Very disappointed by the lack of terrain modifiers on the new tank designer

[podcat]

The DLC is still a long ways off. @Archangel85 you mentioned that you pushed hard on this. Is there any chance this could still be done?

an extremely tiny one. he isnt underestimating the effort of having to essentially redo the unit modifier system from the ground up

 

[Archangel85]

The DLC is still a long ways off. @Archangel85 you mentioned that you pushed hard on this. Is there any chance this could still be done?

I died on that hill. It was a good death. Like podcat said, it would require a rework of the unit modifier system from the ground up, which comes with a lot of risk. The more a project advances, the more risk-adverse things get because there is less time to put out any fires that spring up. It's not that we don't understand that it would be cool to have (hence my dying on hills), but at some point it becomes a question of whether it is worth it to potentially make the game unplayable for several weeks while we rework the modifier system - it's time QA and design planned to have to balance the supply system and teach the AI how to use it. Even if you keep it in separate development branches, it is also time before the tank designer itself is in a state where it can be fully tested, and you have to be very sure that you covered all the edge cases (what happens when a division has 50% tanks that are good in the desert and 50% tanks that are bad in the desert? What happens if it gets into combat and loses a bunch of the bad tanks? Do we end up in situations that are counter-intuitive, like attacking when you are at low strength because that's when the bonuses are strongest?).

We might still do flamethrowers though, people seem to really want those. I think there are ways to do it without having to touch the modifier system itself.

 

[CraniumMuppet]

Well I thought PDX's stance was not to include stuff that models/symbolizes/resembles warcrimes. I don't think technically flamethrowers are in the geneva conventions, but still.

Not complaining, I was just confused regarding PDX's stance on this matter.

Its covered under The Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons Protocol III if you are interested

UNODA Treaties Database

treaties.unoda.org

TL;DR
Not banned, but limited to avoid civilian casualties with the main use to target military objectives

 

[CraniumMuppet]

I will now feel slightly less guilty when laughing maniacally when using flamers in warhammer 2.

I feel like if a madman tries to open another portal to superhell and tries to rip the known world asunder while ratmen spill forth from the sewers you are all within your right to grab the nearest flamethrower, protocols be damned