Jump to content

Choke On This Epic Fail Store. An Indie Dev Made The "right" Decision


62 replies to this topic

#41 FRAGTAST1C

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Fighter
  • The Fighter
  • 2,869 posts
  • LocationIndia

Posted 23 August 2019 - 06:01 PM

View PostNightbird, on 23 August 2019 - 09:13 AM, said:

All I did was reply to your claim that MWO was unprofitable. It has to have been to pay for 5 years of MW5 development. I also pointed out that MWO's decline was exacerbated by not fulfilling MWO's initial promises, leading to a loss of trust.


I agree with you and I agree that my initial post might not have painted a proper picture as to what I wanted to say. I was merely talking about the big picture. PGI is a small company and MWO was keeping the employees paid. But with MWO declining so rapidly to a point where their primary monetization model of selling mech packs was no longer enough. So, making MW5 from the funds that they had made from mech pack sales and what-not from MWO was a choice made to expand the company but, there is always a doubt about the quality of the new product 'cause PGI hasn't been great (shall we say?).

Could PGI have miraculously turned things around and made MWO a highly profitable product and retain interest in a lot of players again? I doubt that. Making a new product, expanding the company work-force a bit more and getting in some early dough by taking the exclusivity route is logical from the perspective of staying afloat.

So, yeah. I just wanted to say that MWO might have been profitable enough at one point to encourage work on another project but it isn't anymore. And if PGI want to stay afloat, this is the right choice. I'm not saying that people should like it and support it however. It's their will-and-choice to do what they want to. But harbouring some sort of ill-will, especially in this day and age is just bad.

#42 Appogee

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 10,966 posts
  • LocationOn planet Tukayyid, celebrating victory

Posted 23 August 2019 - 06:04 PM

View PostMadcatX, on 23 August 2019 - 05:31 AM, said:


Out of honest curiosity, what promise did they not deliver on that they promised backers? I think they delivered everything... just not in the best state. I don't think additional money would have changed the decisions they made that kind of backfired.

The biggest failure to deliver is Faction Play, the enduring end game content.

Take a look at the slideshow by Bryan Eckman, in which PGI outlined what Faction Play was supposed to be - a persistent sprawling battle for the Inner Sphere with pilot careers, logistics, the etc.

Then compare it to what they - Quick Play with bases and respawns.

PGI certainly did not deliver what they committed to Founders.

It's even more reprehensible when you know the backstory about how PGI lied about developing FP until Microsoft renewed their licence, and then had to rush something half-baked out the door before Christmas.

Edited by Appogee, 23 August 2019 - 06:08 PM.


#43 MadcatX

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Brother
  • Big Brother
  • 1,026 posts

Posted 23 August 2019 - 07:24 PM

View PostAppogee, on 23 August 2019 - 06:04 PM, said:

The biggest failure to deliver is Faction Play, the enduring end game content.


Agreed. I should have been more specific however. I don't have the best of memories thus don't remember everything that was promised, thus I was curious if there was anything promised that wasn't delivered in the sense that it didn't even see the light of day?

#44 Appogee

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 10,966 posts
  • LocationOn planet Tukayyid, celebrating victory

Posted 24 August 2019 - 08:47 AM

View PostMadcatX, on 23 August 2019 - 07:24 PM, said:


Agreed. I should have been more specific however. I don't have the best of memories thus don't remember everything that was promised, thus I was curious if there was anything promised that wasn't delivered in the sense that it didn't even see the light of day?

Unfulfilled promises just from the microcosm of the PGI sales video on Community Warfare:
  • player initiated bounty contracts
  • LP earns you the right to join famous Merc Units (eg. Wolfs Dragoons)
  • Exclusive unit patterns, colours etc earned through LPs
  • Units will own assets including dropships and bases.
  • "Every single match played in MWO will have a purpose and affect the state of the Inner Sphere" (ie QP will be replaced)
  • It will be "a giant chess game" requiring you to use Jump Ships and Dropships to move between planets, garrison them etc.
  • Contracts will vary according to how many LP your unit has earned.
  • Earn the "bonuses and benefits and items" of each planet your unit conquers.
  • 3000+ planets available.
  • Discounts available to purchase equipment on planets that you own.
  • The Mechs available depend on the planets you control, as well as access to Black Market goods.
  • Pricing of Mechs varies depending on faction relationships and planets controlled.
  • "Special content" will be available on some planets.
  • "A new meta game" involving a unit leveling system providing access to special rewards "after level 60".
Video here: https://mwomercs.com...an-ekman-video/

#45 Mystere

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 22,783 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 24 August 2019 - 09:52 AM

View PostNightbird, on 23 August 2019 - 05:13 AM, said:

This is 100% false, MWO the Canadian government paid for 5 years of MW5 development before the exclusivity deal, at the cost of not delivering promised features in MWO.


That sounds more like it. Posted Image


View PostMadcatX, on 23 August 2019 - 05:31 AM, said:

I think they delivered everything... just not in the best state.


Now that is what I call an understatement. Posted Image

#46 Prototelis

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 4,789 posts

Posted 24 August 2019 - 09:53 AM

lol. Subsidies certainly helped, but this game has deffo made a **** ton of money on its own.

Even large studios are taking advantage of subsidies. It's hardly a point.

Edited by Prototelis, 24 August 2019 - 10:01 AM.


#47 Mystere

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 22,783 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 24 August 2019 - 10:14 AM

View PostKhobai, on 23 August 2019 - 06:55 AM, said:

If gamers turn hostile they almost always have a good reason for doing so.


Hmm. Was this or this a good reason? Posted Image

As for the topic at hand, the only significant problem I see with MW5 on Epic is if you want to play in cooperative multiplayer modes and you get no one to play with. Otherwise, it's just [1] download the game and [2] play the game. In the end, it's the quality of the product that will matter, not the store.

But that's me.

Edited by Mystere, 24 August 2019 - 10:20 AM.


#48 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 24 August 2019 - 10:19 AM

View PostAppogee, on 24 August 2019 - 08:47 AM, said:

  • Units will own assets including dropships and bases.

(called Garrisons) to build and maintain (meaning multiple bases, one per planet, in which you could add turrets/etc. So while they never promised we'd design our own bases, just that we could have and upgrade them.)
(Covered within my concept of what it would be like here.)

Quote

Lets say Team A Zhizhu Mercs hired by Liao and Team B, a faction-unit of Steiner are sent to take PlanetName.
No one owns PlanetName.
Each team has sent one dropship. Let's say a given Dropship can carry 660 tons in mechs. (modern edit note: The entire team's weight limit is 660 regardless of how many players are using it)
Team A Zhizhu Mercs brings 2 Raven 3-Ls backed up by a Raven 2X and Raven 4X (140 tons) for its Alpha lance. Bravo has 2 Centurions and 2 Trebuchets. (200 tons). Charlie lance has 2 Blackjacks and 2 Catapults. (220). That comes out to 560 tons, and the Raven 2X player puts an Atlas on reserve (meaning when he dies, he is deployed as the Atlas). (12 players with 1 reserve mech). (modern note: 12 players, 13 mechs)
Team B, being typical Steiners, chooses to run 4 Atlases (400), 2 Banshees (190), and 1 Locust, 2 Commandos (70) and poof, they bring 9 players with no reserves. (modern note: 9 players, 9 mechs. A setup like this can't wait for a required 12 players, so it is whom moves together in said dropship or whom responds when already on a planet that is attacked.).

Now that's some variety, strategy, etc.
Lets assume for prosperity that the Liao's surprise Atlas strategy works and Team B perishes.

Team A now garrisons with what is left and reinforcements are sent for to properly garrison and secure the planet. Lets say they managed to keep the Atlas, a Catapult, a Blackjack, and a Raven alive. That's 245 tons defending the planet. The reinforcements bring forth another 660 tons (for simplicity lets say it's the exact same assortment as Team A used before). Now there's 660+245 tons defending the planet from a future attack, x amount of supplies, and a supply line that comes once every whenever.

Team A now consists of a planetary garrison of:
Atlas, Catapult, Blackjack, Raven. Being repaired. 245 tons.
4 Ravens. 2 Centurions. 2 Trebuchets. 2 Blackjacks. 2 Catapults. Atlas. Fresh reinforcements. 660 tons.(Not necessarilythe same players but some might be.)


Quote

  • "Every single match played in MWO will have a purpose and affect the state of the Inner Sphere" (ie QP will be replaced)

They did state this but I'm not certain it was meant as quickplay would be replaced, but if it was then the quickplay would serve as filler matches. Admittedly having quickplay continue to exist is a lot of why faction play couldn't get off the ground...no one wanted to play a fraction of the faction play; they wanted the whole thing...a whole thing we never got.

Quote

It will be "a giant chess game" requiring you to use Jump Ships and Dropships to move between planets, garrison them etc.


Timing is everything..Kurita's was poor in this case.

Quote

Well Steiner might be licking its wounds, but lets say another faction, Team C Kurita, has its eyes on the Zhizhu-Mercs occupied planet.
They send a dropship of 660 tons and are repelled. Zhizhu lost maybe 135 tons. Of them, the Catapult was salvageable and repaired but drained supplies in doing so. The other two, a pair of Ravens, were not salvageable and lost. Zhizhu now has 835 (or 660 + 175) tons left on the planet. Zhizhu's dropships are tapped out for now, so nothing more can come to reinforce this position. Supplies are drained.

Team A after that fight has lost 2 Ravens. The Catapult was defeated but salvaged and is repaired.
The total mechs now for Team A's garrison are:
3 Ravens (35 *3) , 2 Centurions, 2 Trebuchets (200), 3 Catapults (65 * 3), 3 Blackjacks (45 * 3), 2 Atlases (200) = 835 tons.

A supply shipment is received. Repairs and ammo is available.
All mechs are fully repaired and reloaded before the next assault comes. Some supplies remain.
Team A has established turret defenses.


But Steiner is prepared, they had two teams move in a full 24 players equipped with [in total] 1320 tons of mechs. They're aware that the first team might not make it.

Quote

Steiner has another force (Team D Steiner) in the area that is backed up with two dropships (Teams D and E Steiner). Though it's actually 24 players, both are part of the same group and used their shared wealth to have a dropship each for their unit and intentionally chose to attack at the same time.
The game only permits one attacking team of 24 players at a time; the second dropship of 12 players is forced to wait but will be able to engage before Team A can recover.

Again, before this fight the Zhizhu Mercs (Team A) have established base defenses to protect their Garrison.

Steiner's Team D is a balanced assortment of 12 players with 14 mechs, so 12 initially and 2 reserve that they field immediately when the player(s) can take control of them. Team E is really the return of Team B and quite angry at their defeat and are eager to jump in but have to wait until Team D loses or retreats.

Team A (Zhizhu Mercs) has 12 players, 15 mechs in full health + turret defenses.
The first battle with Team D is 14 fresh mechs, and the second battle with Team E is not yet known.

Liao (which has been paying Zhizhu Mercs) has diverted 3 friendly dropships to the PlanetName that these fights has taken place so far, 2 of them were scrambled and are only partially full and 1 loaded is to the brim. These are queued to arrive but will not make it for before PlanetName might fall.

Team A (Zhizhu) manages to defeat team D but has lost 3 Ravens (105) all 3 Blackjacks (135), 1 Atlas (100), and all Trebuchets and Centurions (200), thus reducing Zhizhu's garrison by 540 tons and reducing them by 3 turrets.

Team A Zhizhu now has:
835 - 105 (Ravens), 135 (Blackjacks), 100 (Atlas), 200 (Trebs and Centurions) = 540 tons lost = 295 tons remaining.
Zhizhu now has 3 Catapults and 1 Atlas = 295 tons and some turret defenses. That's 4 mechs left. The Garrison's gates are intact, however the South Gate is damaged. Turrets have power and are under Zhizhu control.

Steiner's Team E lands immediately after Team D, giving Team A (Zhizhu) no time to do proper repairs.

Zhizhu's earlier 835 ton force is now 295. That's an Atlas missing a side torso (100), 3 Catapults (65 *3). Of the Catapults 1 ran out of ammo but has 2 PPCs and 2 lasers, 1 is low on ammo but has backup weapons, and 1 is completely ammunition dependent and about halfway drained. The Catapults are moderately damaged. One has a busted leg. Another is missing an arm but is out of ammo anyway.
Since another fight is coming before repairs can be done, the Atlas pilot is considering paying for a rushed repair and rearm job at the risk of broken equipment and extra expense.

Team E (aka Team B ) which lost potentially permanently lost a lot of mechs in the earlier fight went pretty dang broke and are now sporting an army of 24 Commandos (600), and 2 Spiders. Why? Because vengeance. That's 12 players, 10 of them with 2 commandos each, and 2 more players with 2 commandos and a spider each. (This was written before the Urbanmech)

Team A, 4 damaged mechs + damaged Walled Garrison with gates intact and turrets down by 3 (leaving x amount remaining). This leaves 3 combat capable players as 2 of the Catapults belong to the same player.
Team E just landed 26 mechs, and has a German-style blitzkrieg in mind against the South Gate because Space Germany Steiners. Since Team A hasn't got the man-power needed to properly defend secondary objectives, such as the power station may also be ripe for attacking too. (This concept went along with another thing Bryan said which involved multiple separate objectives to defend; if you take the base design of Mechwarrior 3050 or Mechwarrior 3 or MechCommander 1 and 2... each compound has facilities quite far from each other with their own defenses and an inner base, this reduces the mass coordination of attackers on any single area as a murder ball could easily be wiped out with anykind of coordinated defenses. Furthermore if all the defenses were bundled up in a single ball then the attackers need only bring artillery and never get close. As such neither side can afford to ball up as they do in mwo, eliminating the worst aspect of MWO's faction play.......stagnant camper mentality.)


View PostAppogee, on 24 August 2019 - 08:47 AM, said:

  • Earn the "bonuses and benefits and items" of each planet your unit conquers.
  • Discounts available to purchase equipment on planets that you own.
  • Pricing of Mechs varies depending on faction relationships and planets controlled.
  • "Special content" will be available on some planets.



Koniving said:

Personally I picture lower weights per dropship for obvious reasons. But if you stack 2 dropships and head over to attack here, you'd have more weight at the insane cost it took to get another dropship (at 220 million cbills at last suggestion from Brian, it's definitely not going to be overdone). Takes time to make strikes, repairs and rearm.

Two teams go to a neutral planet, you only have what your dropship(s) could provide.

You invade a garrisoned planet and you are up against what the garrisoning team has chosen to leave on that planet. Now most likely a garrison might consist of a few mechs and defenses (if established at all), and an invading force of one dropship with maybe 440 tons available to it or some other reasonably balance-able number.

I'm figuring many garrisons might just be jump points. But some might contain mining operations. Some might be supply depots. But hey, this is what I pictured when I heard the phrases such as Brian's "economy-based mech pricing", Paul's "Repair and Rearm isn't off the table. It's on the backburner," and Brian's "planets have value."


131 likes on that post, and an additional 96 on another thread with it just quoted.

I get depressed every time I really think about what MWO could have been if PGI just tried.

#49 Khobai

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 23,969 posts

Posted 24 August 2019 - 12:02 PM

View PostMystere, on 24 August 2019 - 10:14 AM, said:


Hmm. Was this or this a good reason? Posted Image

As for the topic at hand, the only significant problem I see with MW5 on Epic is if you want to play in cooperative multiplayer modes and you get no one to play with. Otherwise, it's just [1] download the game and [2] play the game. In the end, it's the quality of the product that will matter, not the store.

But that's me.


historical gamers complaining that a historical game isnt historical sounds like a perfectly legit complaint to me.

theyre essentially rewriting history in a game thats supposed to be historically accurate. its perfectly understandable why that would upset gamers.

Edited by Khobai, 24 August 2019 - 12:06 PM.


#50 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 24 August 2019 - 12:08 PM

Spoiler as it strays from topic.

Spoiler


#51 Prototelis

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 4,789 posts

Posted 24 August 2019 - 12:42 PM

Putting women into a game, even if the game is based on historical events, is hardly a reason to be that upset.

Besides, those games all went on to sell a kajilion copies so like really who gives a ****.

Edited by Prototelis, 24 August 2019 - 12:42 PM.


#52 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 24 August 2019 - 12:53 PM

View PostPrototelis, on 24 August 2019 - 12:42 PM, said:

Putting women into a game, even if the game is based on historical events, is hardly a reason to be that upset.

Besides, those games all went on to sell a kajilion copies so like really who gives a ****.

If you read the post, it had nothing to do with putting women into a game.
I even gave three examples of random real women to put into the game that wouldn't have caused any backlash.

It's putting in made up people, in a real life event that actually happened, and taking the story away from the 12 people who really did it, that's icing on top of an already far-fetched cake of "developer didn't have any respect for the source material or the mockery there-of." in order to serve a political agenda.

No one complained about the woman in BF1. But she was based on a real story, in real history, of a real person.

Where BFV's is based on a fictional person, replacing 12 real people, in a real event that turns out nothing like history, in a game advertised as telling us the real history of World War II...Maybe the reason might be clearer now?

Edited by Koniving, 24 August 2019 - 12:54 PM.


#53 Mystere

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 22,783 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 24 August 2019 - 04:13 PM

View PostKhobai, on 24 August 2019 - 12:02 PM, said:

historical gamers complaining that a historical game isnt historical sounds like a perfectly legit complaint to me.

theyre essentially rewriting history in a game thats supposed to be historically accurate. its perfectly understandable why that would upset gamers.


This is actually the part that caught my attention:

Quote

backlash ... over a rumor regarding the appearance rates of female generals


People going bananas over rumors. At least no one died over the rumor ... this time. <smh>

Edited by Mystere, 24 August 2019 - 04:37 PM.


#54 Prototelis

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 4,789 posts

Posted 24 August 2019 - 07:59 PM

View PostKoniving, on 24 August 2019 - 12:53 PM, said:


Where BFV's is based on a fictional person, replacing 12 real people, in a real event that turns out nothing like history, in a game advertised as telling us the real history of World War II...Maybe the reason might be clearer now?


You gonna post some ads to back that up? I honestly don't remember that; even then it still isn't a rational reason to be angry. It isn't a ******* text book. Dumb outrage is dumb, and the game still sold really well so its even more dumb.

#55 MadcatX

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Brother
  • Big Brother
  • 1,026 posts

Posted 24 August 2019 - 10:04 PM

View PostKhobai, on 24 August 2019 - 12:02 PM, said:


historical gamers complaining that a historical game isnt historical sounds like a perfectly legit complaint to me.

theyre essentially rewriting history in a game thats supposed to be historically accurate. its perfectly understandable why that would upset gamers.


It's technically a legit complaint, but the amount of gamers legitimately upset has been greatly exaggerated. Game news sites and some "video game influencers" on youtube, twitter, etc... made this a big deal, either to get people to view their articles on games websites because they are slowly dying or some influencers who wanted attention by drumming up controversy. Then you had the more reputable influencers that were simply reporting on it, which nonetheless gave the issue a signal boost.

#56 LordNothing

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 16,735 posts

Posted 25 August 2019 - 02:02 AM

View PostPrototelis, on 22 August 2019 - 10:45 PM, said:

"proper modding support" is just a front end and tools that are maintained for you.

The game is still going to be moddable.

Battletech doesn't have "mod support" and has plenty of mods.


modding will happen unless pgi actively prevents it (say making the game refuse to launch if its files have been modified). of course modders can be clever some times. for example running the exe through a disassembler in order to make changes to the code at the asm level.

Edited by LordNothing, 25 August 2019 - 02:03 AM.


#57 Drunk Canuck

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Rage
  • 572 posts
  • LocationCanada, eh?

Posted 25 August 2019 - 05:40 AM

View PostFRAGTAST1C, on 22 August 2019 - 10:02 PM, said:

A couple of things to say here..

1. PGI made this decision to become EGS exclusive for profits to stay afloat. MWO wasn't raking in any money so, yeah. They decided to get paid first for a product.

2. Refund was nonsensical. Yes, they promptly offered the option of refund. BUT, the one month time limit is what is nonsense. See, me, I didn't go for the refund. I want to keep my pre-order. I probably won't care how bad the game is when released 'cause there is a dearth of proper Battletech games and I like it, though I'm a newcomer to the franchise (started with HBS Battletech).

Anyway, why is the one month time limit a complete nonsense? Well, imagine the EGL doesn't have proper modding support 3 months into the game launch. Then, the promise of modding support has gone down the drain. Now go further and imagine that a person hasn't used the EGL key to download MW5 even after 3 months. After seeing this unkempt promise, they NOW want to refund. They haven't used the key, they haven't downloaded it. Why can't they get a refund now? That's the whole problem of getting committed to EGS exclusive the way PGI did.

3. The promise of staying afloat is sometimes better than &quot;Loyalty&quot; 'cause the company has to retain its employees first and foremost otherwise, guess what? No customers. Now, this is a very debatable topic but from the opposite POV, it makes perfect sense.

So, the concept of loyalty is good but in this case, it isn't 'cause there isn't enough money being made from the current product and how well the new game does is anyone's guess. Remember that there have been only 20k-or-something pre-orders? I don't think that's enough. What is clear though is that the way PGI handled the situation, barring offering refunds, has been very poor. So, picking one e.g., of an indie developer &quot;sticking it to the corporate types&quot; is just silly. We must grow out of that high school thought process.


See, the problem is that after all the half baked implementations of features in MWO, Russ's constant disdain for this community and creating a fun, balanced game with a huge depth of scope that was originally part of the game plan for Community Warfare in particular, they deserve to lose the license. I feel sorry for the great staff who actually do care but are ultimately handcuffed because of the decisions by the guys at the top making poor decisions and having poor leadership qualities. But hey, when you don't want to listen to your community, call them out as being on an island, promising to deliver CW within 90 days and a year later attempting to launch another product without having delivered on said feature, then proceeding to do nothing even close to what the original plan that Brian Eckman had created, of course people are going to be really mad.

#58 Drunk Canuck

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Rage
  • 572 posts
  • LocationCanada, eh?

Posted 25 August 2019 - 05:51 AM

View PostMystere, on 24 August 2019 - 10:14 AM, said:


Hmm. Was this or this a good reason? Posted Image

As for the topic at hand, the only significant problem I see with MW5 on Epic is if you want to play in cooperative multiplayer modes and you get no one to play with. Otherwise, it's just [1] download the game and [2] play the game. In the end, it's the quality of the product that will matter, not the store.

But that's me.


Women on the front lines in WWII? Show me the evidence. There were women in the armed forces, but they weren't front line soldiers. They usually occupied the reserve forces and medical camps. Just because you did basic training doesn't mean you are going to serve on a battlefield. And women sure as hell weren't gladiators and warriors before the industrial revolution either. If you are presenting a game as historically accurate, especially 20th century history, you should probably stick to what really happened instead of fabricating a bunch of inaccuracies.

#59 VonBruinwald

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Undisputed
  • The Undisputed
  • 3,460 posts
  • LocationRandis IV

Posted 25 August 2019 - 12:31 PM

View PostDrunk Canuck, on 25 August 2019 - 05:51 AM, said:

Women on the front lines in WWII? Show me the evidence. There were women in the armed forces, but they weren't front line soldiers. They usually occupied the reserve forces and medical camps. Just because you did basic training doesn't mean you are going to serve on a battlefield. And women sure as hell weren't gladiators and warriors before the industrial revolution either. If you are presenting a game as historically accurate, especially 20th century history, you should probably stick to what really happened instead of fabricating a bunch of inaccuracies.


Since we're being historically accurate, how about we go with bears!

If women are your thing though how about Mariya Oktyabrskaya who sold everything she dad to buy a tank and go on a rampage, or good old Nancy Wake who was the piece de resistance of the resistance.

Was 600AD too soon for the industrial revolution?

#60 Nesutizale

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Privateer
  • The Privateer
  • 3,239 posts

Posted 25 August 2019 - 01:10 PM

I think there where a lot of woman fighting in lots of wars who where not officialy there. Mostly in resistance fighting groups or militia groups.
Also what about the Israelien army? IIRC they have woman as regualar part of their military as equals to man.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users