simply because it looks cooler and is more realistic, also is a hell of alot cheaper. I'm thinking it was made to balance out mi-24. I also don't think the mh-6 can carry that many soldiers in it.
4. I'm saying i think the apache machinegun and havoc machine gun should fire on armored targets, and do damage.
5. Could you give me a refrence where this was stated? As far as I can find out it is infact still used and has not been removed from service. I have however seen plans to upgrade them over time, but until they are upgraded they are still used by the Russian federation. In most battles Russia would get involved in they would have enough t-90's but in a modern world war all tanks would be needed so I think you would see t-72's. The bmp-3 would be cool to have so i hope it is added.
6. A M1A2 sep tusk would actually be much more effective than an m1a1 sep, the m1a2 series has better targeting sytems, better ranging systems, better night optics(not that it matters), and I think it got depleted uranium armor. The tusk version has much thicker side armor, a .50 cal machine gun over the cannon, a .30 cal m240 machine gun, and defensive armor around the machine guns on top.
7. European Union Battle Group (under direct control of the European council of the european union) with many 1000's of soldiers under their control. I think under a World War if they where attacked they would most likly be used.
8.I felt infantry where hugely lacking and only really useful when used to spawn camp or kill artillery, these would add more strength to the doctrine, and the regular infantry versus elite's would just make it a bit more intresting to have infantry battles, I personaly feel that infantry are lacking in world in conflict, it feels the tank to infantry ration is to high.
9. What I was talking about was a ffar rocket that is accurate, not a replacement for a hellfire, a helicopter would have both of these, honestly it doesn't matter, forget this one.
10. As far as I have seen there is no ah-6 with hellfire's or miniguns only one that has ffar's and it looked like 1 6 rocket pod, it doesn't have a model though so it looks just like the mh-6 from vanilla. I think you are thinking of the ah-60 blackhawk that has the hellfire, 20mm cannon, miniguns, and more, the real one even has ffar rockets (an extremly powerful gunship if I do say so my self).

One other thing, why is the ac-130 so strong? it's just a 105mm high explosive round not a 250mm gun ( I do believe the AC-17 that was being designed planed to have a 155mm or a 122mm gun instead of a 105mm, if you want to go a little bit futureistic.

Also can you add more than 2 ability to a single unit, If so there is alot you guys could do.

In a world war the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) would be used.

There are only 1500 soldiers in the EUBG!!! And NO armour.

NATO is the full force of 28 countries armies!!

No need for the yelling, I'm simply saying, Nato has the United States in it(a very big role infact) and this makes it kind of wierd to have nato and the united states as two different teams when the united states is in nato. So my solution would be another European faction that has equipment from all over Europe, the solution was the E.U.. I have just quickly looked up how many soldiers there was in eubg and first thing I got was wikipedia(so this may be extremly incorrect) and it says there is more than 1500(quite a bit more). Now I just think that we could pretend this conflict took place in 2-4 years and the E.U.B.G.'s have grown in size to even include armored units and such. If that where to be the case we could have a seperate faction instead of haveing the equivelent to having the United states military forces team and haveing another team called the united states marine core(marine core is part of the united states military)

cpl.fernandez wrote: 2. I know it has miniguns but it also hellfire missles a 20mm cannon and that's cool, but it should wait for a model, until then the default uh-60 would be nice to have, simply because it looks cooler and is more realistic, also is a hell of alot cheaper. I'm thinking it was made to balance out mi-24. I also don't think the mh-6 can carry that many soldiers in it.

The MH-60 model is planned for replacement. But I just don't have the time right now.

4. I'm saying i think the apache machinegun and havoc machine gun should fire on armored targets, and do damage.

They already do, using secondary fire. 30mm bullets actually do serious damage against armored targets. But the reason why you don't see that is two fold:

- 1. For anti-infantry use, the 30mm bullets are HEI, not API or HEDP and;
- 2. The bullets miss their targets all the time, since shots longer than 145wm range (equivalent to 1km-1.5km in real-life) result in much wider CEP than closer range.

I don't believe their chain gun needs to be made any more powerful, they are already pretty powerful enough for what they are. And besides, they are loaded with 70mm rockets and ATGM munitions so it's not much of an issue.

5. The bmp-3 would be cool to have so i hope it is added.

The BMP-3 will be added. It's simply a money issue right now.

6. A M1A2 sep tusk would actually be much more effective than an m1a1 sep, the m1a2 series has better targeting sytems, better ranging systems, better night optics(not that it matters), and I think it got depleted uranium armor. The tusk version has much thicker side armor, a .50 cal machine gun over the cannon, a .30 cal m240 machine gun, and defensive armor around the machine guns on top.

The tank is modelled after M1A2 SEP, not M1A1. The fire control script of the tank for main cannon actually uses Predictor code which makes it very accurate at hitting targets while on the move.

7. European Union Battle Group (under direct control of the European council of the european union) with many 1000's of soldiers under their control. I think under a World War if they where attacked they would most likly be used.

New factions are extremely complicated so it is unlikely to happen for a foreseeable future.

9. What I was talking about was a ffar rocket that is accurate, not a replacement for a hellfire, a helicopter would have both of these, honestly it doesn't matter, forget this one.

APKW Hydras will be too overpowered, helicopters are already too annoying for people playing human vs. human in multiplayer. It's really easy to criticize how choppers are so weak and "underpowered" for newcomers in the mod, but once you get the hang of the air, and play against skilled opponents who are going air against you, you will get to truly appreciate the devastating firepower of the Air role right now, and that we don't need to make them any more effective than they are.

10. As far as I have seen there is no ah-6 with hellfire's or miniguns only one that has ffar's and it looked like 1 6 rocket pod, it doesn't have a model though so it looks just like the mh-6 from vanilla. I think you are thinking of the ah-60 blackhawk that has the hellfire, 20mm cannon, miniguns, and more, the real one even has ffar rockets (an extremly powerful gunship if I do say so my self).

There are two units, AH-6 with small rocket pod and MH-60 DAP with Hellfire + 70mm rockets + M230 AWS. Hope this clears up any confusions...

Also can you add more than 2 ability to a single unit, If so there is alot you guys could do.

That is not possible as MC meta type for units only allow 2 abstract abilities, and that is hard-coded logic of the Masstech game engine (thus cannot be changed by a mod).

Edited by: blahdy

2. Okay, should be cool to have that new mh-60 model, will be epic to use.
4. Okay I understand the offensive one would use anti-infantry rounds, but could the defensive helicopter use it(it is used primarly for anti-tank) or does the game only have 1 entrie for weapons that is linked as a hardpoint? Also 1.5km is effective range of gun but it can fire up to 4.5 km so just a thought.
5. Nice will love to dominate stryker's with it.
6. Understood so new model would be needed.
7. I was suggesting that nato could be renamed like you renamed the soviets to russian federation.
9. Yeah I know I just got my head going and started thinking of how you could make the apache extremly over powered.
10. Yep I saw that I was suggesting adding miniguns to the ah-6 is all, and also giveing us back the blackhawk just for a personal style prefrence( Really doesn't matter to much)
Lastly damn that sucks would be awsome to be able to add run ability to infantry.

11. I had another idea though since the defensive helicopter has an open slot on the abilities so it would be cool to give it a lobl missle shot for defense, not super important or even necessary just thought it would be sick to have.

cpl.fernandez wrote: 2. Okay, should be cool to have that new mh-60 model, will be epic to use.
4. Okay I understand the offensive one would use anti-infantry rounds, but could the defensive helicopter use it(it is used primarly for anti-tank) or does the game only have 1 entrie for weapons that is linked as a hardpoint? Also 1.5km is effective range of gun but it can fire up to 4.5 km so just a thought.

Defensive Apache uses M230 if you issue Attack-Ground / Force-Fire (press and hold F key then left-click).

7. I was suggesting that nato could be renamed like you renamed the soviets to russian federation.

NATO faction is currently not supported and our official position to players is to not play as NATO due to a numerous amount of bugs related to dedicated server and bot AI code. It's not going to be a supported faction for a while until we have more than enough time available to debug it in greater detail.

10. Yep I saw that I was suggesting adding miniguns to the ah-6 is all, and also giveing us back the blackhawk just for a personal style prefrence( Really doesn't matter to much)

We've had miniguns in AH-6 back in alpha and open beta R0, but they've been subsequently deleted in beta update #1, due to complains from so many people about it being overpowered. Because of the minigun and what little rockets they have, players would spam all AH-6 (due to their low cost) and they sheer number of the made infantry playing impossible. It is fine as it is now without the minigun and we will not be re-implementing them as complaints about balancing have stopped after removal of minigun from AH-6.

The Blackhawk was replaced by AH-6 due to popular request from players on facebook to have transport choppers replaced to Littlebird for special-ops style insertion and change Blackhawk to DAP.

11. I had another idea though since the defensive helicopter has an open slot on the abilities so it would be cool to give it a lobl missle shot for defense, not super important or even necessary just thought it would be sick to have.

Don't believe it is necessary. The Russian helicopter does not have LOAL capability to match the list with Apache.

Defensive chopper fires an ATGM that can kill a unit in single shot, every 3-5 seconds. I think that's enough for a unit that is already too powerful.

BTW can we get the heavy sam missiles that use predictor code on the place of the inert round rather spec ability? And can we have shootable balistic missiles with limited player control? This is b/c with unshootable bm we have a too overpowred unit. And the bms use the image corelation seakers thus logically it is better to give them atack or move orders rather than dumb ir seaker. And with manual control and skill the player can hit high vale assets that use smoke or jamming.

Well I've got a couple more things you can suffer through reading.

First of all T-64 being replaced by t-72b? It is still in russian army(may not be used as much but they still have a shit ton of them and in a world war they would use them) or just make it a t80u. I remember hearing somewhere that the t-90 was a upgrade of the t-72 and that the t-80 was an upgrade of the t-64 if that is true it could work.

Secondly do you disagree with increaseing attack helicopter gun ranges, I'm fairly sure that they shoot accuratly at the current engagment range ingame and shoot inaccuratly at twice the ingame range if we use the range table you provided earlier in the thread. If this where to happen you would need to have a codeing where when moving accuracy is reduced severly( was going to provide a video of gun at range but you could google it your self search m240 ambush on google and click the first video that shows up.

Third is this a realism mod or just a modern combat mod?

cpl.fernandez wrote:
Secondly do you disagree with increaseing attack helicopter gun ranges, I'm fairly sure that they shoot accuratly at the current engagment range ingame and shoot inaccuratly at twice the ingame range if we use the range table you provided earlier in the thread.

Because the map size of WiC is so small (each map is about 1.2 to 1.5km on dimensions, on average), we can't simply copy and paste what you see on Wikipedia and YouTube and call it 'realism mod', such kind of action destroys multiplayer game balance completely.

As a result, the MW Mod uses a proprietary "Scaled World Distance System" to simulate authenticity but not produce outright realism -- the goal is to balance realistic feel with game playability given the constraints of small map size in WiC.

WiC's map meters/km's are referred to as "wm" in MW mod or simply "wic meters".

Now, to apply that to your current discussion, the rMax of M230 AWS on apache is 250wm in WiC.

250wm equals 3 to 4km in real-life according to scaled distance system we use.

So this means, in order for your chopper to have accurate shot for shot, you need to come much closer to 62.5wm.

In other words, it's fine as it is. Why would you want air role more powerful, when it's fairly realistic enough given the constraints of map size? It already destroys so much stuff and air is the only role that gets so much TA compared to anything else.

Our goal of the mod is to bring authenticity of modern combat, note the keyword "authenticity." Being authentic does not mean being realistic. At some point you have to make compromises and be unrealistic in ways you implement some elements of weapons in the name of game balance, but the key is to maintain the authentic level of combined symmetrical warfare from a strategic point of view.

We're not going to destroy game balance on multiplayer that we've worked so hard to protect, because someone thinks one particular weapon does not look realistic enough. When you play on multiplayer, you have to try to understand what it means when you're proposing an overpowered unit -- you need to first get shot at by such unit on multiplayer and feel how much it sucks to play as armor or infantry role when a skilled air player is bashing you on the other site -- take that into consideration, and that's how we think about designing a game balance while keeping things in relative context of realism.

-------------------------

ikalugin wrote: BTW can we get the heavy sam missiles that use predictor code on the place of the inert round rather spec ability?

Right now we cannot, because for reasons that we do not know, the game crashes when a normal primary shooter attempts to fire a lead-pursuit guided missile.

Later in the future, it will be possible to write a mid-course update feature using inertial navigation system on ballistic homing missile, so that the missile delivery system follows the air player before unleashing a lead-pursuit guidance on him for terminal end-game kill. But this feature is still far away off from research/development perspective.

So for now, the only most applicable way to deploy this missile taking in considerations of both technical feasibility and game balance is to make it available as offensive special ability only, for now.

And can we have shootable balistic missiles with limited player control? This is b/c with unshootable bm we have a too overpowred unit. And the bms use the image corelation seakers thus logically it is better to give them atack or move orders rather than dumb ir seaker. And with manual control and skill the player can hit high vale assets that use smoke or jamming.

Currently the BM is shootable by anti-bm defenses like pac-3 and s-300. Manual control is a bit too complicated I think to implement while simulating ballistic gravity movement action -- where as manual control is very easy to do with cruise missiles, b/c they fly like aircraft to begin with.

But we also must consider game balance impact here.

Ballistic and cruise missiles are not designed to take out high-value targets from game balance stand point (although in real-life, they are). Because, if we mke them able to take out high value assets, then ballistic missiles and pgm's will be spammed to destroy s-300 and patriot sites in a single sweep with no way to effectively counter them, even with anti-pgm defenses setup. This is the problem we had during open beta and forced us to nerf the cruise missiles on subsequent updates. Even with anti-pgm + predictor code, they got easily overwhelmed with two air players throwing pgm's at the SAM site. And once SAM site is down, the entire team collapses with continuous non-stop wave of PGM's on front line forces. At the end of the day, air players stopped flying helicopters, but spammed PGM's all day long, b/c they score lot more by throwing PGM's than flying choppers.

