hoeksema wrote:I miss Tactical Battlefield. It was the most ArmA-feeling thing I had ever played when I started. The radios, the team play, the way the combat felt -- all of it stood out to me as exemplary. However, the burden of entry was extremely high, and the first time RHS got an update I didn't play the mod for weeks due to the gigabytes of downloads required.
I know it's a tired topic, and I know that talking about it while not being able to help a lot in building it due to me being not a good modder is selfish, but TacBF needs to be made simpler. It needs to ditch all of the mods required to start it, it needs to be able to have an audience that's not just the hardcore members of the community. Sure, it's on the workshop now, but if I turn on my computer and suddenly I have 5+ GB of mods updating, I'm gonna pause that s*** if I'm trying to do something in the meantime.
The Apex expansion added AKs and kinda screwy M4s, RPGs and M249 equivalents. There's still a lot missing from the vanilla asset library that makes TacBF good (armor values, how tanks work, etc), but sacrificing some of this in order to keep the mod actually going I feel is worth it. Having King of the Hill levels of simplicity isn't what I'm looking for, but having the simplicity of downloading ~1GB of files, clicking on a server, and getting playing IS what I feel will save the mod. I miss playing the mod and playing with all of you, but I can't keep spending 4 hours downloading mods just to find constantly empty servers.
I can try to learn the editor to help if that's what's needed, because I really do believe that this is a great modification, and more people need to experience what I've experienced playing with all of you, and that's not going to happen as the mod is now.
Harold wrote:I predict that we would lose more players than we would gain if we changed the modset. A lot of people seem to really like RHS, and it makes TacBF unique compared to other servers out there.
Without more analysis, Hoeksema is taking a wac-a-mole approach to improving the server population of TacBF. If you want to know why people aren't joining the server, ask them. I think that it's because there's not much tactical about TacBF. It currently favors the individual instead of the squad because individuals have too much survivability (too high of armor rating and too fast to bandage).
Also, the framerate is very low for all but the most powerful computers. A friend tried TacBF for the first time and ended up with 7 fps and less during firefights. It's possible to improve the framerate of TacBF if we focus more on optimization and reliability instead of new features in our development efforts. A code freeze would help with this because then it would not be a moving target for optimization improvements. And we should do testing with slow computers and high player count and establish a goal for the framerate (e.g. 30 fps minimum on a slow computer).
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest