What do you think of World in Conflict multiplayer?

Maximilian

Lifer
Feb 8, 2004
12,601
6
76
In a nutshell this games multiplayer is fast to start fun action, with good autobalance features that move players to other teams and stop players from spamming all helicopters/armor etc, which probably wouldn't work anyways. Also it dosent lag, nope no lag at all. This is the battlefield 2 of strategy games, except its better because its not by EA and it dosent require a massive patch to be balanced and non-buggy. Also the campaign is good! its not half life 2 quality storyline but its definately better than the tacked on company of heros one and worth a play through. I can definitely see this joining my "take wherever i go" games pile, which currently consists of starcraft+company of heros+orange box. This is proper RTS multiplayer fun (or RTT if you like, whatever) this makes up for the let down that was C&C3 multiplayer.

Anyone else play this? Did you like multiplayer?

 

samduhman

Senior member
Jul 18, 2005
397
2
81
Originally posted by: Soviet
Does noone play this game?? Seriously?!
I've played it some. Love what I have played. I just have to many pc games to keep up. Especially with WoW still eating up a large majority of my gaming time.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,078
506
126
I like the game but have to turn off the sound. Too many assclowns thinking they know what they are doing yelling at people. Integrated voice sounds great until you see the result. A bunch of idiots yelling at each other.
 

Maximilian

Lifer
Feb 8, 2004
12,601
6
76
Originally posted by: Capitalizt
I love it..very addictive. I am a heavy support whore. ;)
Same, i sit there with 2x heavy artillery and 2x heavy anti airs, ready with the smoke in case the enemy choppers take interest (and they usually do). Or i go armor sometimes, because its fast and easy :)
 

ConstipatedVigilante

Diamond Member
Feb 22, 2006
7,671
1
0
I played the beta and it seemed like infantry was useless and choppers dominated. It also didn't really matter whether your units died because your money would come back pretty fast. Has any of this been changed?
 

Ichigo

Platinum Member
Sep 1, 2005
2,159
0
0
Infantry > Air.

I'm pretty sure the significant time gap between losing your units and repurchasing them to bring back to the front *does* matter.
 

ZzZGuy

Golden Member
Nov 15, 2006
1,855
0
0
Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante
I played the beta and it seemed like infantry was useless and choppers dominated. It also didn't really matter whether your units died because your money would come back pretty fast. Has any of this been changed?
It's more balanced, if one team goes all helo's they'll get raped. Infantry kick ass until there is no more cover left for them, or a few nukes go off (you just need to know how to properly use them).

There are tactics involved but it's more like "guess where they will drive their armor through, bock their patch with your tanks, hold them there while you call down a air strike on your position and then retreat at the last second." Do that enough and you'll be waiting at their drop zones for new targets (i mean use good tactics, not one good one).


But in the end it all boils down to if you're any good and are your team mates half decent? You could be the all time best player of WiC and it doesn't mean a damn thing if your team mates suck because you all rely on each other and can you/they adapt to the enemy teams changing tactics (eg, they where going heavy on ground assault then suddenly switch heavily to air). Since the load times are so short, i leave any match where my team mates are retarded.



But i'm not playing the game now because i had formatted my computer and lost that tiny scrap of paper they put the CD key on.... i refuse to buy a new copy because they where too stupid to print it on the manual (which is MUCH harder to lose). Let this be a lesson to all, use a permanent marker and put your CD key on you CD if you have it on a scrap of paper instead of the manual.
 

Maximilian

Lifer
Feb 8, 2004
12,601
6
76
Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante
But i'm not playing the game now because i had formatted my computer and lost that tiny scrap of paper they put the CD key on.... i refuse to buy a new copy because they where too stupid to print it on the manual (which is MUCH harder to lose). Let this be a lesson to all, use a permanent marker and put your CD key on you CD if you have it on a scrap of paper instead of the manual.

In addition to that they should provide a goddamn plastic DVD case with their game, i have a neat pile of games and then theres this beat up looking vice city box and another beat up world of conflict box... My attempt to improvise isnt much better either, check this out.... What a load of balls...
 

novasatori

Diamond Member
Feb 27, 2003
3,851
1
0
infantry was damn good when I played

I played a ton in beta
I just don't have high speed net atm to play so I haven't bought it.
 
Apr 17, 2005
13,465
3
81
Originally posted by: Soviet
Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante
But i'm not playing the game now because i had formatted my computer and lost that tiny scrap of paper they put the CD key on.... i refuse to buy a new copy because they where too stupid to print it on the manual (which is MUCH harder to lose). Let this be a lesson to all, use a permanent marker and put your CD key on you CD if you have it on a scrap of paper instead of the manual.

In addition to that they should provide a goddamn plastic DVD case with their game, i have a neat pile of games and then theres this beat up looking vice city box and another beat up world of conflict box... My attempt to improvise isnt much better either, check this out.... What a load of balls...
ahahaa
 

ConstipatedVigilante

Diamond Member
Feb 22, 2006
7,671
1
0
Originally posted by: novasatori
infantry was damn good when I played

I played a ton in beta
I just don't have high speed net atm to play so I haven't bought it.
When I played, infantry would just get pounded by white phosphorous tank/artillery shells and napalm strikes. People would march them towards the objective like they were threatening, and they'd just get annihilated by a well-placed airstrike or something.
 

Maximilian

Lifer
Feb 8, 2004
12,601
6
76
Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante
Originally posted by: novasatori
infantry was damn good when I played

I played a ton in beta
I just don't have high speed net atm to play so I haven't bought it.
When I played, infantry would just get pounded by white phosphorous tank/artillery shells and napalm strikes. People would march them towards the objective like they were threatening, and they'd just get annihilated by a well-placed airstrike or something.
That happens with every ground based unit, my heavy armor is just as vulnerable as infantry is, even more vulnerable on some maps.

I dunno how to be a good infantry commander but i have seen them getting top score from time to time, i think the general idea is to stay in the trees where tanks cant harm you and your well protected.
 

ZzZGuy

Golden Member
Nov 15, 2006
1,855
0
0
Originally posted by: Soviet

I dunno how to be a good infantry commander but i have seen them getting top score from time to time, i think the general idea is to stay in the trees where tanks cant harm you and your well protected.
Cover is the key i had learned, also the fact you can replenish you're units in the field without ordering new ones. However once a nuke or 2 is dropped they become useless and the radiation will kill them, and almost all cover in important areas is gone.

 

Coldkilla

Diamond Member
Oct 7, 2004
3,944
0
71
I have no idea why this was given 9.5's etc.. I never liked it... then again I like pure realism games only...Arma/OFP
 

Malladine

Diamond Member
Mar 31, 2003
4,618
0
71
Hmm, might have to check this out.
I agree with the OP on C&C MP, not sure what it was but it sucked. Maybe the imbalance?

I just bought Dawn of War Platinum on steam...yum.
 

chizow

Diamond Member
Jun 26, 2001
9,537
2
0
Loved this game, definitely the most underrated game of 2007 IMO. It was well-received critically but I don't think its received as much buzz in the gaming community as it deserves. Really does some revolutionary stuff for an RTS and has the best-looking and most functional "true" 3D engine as well. I think part of it is due to the high system reqs and low published benchmarks, but the game only needs ~30FPS for smooth gameplay. Looking forward to an expansion for this game for sure.
 

Coldkilla

Diamond Member
Oct 7, 2004
3,944
0
71
Under rated? It got higher scores than Bioshock, GoW, CoD4... Tied HL2, Crysis, Halo 3...

No way it was better than all of those..
 

TheSlamma

Diamond Member
Sep 6, 2005
7,625
4
81
I didn't care for the unit limits at all.. I felt like once I had 4 helicopters I was done building.
 

chizow

Diamond Member
Jun 26, 2001
9,537
2
0
Originally posted by: Coldkilla
Under rated? It got higher scores than Bioshock, GoW, CoD4... Tied HL2, Crysis, Halo 3...