With the current balanced setup, PGM's and BM's are designed to be used to take out high-value command points that are not effectively guarded by anti-pgm and ABM systems. They are extremely effective command point clearers, and gives air player the offensive reach to go in bold behind enemy lines in midst of extensive SAM activity to take out a specific target with precision. But when they are used to attack a high value asset that is anywhere near PATRIOT or S-300 site, you're not getting through at all, period.

Edited by: blahdy

Oh i'm sorry I misunderstood a previous post of yours that's my bad dude I appologize you have it as I want then(I read it and thought you said 150 wm was max range and you said that was 1.5 km in real life and that was max range, then reread right now) Again I appologies for sounding like an ass hat.

No worries, not a problem at all =)

But yes, both 70mm rockets and m230 chaingun have relatively same range in mw mod (~4km in RL)

Okay...most of you probably know me as the guy who talks alot and doesn't really say much. LOL Anyway, I just had a thought...maybe the NATO faction could use Harriers instead of choppers? It would add in some model variance, just so -everybody- doesn't use helicopters, and could be just a fun model to add...because it wouldn't radically change the game dynamics, as a harrier is VTOL, it could hover like a chopper and thus fight and play in a similar manner as the air players of the past are used to? Again, just my two cents.

I just have something small to point out as far as accuracy is concerned that wont affect the balance too much: the M256A1 cannon on the M1A2 (or M1A1 for that matter) can hit targets further away than the cannon of T90 (3-3.5km). The T90 has longer range when using 9M119 Svir (aka AT-11 Refleks) ATGMs (5km). Maybe you could add the Svir as the T90 special ability and give that a greater range than the Abrams. Also, manual reload time, even for relatively untrained personnel, is significantly faster than the autoloader, whose primary advantage is 1 less crewmember in the tank. Highly trained loaders can reload 3-4 secs after the gun is fired, where ALs can only attain a max of 10 RPM under ideal conditions.

BTW: The T64B was the russian 'quality' tank during the cold war, and is undoubtably superior to the 'quantity' T72.

"BTW: The T64B was the russian 'quality' tank during the cold war, and is undoubtably superior to the 'quantity' T72."

Really? I didn't know that The thing is though- the very first line of the wikipedia article on the T90 is: "The T-90 is a Russian main battle tank (MBT) derived from the T-72"

They chose T-90 as MBT b/c the T-64 -> T-80 series family basically failed from operational justification perspective. They had to make a business-case decision to cut operating costs, so T-72 it is, combined with updated armor package, fire control system and Shtora-1 and that's your T-90.
Compared to an M1A2, T-90 is a total joke, few people on Facebook who claim 'M1A2 = T-90' obviously have no f'ing clue about how MBT's work other than their fairyland dreams. The very notion that some how K-5 ERA on T-90 will withstand and hold up better than a Chobham/DU configuration is completely foolish and defies law of physics.

Lots of Russian nationalists actually claim the T-90 is BETTER than the M1A2... on youtube.

Youtube.com
Youtube.com
Youtube.com

Ah propaganda, how you give so many Russians hope :\

They also claim Phazotron UHF band search radar on Pantsir can spot F-22 at effective WEZ, when KBP Instrument Design Bureau (manufacturer and designer of Pantsir SAM)'s own marketing literature and specification states otherwise.

Russian nationalists are generally the old USSR types who are very artful at distorting facts, but nobody outside of their fairyland cares.

Edited by: blahdy

Have you guys ever added the MI-24 Hind?

You should add that.

Also the BTR-80A, its on my profile btw. Just to show you what it looks like.

Why not add the LAV-25? I love that vehicle.

They're already there, they have been in there since vanilla WiC itself.

They already have the MI-24 in game.
Yes, you will find that on many forums the Cold War is indeed, far from over. Russian nationalists will claim til the cows come home that EVERY piece of Russian equiptment is superior in every way to their American counterparts.
I really have enjoyed this mod, by the way, and play it now more than the vanilla game.

As far as I know as I said above the t-80 is an advanced t-64 and the t-90 is an advanced t-72, and the t-90 is in no way better than an abrams unless your convinced that 5 milimeters larger tank cannon makes all the differnce in the world. But whatever the cool thing about the t-90 vs abrams or any other argument someone might have is this little fact, there are a shit ton more abrams than any other modern tank. I think there are over ten times more abrams than there are t-90's(over 9,000 abrams last time I checked and like 500 t-90's), so in a cold war the Russians would use t-72b's as I posted earlier(no rush but I think it should replace the t-64, shouldn't be hard to modify t-90 into t-72, just delete stuff lol). In any case I believe American military is completly superior to the Russian military at this point in time(other than when looking at air forces), but if a war was going to occur it would most likely be a shit storm for both sides.

On another note, do you have plans to ever implement the chinese, not going to hold you to anything just wondering if you have thought about it(common I know you have).