No way it was better than all of those..
Yep, it got high ratings from people who play and review games for a living. But it didn't achieve similar success in terms of sales or general gaming buzz. Even in the multiple polls or recommendation threads here it was seldom mentioned or listed. As for being better than the games you listed, I guess everyone's opinions are different, but you do realize you've listed FPS games and WiC isn't an FPS right? I still think it stacks up favorably, but I'm comparing it against games in its genre like CoH+OF, SC+FA, etc.
 

ZzZGuy

Golden Member
Nov 15, 2006
1,855
0
0
Originally posted by: Coldkilla
Under rated? It got higher scores than Bioshock, GoW, CoD4... Tied HL2, Crysis, Halo 3...

No way it was better than all of those..
Well, i like WiC better then bioshock, GoW (gears of war i assume), HL2 and Halo 3. COD4/Crysis/WiC i put around even. And yes i've played all these games.

But as chizow said, it's apple and oranges when comparing FPS to RTS. But the fact i like WiC over all these games does not mean the masses would agree with me. To each his own.
 

chizow

Diamond Member
Jun 26, 2001
9,537
2
0
Originally posted by: ZzZGuy
Originally posted by: Soviet

I dunno how to be a good infantry commander but i have seen them getting top score from time to time, i think the general idea is to stay in the trees where tanks cant harm you and your well protected.
Cover is the key i had learned, also the fact you can replenish you're units in the field without ordering new ones. However once a nuke or 2 is dropped they become useless and the radiation will kill them, and almost all cover in important areas is gone.
Yep, good points. You can schlep em around some in Bradleys/transports/Humvees to avoid radiation, but its a lot more micro. Also, infantry can be highly effective vs both air and ground. Other units are typically extremely effective vs. air or ground only. Would've been nice if infantry added to transport damage capabilities like some other games, but I guess that would've been unbalanced.

I found infantry in WiC more effective than *most* infantry units in CoH/OP and its nice being able to reinforce outside of the Command Sector. But they do heavily rely on cover, which I also liked a lot more than CoH. In WiC, infantry actually gets better, not worst under cover or in buildings. In CoH, buildings made it very easy to kill infantry and they also seemed to be penalized by quirky LoS. For example, a tank shell that might overshoot or miss pinned infantry in CoH would slam into a building and cause either direct or collateral damage.

 

chizow

Diamond Member
Jun 26, 2001
9,537
2
0
Originally posted by: ZzZGuy
Originally posted by: Soviet

I dunno how to be a good infantry commander but i have seen them getting top score from time to time, i think the general idea is to stay in the trees where tanks cant harm you and your well protected.
Cover is the key i had learned, also the fact you can replenish you're units in the field without ordering new ones. However once a nuke or 2 is dropped they become useless and the radiation will kill them, and almost all cover in important areas is gone.
Yep, good points. You can schlep em around some in Bradleys/transports/Humvees to avoid radiation, but its a lot more micro. Also, infantry can be highly effective vs both air and ground. Other units are typically extremely effective vs. air or ground only. Would've been nice if infantry added to transport damage capabilities like some other games, but I guess that would've been unbalanced.

I found infantry in WiC more effective than *most* infantry units in CoH/OP and its nice being able to reinforce outside of the Command Sector. But they do heavily rely on cover, which I also liked a lot more than CoH. In WiC, infantry actually gets better, not worst under cover or in buildings. In CoH, buildings made it very easy to kill infantry and they also seemed to be penalized by quirky LoS. For example, a tank shell that might overshoot or miss pinned infantry in CoH would slam into a building and cause either direct or collateral damage.

 

frankie38

Senior member
Nov 23, 2004
677
0
0
Originally posted by: Soviet
Originally posted by: Capitalizt
I love it..very addictive. I am a heavy support whore. ;)
Same, i sit there with 2x heavy artillery and 2x heavy anti airs, ready with the smoke in case the enemy choppers take interest (and they usually do). Or i go armor sometimes, because its fast and easy :)
So...thats you! lol.

It was fun trying to get 4 stars...now that I have them....its difficult to stay amused. that said, wic mp>bf2 mp.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS