Link

Hi, friends.

Today is one of those diaries in which we won't publish the gameplay video and won’t release the game… again. Again we won’t cure all runny noses in the world, won’t finish “A song of Ice and Fire” and, obviously, won’t return the kindness to the Internet. But there’s still something to talk about. A good half of the questions in the community about when to release, why so long and how can we dare to delay ourselves in the first place?! Let's try today to understand the conditions of work on Soldiers: Arena, and to hold a small retrospective of past years and delays. Let's talk about development and developers, about why two years are not many, and why two, not three, and even if three, it is still not too long. We will have a diary that can be referenced by seeing the next “Release date?!”, and you will have screenshots and answers.


On the Steam forums and in the comments is very easy to find lots of folks solidary with Emerson, but it's just not serious. Do we develop the game long? - Hell no! Do you wait for it long? - Probably, yes. The fact is that the time from the announcement of the game to its release does not equal the development time. In most cases, users will learn that a game is being developed when it is almost ready. Firstly, because at the final stage it is easier to correctly determine the remaining time for development, and secondly, because players do not have to become tired of waiting. After all, there is no shortage of games, and in 2017 alone, almost 7,000 came out on Steam. Keeping a player’s interest for several years of development is incredibly difficult (well, we are well aware of this), so the time of pre-release activity is usually not more than six months.

Game development often takes from 2 to 5 years depending on the complexity of the project. And there is an astounding number of factors capable of increasing the originally planned period. In the case of Soldiers: Arena, these factors were: the cancellation of ‘Nuclear Union’ and limited resources, the relocation of the studio to another city, the remake turned into a full-fledged game, the search for a new gameplay style, the overall complexity of the project, a small number of employees (less than twenty) and a number of other factors which we do not even want to remember. Oh, friend, we have gone through so much and have done so much for these two years, having so little that talk about way-too-long development and the jokes about the release in 2031 due to the sheer bewilderment. Below we will restore the chronology of events in making of Soldiers: Arena and try to explain why everything is as it is and why it is good.


The Steam store page was created in December 2015 and we immediately decided to keep in touch with the community all the way to the release. Moreover, this release has to happen in three months. In those days, Soldiers: Arena was supposed to be a remake of a multiplayer (and only this) part of Men of War, with steam features support and replacement of some models. Most of our team didn't even work on it but provided support for games from third-party developers using GEM: Battle of Empires, Gates of Hell, Draft Wars, and several others.


Link

Already in the first month, it became obvious that after such a long silence you expect something more than a remake from the Best Way. We already got used to the relocation, resumed the processes and, in general, also wanted to do something more. So the whole first and second quarter of 2016, we tried different options, thought over the list of new features, chose the version of the engine, but still, there was no talk about the new game. It was rather a more advanced version of the remake. It was so until the fall of 2016 when a new gameplay began to appear through the list of new mechanics and technical improvements. More precisely its sketch. It was different from the MoW and was both promising and controversial, and so far existed only on paper. The whole team started working on the game exclusively by the fall of 2016. It is this time that should be considered the beginning of work on the Arena-game.

Frankly, we could go into silence for the next couple of years and return only to the stage of pre-release activity, which was written above (these 3-6 months). But again we didn’t want to disappear, and we thought, why not take a chance to maintain a dialogue with the community from the first days of development? The great perspectives of regular diaries and the most early closed alpha test attracted us with constant feedback and warm motivating words of support from players. And we warmly welcomed these promising perspectives. And they gave us the opportunity to test and refute theories at the earliest stages, correct the mistakes that you find and get rid of what you are not very interested in. Remember that every comment you leave can improve the final game! Huge power in your hands, do not waste it all on “Releasedates?!”.


Link

The time from autumn 2016 to summer 2017 was the hardest. It was then that we tried to understand what the game should be and were looking for core gameplay. Time is interesting but often painful. Soldiers: Arena then looked like a fishing hut, to which we were trying to attach a medium-sized castle. It looked weird and often annoying. There was a lot of unnecessary and temporary, a lot of things that are added to the game, only to make it obvious that they are not needed in it. We tried a lot and refused a lot. By the way, all this can be avoided if you make a sequel or clone of something. In this case, the development is reduced to the replacement of models, animations and the creation of a pair of new campaigns. With such a project it is easy to calculate the time for development and meet the deadlines. It's pretty simple when you do not need to invent a new gaming experience, but we wanted to develop the series, and not treading water. It was at this stage that the basic principles of the new project were formed:

• Variability of gameplay. Make an army managing a mini-game in which there are no one hundred percent correct or incorrect decisions. So even the craziest set of units had a chance.
  
• The primacy of tactics. Proper use of units should be more important than “the fastest hand in the whole wild west.”
  
• Role component. Give the player the opportunity to play his favorite units and encourage him to play the role.
  
• Epicness. The battle should consist of a series of epic moments, and not of a sequence of identical actions like: accumulated points on your favorite tank, went on the attack, get wasted, accumulate again or ragequit. Session must be in suspense from the first to the last seconds.
  
• Readability battle. If you are killed, you should at least approximately understand by who, why, and how to get revenge.
  
• Team play. Cooperation with other players should be maximally encouraged and be the pillar of gameplay.
  
• Lots of content. Scope and possibilities! A huge selection of units, perks, and customizations for them, many commanders of various specialties, tons of cooperative. Later, a single-player component was added too, which was not originally in the plans, and which was influenced by you, guys!
  
• A continuous fight against useless units. With the development and receipt of new units, the old ones should not become useless. The gameplay of each should be considered a set of mechanic and sometimes mini-games.

But it is one thing to formulate, and quite another to implement these principles. After all, the end result is so abstract, and the terms are so approximate! Basically, everything has to be tested empirically. In a readable language: it was necessary to iteratively improve and modify. For example, we now have the fourth revision of HE-shells in our work. Fourth! In most cases, you just can’t predict and take everything for granted. Make, test, rework.


Link

In the second year of development, the first reports about the waay-too-long development have already appeared! The game at that time was not very stable and poorly optimized, but quite playable and it was already possible to go into Early Access then (in the end, alpha testers have been playing for more than six months already). But we decided that you should not be misled by the lack of interfaces, low fps, drafted models of vehicles and unfaceted gameplay. Yielding to persuasion in June 2017, we named the date - the first quarter of 2018. The development went on, the scale increased, the number of units, commanders and new mechanics grew. From the initial calculation of 60-70 units for each nation, we came to 100+ (and this figure continues to grow).


Link

The core gameplay was ready, and most of the features were implemented, work began on the interface, which is still going on to this day. It is worth saying that words like “interfaces”, “optimization” or “balance”, of course, do not convey the number of works behind them. “Interface hell”, “optimization swamp” and “balancing infinity” would be better suited. Make, test, rework.

In March, after the publication of the first videos, we saw that most of the community was not ready for fps drawdowns and lags. We were seriously surprised by this because all this time we were talking about getting into Early Access, which does not imply a ready-made, optimized and devoid of bugs game, as water does not imply soup. As in any beta version of the game, there will be bugs and imbalances in it. Ok, it’s probably worth doing optimization and network code before entering Early Access, we thought and changed the date to the second quarter of 2018. At the same time, we started several tasks from those same themes that were impossible to perform on the GEM engine. It is because of the complexity of these tasks that we had to postpone the release once again to the autumn of 2018.

And here we are. The core gameplay is ready, two playable nations too (we will most likely finish the USA after entering the EA), the impossible has become possible, and you can play without a slideshow even from mediocre PCs. Now we are a bit late with interfaces and network code. But in the next month we hope to catch up with it, but the plans, as before, are approximate. As mentioned above, Early Access is just the beginning and each delay makes this beginning more likely. It makes the game better, we become better prepared, and the players who paid their hard-earned money will become happier. Perhaps, we will first release a limited number of keys in order to simultaneously receive support from our most devoted fans, who are ready to treat problems and bugs with understanding and at the same time limit the number of users and keep up with support. Thanks to everyone who supported us on this way, helped with advice and inspired with comments. Guys, you're the best! Release date?!

Link

Hi, friends.

Under the last post, g0Dwarrior23 drew attention to the strange fact that you have not yet seen extensive documentation on multiplayer maps. And it was one of those “Oh, re-e-e-e-ally” moments when you realize that you did not see (didn’t show in our case) the forest behind the trees. In the diary about Polesie we talked about the reference search process, map zoning and showed some landscapes, which is interesting by itself, but does not provide an overall picture. To fix the situation (or lack thereof), today we will look at one of the maps from a bird's-eye view and take a walk through the main sights.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2emqBAp_TE&feature=youtu.be

The ‘Village’ map can be divided into three lanes: dense buildings on the left, open area in the center and the forest on the right. The line of first team fights is usually close to the central group of buildings.


Link

The preferable flank is usually determined by the chosen commander and the troops he specializes in. In most games you will have to be in several places at the same time, alternately defending and attacking, retreating and supporting the offensive, and success can greatly depend on the choice of these locations. The better you know the terrain, your units, and the likely enemy tactics, the better you will be able to seize the initiative and unleash the potential of your chosen commander.


Link

Infantry dominates on the left flank. An Assault battalion is the most successful in urban fights, since storm troops have an advantage in capturing and defending buildings. Moving between buildings on the left flank, you can capture the territory almost down to the enemy’s spawn point. Here you can also strengthen the safest positions for howitzers and mortars, completely protected from direct fire.


Link

Tanks along the building need to move very carefully, gallantly inviting the infantry forward, avoiding succulent main courses of AT grenades served in bundles. Cannons with direct fire have nothing to do here, since you can only fire at close range and probably only once.


Link

The central and the biggest part of the map is the open area, which is the natural habitat for the Tigers, Panthers, and Lynxes. And that means there are many artillerymen who attend the safari there. Open spaces allow you to shoot over large areas, and a battery of anti-tank guns concealed in a good location can stop a tank rush even before it starts. However, the response to the brazen gunners who are shooting at an auto attack comes so fast that you usually don’t even have time to suffer. Here, with the support of tanks, infantry can break through faster and farther than anywhere else, since it is much more difficult to tie it up with a fight in an open field.


Link


The woodland on the right flank gives a lot of opportunities for tank breakthroughs. Because of the dense vegetation, stones and height differences, anti-tank artillery is almost useless here. So if you don’t want to see the enemy’s vehicles in the rear, it’s best to mine the narrow passages. In most cases, you hardly meet anyone in the forest, except for mortars hidden behind a stone ridge, so this zone is more often used by saboteurs to cross the front line. So cliche, but still effective.



Playing on all three flanks at once or putting pressure on one alone is up to you, but knowing the terrain and commanders will help make this decision right. For example, it is better to use anti-tank guns as a battery in a place where it will definitely shoot someone, since changing the flank quickly will not happen. Howitzers, on the contrary, are almost not tied to any terrain and can shoot from one side of the map to another, regardless of barriers and distances, although the accuracy with distance decreases significantly. Playing with heavy tanks, you often simply won’t have so many units to deploy them across the whole front line, but the infantryman just needs to be present at least in several places at the same time.

Before we proceed to inspect the village sights, we remind you that any point on the map can become paramount if the situation requires it. A particular building interferes with your plans? Raze it with your HE-shells. Are you afraid of open spaces? Build your cozy fort from bags, barbed wire, and anti-tank hedgehogs, make a moat of trenches and scatter the mines around. And feel yourself at home.


Link

The group of buildings in the center is the local navel of the earth. It can give a huge advantage and serve as a foothold for entering deep into enemy territory or help expand the front by half the map. That is why the clashes never stop here. A similar situation with buildings near the forest. Their capture will allow to see the nearest territory and keep the enemy in stress.


Link

In the central part of the map, closer to the rear, both teams have buildings that are simply created to be captured by the paratroopers. In addition, it is one of the best positions for a battery of howitzers, albeit the most obvious one.

In addition, any stone and any barrier can be used as a shield or additional armor for your units. The battle in the Frontline goes for the territory, and the better you know it, the easier it is to capture and defend. The easier it is to choose the right place for minefields, trenches or a breakthrough into enemy territory.



And briefly about the most interesting development. Now multiplayer maps will change their size depending on the number of players in the session. When playing 3 vs 3, the map will be cropped narrower than when playing 5 vs 5 and will retain the same combat intensity and an average number of units per map area. We will not go into details further, it will be better for you to try it out by yourselves.

So we use every existing one and create new opportunities to make the gameplay in Soldiers: Arena intense and damn diverse. And we are trying very hard so that soon you will try it by yourself. Wish you all the best, guys!

Link

Hi, friends.

We did not have enough time to prepare a diary this week. Sorry about that. Feel free to use your right and suggest the topic.

Wish you all the best.

Link

Hi, friends.

In feedback diaries we usually talk about some results and changes of recent months. About settings, features, models, funny bugs, interface pieces, units, and the rules by which Soldiers: Arena lives. But today we need to talk about the balance also. Talk seriously and sincerely. Under the last diary there was much controversy about whether the stormtroopers are balanced or not, and how the absence of an armored car or flamethrower can destroy everything. Before we proceed to a soothing-explanatory text, pay attention that the Tiger. Pz. VI was already on the cover of the diary about heavy tanks. How do you like this change?

• ... compare units with similar ones from other games / books / wikipedia. Limiting the range of fire or its absence, the range of the HE action, the disguise, the possibility of retreat, of capturing the vehicle or any other of the hundreds of game features can significantly affect the result. If in another game you can shoot a tank with the machine-gun, this does not mean that you can do it in Soldiers: Arena.
  
• ... think that duplicating units is good. It’s a mortal sin to produce the same units, differing only in skins! And it's not just about stormtroopers. StuG III Ausf. G and SU-85 are conditional analogs of each other, but are they the same? The SU-85 shell deals more damage, but StuG III Ausf. G is better at piercing armor at long ranges, has a machine gun and faster reload rate. Which of these characteristics are the most important, will depend on the chosen tactics.
  
• ... perceive the unit in isolation from the game. Combat in Soldiers: Arena is not limited to a set of duels. You can even destroy your anti-class if you use the conditions correctly. Do you think that the flamethrower is stronger than a fighter with a submachine gun? But what if the submachine-gun-guy lies in the grass so damn invisible? What if he successfully throws a grenade? What if he has an older tankman brother? This game is about choosing, creating and correctly using favorable situations. Among other things

Link

(Let's have some rest and help Dora the Explorer to find the elite sniper)

• ... forget that every unit has its own tasks! The PM-41 mortar has a bigger caliber than the BS-3, but that does not makes tanks easy targets for mortars. There is no point in comparing the stormtroopers in battle against stormtroopers, because you do not compare how well one air defense weapon destroys another air defense weapon, right? Units are balanced not in comparison with their counterparts, but in relation to whether it is good enough (and whether it isn’t too good) in performing their tasks. And there are always more than one way to accomplish this task. If you like to storm the building on an armored car more than to suppress it with a machine gun and annihilate the defenders with your shotguns, it's your choice. But this does not create an imbalance.
  
• ... simplify to the point of absurd. The presence of a flamethrower or an armored car is not the only important characteristic. There are dozens of them and we take into account everything! To give a PTRS-41 or a grenade launcher to every infantryman is not the only way to strengthen it in battle against tanks. We reduced the speed of tank turret rotation and it worked no worse. Added one AT and two AP mines to miners, so it makes artillery and infantry stronger in defense. Is ZIS-2 too strong for its class? You can change its level from the third to the fourth and its natural opponents will change from Pz III and Marder, to Pz IV and StuG. And this did not change its in-game characteristics. So "Let's give everyone a hammer" is not the only option, there are also more elegant ones. The only question is whether you want to look for them. We want.

Friends, we do like disputes about usefulness of units. What can not be said about reproaches that we are deliberately creating an imbalance. When a playable nation loses in one thing, but wins in the other, that's good. This is a balance of strengths and weaknesses. Also this adds some diversity. Do not look at the question so one-sidedly. You do not play one unit for the whole session. You do not have to figure out how to destroy a tank with a sapper shovel. This stuff is for digging trenches! The screenshots below show the composition of two infantry battalions: reconnaissance and sabotage for USSR and assault one for Germany. As you can see, you have a little more than one infantryman for the game.


Link

First row: Pak 35/36, Riflemen (Recruits), SMG infantry (recruits), Rocket-launcher infantry
Second row: LeIG 18, SMG infantry (Regular army), MG squad MG-34, Flamethrower infantry
Third row and fourth row: Separate infantry squad, Riflemen (Veterans), Sd. Kfz. 4/1, Stormtroopers, Medics

Sorry guys, but we have no English localization of this piece yet. Both battalions are infantry, but they are used for different tasks. The first should go to rush and attack, and the second should hide in the shadows. By the way, this is still not the final version of the icons and only one of the many options of managing the battalion. Which of them seems more interesting to you and why?


Link

First row: Riflemen (Recruits), Sentinels, SMG infantry (recruits), Scouts
Second row: Riflemen (Regular Army), Snipers, Scouts, BA-11
Third row and fourth row: Paratroopers, Aerial reconnaissance, Elite Snipers, Saboteurs, Medics


In recent months, we are working hard to make the game intuitive, enjoyable and remove as many bugs, lags and drafts as possible. Incredible gameplay, like the inner world - no one will notice, if not to reveal. Of course, you will not go into the game for the sake of the interface or super-beautiful icons, but definitely notice their absence. So we created more than two hundred icons and modified interfaces. All these windows, development trees, backgrounds, scenes and so on. And also redesigned the interface windows to support 4K resolution.

In addition to the hints on the loading screens and training missions, you will be introduced to the game with the system of interactive tips. By hovering the cursor over a part of the interface / battlefield / unit, you will see a small brief description about the management, tactics and tricks of the game. It's not easy to make a complex game intuitive. This is a long, painstaking work consisting of thousands of boring things that you will never notice. But unfortunately, this is a damn important part of the development.


Link

We tested the first mission of the Soviet campaign, which can be held as a solo, or in a co-op of up to five players. Also, we added a prototype of the new multiplayer map "Kursk fields" with a large number of open spaces. By the way, the landscape also affects the overall balance. On this map, guns with direct fire are stronger, and the life of an infantryman is sadder than usual.


Fought off bugs of varying complexity and amusement. In some cases, the level of amusement is so low that it goes into negative. You often rush us with the release, but why? Just imagine such a session. You are retreating on your beloved ISU-152, miraculously leaving the shelling, having repaired the track with the last crew member. You think that you already got the Lord by the beard and ready to laugh at the enemy-loser, when suddenly an armor-piercing-karmic shell shot you. How? Why? Who killed Kenny? It turns out that the retreat icon burned over your unit even in the fog of war, turning your way home into a corridor of shame marked with neon "Hit Me" signboards. And if the players could have no time to react, the AI simply ignored the camouflage mechanics in those days. "There are no eyes - there is no fog." - he thought and fired without unnecessary self-reflections.

The fact that AI refuses to comply with the gentleman code is demoralizing, but you are an optimist. You console yourself that actually love hardcore. When battlefield gives lemons, you make limonkas but not useless lemonade. You attack in the hope of fulfilling the task of capturing the flag and bring your team victory points. You squeeze out of yourself all the life that is left after the loss of the sweet ISU-152. You attack like the last time in your life and reach the goal! But … for some reason the points are not credited. You feel downfallen, deceived, devastated ... But your team still winning a little and at least the victory will be yours, which will compensate a bit for the suffering. It will be possible to say that you fought against the whole world and won and did not give victory to the dishonest bug-abusing opponent ... And while you think so, the skyey Charybdis opens its mouth deep in the rear and overthrows parachute rain. Because of the bug with victory points, the enemy gets such an advantage, as if he captured the entire map, Moscow, Berlin and Atlantis. Over time, you knock him out of course, cause you're good! Unfortunately, the time he won with his dastardly blow is enough to win. You would like to throttle the air in anger and "Fus ro dah" on the whole throat, but the last forces are already given to this fight. You want to go away from the computer, but your legs fail. You fall to your knees in the middle of the room, your mouth is open in a silent cry, and the rain pours directly from the ceiling, hiding your tears. Why? - quietly howling you, curling up on the floor, while the camera moves away, leaving you alone and confused.


Link

Do you really need this, my friend? Do you really need a game like right now? Or can we fix at least the most critical bugs? The ones described above, by the way, no longer exist, don’t worry, but their colleagues are still doing their job. And if we get rid of them, then you do not have to go through the seven circles of bugs, and we won’t wander through the icy wastelands of negative reviews obsessively repeating "We warned them". A little more support to finish what was started, and everyone will become a winner. You can do this, guys, cause you are the best!

link

Hi, friends.

The last few months we are preparing Soldiers: Arena to show to the people. There is still much to be done, but as far as it is goes, we’re more or less done with the gameplay and optimization, and now we can work some more on cosmetic improvements. We get rid of temporary solutions, modify interfaces, configure controls, hotkeys, repair uncritical bugs, which usually did not get our attention beforehand. So we polish, decorate, simplify. And in today's diary, we'll talk about some changes in the management and gameplay of infantry, about specialized squads and their differences.

We added the possibility to spread the units on the move. Moving the mouse up and down while pressing the RMB, you can specify the distance that the units will keep when moving.



Dispersal in the area not only allows you to quickly capture the territory but not to lose the entire detachment from a single shell or machine-gun fire. And you can also control how close to each other the units will take place in the cover.



We changed the mechanics of an artillery strike. Scouts, saboteurs and elite snipers now have signal grenades that, when exploding, spawn a pillar of smoke. Ten seconds later, in the smoke-marked area, the artillery gives a volley of three 105-mm shells. Since the shot making the artillery "outside the map," no additional cooperation with the allies is required. Only time for observation tower to see your signal and for artillery to aim. Ten seconds is quite a lot in game time, so an attentive player has a chance to react and retreat. Saboteurs, scouts, and snipers do not affect the front line and are visible by other units whey are half-way down the view range. Due to this they can not only get close enough to throw grenades but to also reach the weak points in the enemy’s rear and destroy howitzers, mortars, machine guns, fortifications, and some inattentive tanks.



In Soldiers: Arena, having opened a new unit in the development tree, you do not obtain discounts on the previous one. And we spare no effort to make them realistic, unique and relevant throughout the game. One of the tools to achieve this goal is the fine-tuning of each unit and weapon. Let’s take a close look, for example, to the heavy assault infantry of different nations and how their weapons and tasks differ. Storm Troopers of the USSR, the Rangers of the United States and the German Panzergrenadiers are inhomogeneous squads, with fighters with different equipment. This is an infantry elite that has been in lots of battles, with better survival characteristics, and a bonus to capturing and strengthening buildings.


link

Stormtroopers:

• 3 stormtroopers with a submachine gun (PPS-43, grenades (AP, AT, smoke), dynamite, bulletproof vest)
  
• 1 stormtrooper with a flamethrower (Flamethrower, grenades (AP, AT, smoke), bulletproof vest)
  
• 1 stormtrooper with a machine gun (BAR, grenades (AP, AT, smoke), bulletproof vest)

In reality, such squads were used as anti-bunker infantry, therefore there is no infantry in the game, which could compete with them during the storming of buildings. Thanks to bulletproof vests, they are less afraid of small arms, and thanks to the flamethrower, they are much more scary to any other infantry. As one of our designers likes to say - "Flamethrower does everything better". Unlike most infantry with assault rifles, they are armed not with PPSh, but with PPS-43, which is characterized by better accuracy, but smaller cartridge. And dynamite with a remote fuse. Just imagine how many unforgettable moments you can give to the enemy!


link

Rangers:

• 2 rangers with submachine gun (Thompson, Bazooka, grenades (AP, HE, smoke), bulletproof vest)
  
• 2 rangers with a shotgun (Winchester 1912, grenades (AP, HE, smoke), sandbags, bulletproof vest)
  
• 1 ranger with a machine gun (BAR, grenades (AP, HE, smoke), sandbags, body armor)

Body armor, a set of grenades, bazookas and a machine gun make them multifunctional and dangerous for any opponent. The ability to install barricades from bags helps to strengthen on the ground. But the main feature of the rangers is shotguns. In Soldiers: Arena, they are extremely honest and harsh. In close combat (and only in it) one shot from a shotgun can quite kill several enemy infantrymen. So, when it comes to storming trenches, fortifications or close combat, the rangers are unparalleled.


link

Panzergrenadiers:

• APC Sdkfz 251 Ausf C
  
• 1 grenadier driver (MP-40, grenades (AP, AT, smoke))
  
• 2 grenadiers with a rifle (G43, grenades (AP, AT, smoke))
  
• 2 grenadiers with Assault rifle StG 44 (Panzerfaust, grenades (AP, AT, smoke))
  
• 2 grenadiers with submachine gun MP-40 (Panzerfaust (x2), grenades (AP, AT, smoke))
  
• 1 grenadier with a machine gun (MG-42, grenades (AP, AT, smoke))

Panzergrenadiers are armed somewhat worse than similar detachments of the USSR and the United States and do not have bulletproof vests, but have much greater mobility. Panzerfausts and cumulative grenades will help you cope with any vehicles. Sdkfz 251 Ausf C makes it possible to reduce the distance to an enemy tank, heavy machine gun or fortifications without guaranteed death in the process. And thanks to more infantry in the unit and a wide roster of small arms - this is the strongest unit in the game in sense of the density of anti-personnel fire.

As you can see, each of these units has its own characteristics and strengths, despite the fact that their main task is the same - an assault. In our opinion, there should be as few as possible unremarkable units in the game. So we will continue to customize and emphasize the features of them, and you can write down what strengthenings for the infantry you would like to see. Wish you all the best.

link

Hi, friends.

Today we will continue our acquaintance with the USSR development tree. As promised in the past diary , we will talk about tanks, specifically, the legendary T-34 and its modifications. In addition, we will try to silence the superstitious fear of the F2P model that lives in the community. Once again, we’ll talk about health bars, and why they won't kill the hardcore. We will show you the USSR tank branch in its current state. And, as always, screenshots, friendliness, walls of text.


T-34 is one of the most recognizable symbols of the Second World War, the most massive tank of that time and it is no wonder that in Soldiers: Arena it occupies an important place. We can say that it is also a symbol of our idea of units that never lose their relevance. Despite the fact that there were tanks with better armor and better weapons, it was the T-34 that accounted for 79% of the total production of tanks in the USSR by the end of 1943. The design combined excellent maneuverability and mobility with a decent gun and adequate armor, but the most important element was its modernization potential, ease of use and production. T-34 was created as the basis for the future tanks, which could change with minimal costs and meet the demands of the time. Thanks to these initially laid down qualities the T-34 remained relevant throughout the war, and the production cost of serial models was constantly decreasing (from 270,000 rubles in 1941 to 142,000 rubles in 1945).

In the game, T-34 is represented in almost all of its serial modifications (except perhaps the flamethrower version, but it will probably appear in future) and, like its real counterpart, always remains relevant. The early version of the T-34-76 model of 1940 with the L-11 gun became an unpleasant surprise for the German tankmen. There weren’t enough Pak-40, so almost the only savior was the requisitioned and modified Pak-36 (r), the sad story of which we told earlier. In the early and mid-game T-34-76 models of 1940 and 1941, with the F-34 cannon are simply indispensable and may perfectly cope with the tasks of breaking, protecting and supporting.


link

T-34-57 will allow keeping a bit longer distance in the fight against medium and some heavy enemy tanks. The penetration of the ZIS-4 cannon mounted on this version of the T-34 was so strong that the production of the tank was even temporarily suspended due to "excessive power". While firing at enemy artillery or fortifications, the 57-mm projectile is not as dangerous as you would like. And T-34-85 was, in fact, the answer to the appearance of the Tigers and the Panthers on the battlefields, but even with the increase of frontal armor in the T-34-85M version, it couldn’t stand against the 88mm PZ-VI shell. So in the game, the T-34-85 can fight German heavy tanks, but it's a risky business. To become a winner of such a duel you must take full advantage of your speed and maneuverability. And it is even better to use self-propelled guns based on the T-34 to fight heavy enemy tanks: SU-85, SU-100 and SU-122 (located in the artillery branch).


In the comments under the last diary, there were many questions about the imbalance which premium units could produce and how they definitely bring the game down into the Pay To Win abyss. We do not really understand how the T-34-76 version with screens or Valentine can own everything. Each unit is configured based on its real characteristics so T-34-76 shoots like a T-34-76 regardless of whether it is premium or not. Armor screens welded on the sides increase a bit its survival rate, but at the same time increase its spawn price. The biggest advantages of the premium units is the ability to earn more experience, their visual uniqueness or some interesting gameplay. If you pay attention to the level of T-34-76 with screens (4th) and try to compare it with other units of the same level, you will definitely notice that it does not look super-strong. There are PZ IV Ausf. G, Stug III Ausf. G and Pak-40 also on this level and they calmly cope with it. The grenade launchers are a unit of the third level, and the miners are of the first one, and they do not care about the extra armor. In the future, the number of premium units may become larger, but the tendency not to make them imbalanced will continue. One of the distinguishing features of our games was the ability of a pennyworth infantryman to deal with the most expensive enemy unit and this is the basis of the balance in Soldiers: Arena. In the past test, we conducted an experiment. One of the game designers played an infantry commander with first-level units in combat, where the ISes and the Tigers played and still managed to stay in the top among all eight players. If the first level infantry holds on somehow, then the other units could do it too.


link


Thank you Pontiy for questions about another community fear - healthbars. Friends, do not rush to take leaflets of the cult of hardcore witnesses and fear the Arcade-Judgment Day. Let's take another look at the examples of the work of healthbars and their contribution to the common good and understandability of the gameplay. Healthbar displays the general state of the tank, and when it drops to zero, the tank becomes a heap of scrap metal. Healthbar can only be restored with the Fallback mechanics. On the battlefield, such repair is impossible. To damage the armor, you need to pierce it, which is possible not from any gun or from any distance. Consider the example. T-34-85 can penetrate the Tiger from a close distance and, if luckily combined, can neutralize it for at least two shots. After the first Tiger will lose up to 75% HP and several crew members, and at the second shot will destroy it. Damage to the HP depends directly on the caliber of the projectile. For example, the 57-mm T-34-57 projectile has the best armor penetration, but the damage caused to the HP will cause less than 76mm of the T-34-76.


link

In addition to the removal of HP there are a number of other events while piercing: the explosion of ammunition, damage and breakage of tank parts, tracks disruption, a death of crew members, etc. For example, when shooting from a Faustpatrone and other grenade launchers, there is no big damage to HP, but there is a high chance of crew death or an explosion of ammunition. Burning through armor, the cumulative jet has a chance to destroy the inside of the tank, and causes the crew to suffer from a monstrous pressure drop and a rise in temperature. The tank is not necessarily destroyed, contrary to popular belief. So, in addition to the obvious utility of the bazookas, they have an additional plus - the tank is more likely to be captured. Why break a good thing?


link

The penetration from other guns also does not always lead to an explosion and this is also quite realistic. After all, mostly the crew died faster than the tank become completely destroyed. The chances of survival of each tankman are affected by a number of modifiers. For example, a driver's mechanic has a better chance of surviving after the tower piercing than a loader. The chance to survive after penetrating with the 57-mm shell is higher than with the 76-mm, because the second one generates more fragments (both from the armor and from the shell itself). In addition, the hit can lead to a concussion of a crew and a brief stun. The idea is that the healthbar provides an opportunity to understand when a damaged tank will become unrepairable, but it does not cancel all other mechanics. So no fear, guys.

What Soviet tanks do you personally lack? What it is necessary to add or remove? Still afraid of HP? Meet you in the comments under the post. Wish you all the best!

Hi, friends.

Immediately after the vacation, we rushed into the work, so there was not enough time to finish the diary. We'll post it in a few days. In the meantime, pay attention to the screenshot from the last issue. Again. And try to find the "Easter egg" standing near the trees. Wish you all the best as usual.



link

link

Hi, friends.

The theme of today's diary was born from your comments under the last post. We read them all, don’t you know? As Doomykins reasonably noted, the USSR development tree did not appear in the diaries beforehand. Today, we will correct this situation and talk about Soviet artillery in Soldiers: Arena. And so, we’ll tell Egor Tolstoff and the whole community why the difference in one or even several levels is not a huge margin separating the winners from the losers. This is not the final version of the development tree btw. We constantly add new units, change levels or type of existing ones, their places and links with other units, so as not to let imbalanced forces invade your PCs. Vigilantly and relentlessly we stand on the guard of balance.


link

We did not include most of the SPGs here, because they are closer to the tanks in the devtree, and we will write about them in the next diary. But even without self-propelled guns, the artilleryman has a wide range of tools to destroy any enemy. Collecting the deck, you can adjust it to your style and add some infantry aggressiveness, self-propelled mobility or howitzer large-caliberness. How to play and how to assemble a commander is up to you. In Soldiers: Arena, the artilleryman does not have to sit in the bushes all the time. Despite the fact that most guns in this group are good at long distances, they can be played aggressively. After all, the closer the distance to the target, the more likely the ‘one-shot’ is, so sometimes it's more profitable to get to a good position for a shot rather than to aim for long - Especially if you support allied forces or they support you. It makes sense to recall the experience of assault troops during the battles for Stalingrad or Koenigsberg, which included sappers, scouts, riflemen, several machine guns, anti-tank guns and cannons. This tactic also works in Soldiers: Arena, and Zis-3 or 53-K, for example, are lightweight and mobile enough to be moved by the forces of their crew and, moving along with the infantry, to support the offensive. Most often, seeing the advancing infantry, the enemy calls something inexpensive and capable of stopping it. Whether it's a machine gun, an armored car or a medium tank, such an assault team will overcome this barrier without hindering the advance. If you were always embarrassed by the contemplation of the artillery gameplay, it's time to reconsider your views. Any deck can be good in Soldiers: Arena, if you know what you are doing.


link


With the increase in the level and development of the artillery branch, you will gain access to the most threatening weapons such as anti-tank 100 mm BS-3, ML-20, and B-4 howitzers. There is no armor that these monsters can not cope with, and there is no such cover that will save a foe from their domains. The payment for such power is a high level of noise produced, a low rate of fire and heavyweight. In the game, this means that you quickly become visible and evade the retaliatory strike slowly. In addition, the huge caliber does not make the crew more survivable. Grenade, tank tracks, paratroopers, mortars and even small arms - either of these options are deadly. That is why the level of the unit in the tree is not the only determining factor of success in a duel. Often even the most innovative tools can be broken, when you have the correct tactics, skills, experience, and knowledge of the enemy's vulnerabilities. And this is the realism to which we aspire. In previous games of the series, for example, the IS-1 has practically no chance against Pz.Kpfw VI Ausf. H1. In Soldiers: Arena all chances are on the side of the experienced player. Even KV-85 or T-34-85 can compete with the Tiger if they are in better conditions. It creates the room for maneuver when most tank fights are not solved with ‘one-shots’. You can hide into the fog of war after an unsuccessful enemy shot, come from the rear, spot him first, lure it to some mines or just knock down its tracks and allow allied artillery to spank him - all this can lead to the victory of a weaker unit. In addition, the fight is not split into an amount of duels and sometimes there is no time for them. The Tiger may be stronger than KV-85, but is it stronger than KV-85 and BS-3, for which you carefully spotted it? In the previous Diary we compared the F-22 and Pak 36 (r). Indeed Pak 36 (r) is one level above and better copes with the tanks, but the F-22 due to a larger bullet drop can shoot with indirect fire. It turns out that Pak 36 (r) copes better against tanks, but the F-22 copes better against the Paks, and it does not matter what Pak we’re specifically talking about. Which of them is stronger?


link

Even the units of the first levels never lose their relevance. The most advanced infantry will die very quickly if it is sent to a fortified position with fire coming from a modest first level Maxim gun. ZIS-2 crew often do not even think about the level of medium tanks they’re facing. And no matter what version of Pak the enemy has, even a 50-mm mortar can handle it, if you give them enough time to it. And of course, BM-37 or 120mm regimental mortar can cut some people to shreds without hesitation. Taking a position in the yards or behind a natural shelter, you can shell the infantry and artillery of the enemy even through the entire game duration. People often underestimate such cheap and, apparently, harmless units. Seeing something powerful and expensive on the map, players forget about everything just to focus on taking the kill. Tankmen are firing from all guns, infantry is leaping about with grenades in their hands and howitzers are firing at tanks hoping to deal the finishing shot. And during this time a mortar crew may destroy half of the enemy's artillery. Also, no matter how powerful are the infantry in the trenches or buildings are, they can not survive the hit of a 76-mm shell of the M1943, and the penny-worth DS-39 suppresses the infantry better than the B-4 because it shoots without prolonged reloadings. We can continue calling out examples, but you have caught the main idea. Whether the unit will dominate the session depends only on your skills and knowledge.



By the way, we have finished the model of 29-K. Changed the body and supports to match the real ones, and added animations. This gif is for you. The next diary will be in three weeks, since from 6th to 19th we have a vacation. All of Best Way at once will take it, just to avoid unnecessary delays and disruption of the schedule. So we’ll see you in three weeks, friends. Wish you all the best.

Hi, friends.

We will post the diary next week. Still thinking about the topic, so it's the right time for your suggestions. Wish you all the best.

link

Hi, friends.

While the Best Way programmers take Soldiers: Arena from the darkness of unoptimization into a stable bright future, the rest of us also have something to do. In today's issue of DevFeedback, we'll talk about some of the minor (and not so minor) fixes, changes and settings that Soldiers: Arena has been subjected to in the last few months. Also we’ll tell some about logic and behavior of AI that did not fit into the previous diary. Over the past few months, AI has grown strongly and moved from the phase of children's entertaining to the phase of teenage rude AI, and we just had to send it to military school to correct its behavior.

• Choose the right targets. The threat factor of the enemy and the distance to it are both taken into account. For example, an SPG is much more dangerous for a tank than a grenade launcher or another tank. But, what if the SPG is on the other end of the map, and the grenade launcher is ten steps behind and reloading his weapon? Now the units know what to do in this situation. Machine gun crews know that a car moving straight towards you is a bad sign, and anti-aircraft gun crews know that no ordinary bird can cast such a big shadow.
  
• Use weapons on the right situation. Against infantry in a shelter or on a hill, anti-infantry grenades are preferable to small arms, a moving car is better to hit with a HE-shell, and the smoke grenade used in time has a positive effect on the survival rate of the entire squad. And of course they know a few things about the importance of a precision lobbing of a sapper’s shovel - If the shovel of death is in the hand, and the enemy has come close enough - the AI ​​knows what to do!
  
• Manage units. And not only how to play with the rushing tank, but also how to play guardedly with howitzers, how to support the allied infantry with fire from light cannons, to withstand the balance between sitting in the rear and breakthroughs of the front line with SPG-s. He learned some tricks about the game with situational and complex units. For example, Willys with bazookas will patrol the territory until enemy tanks go on a breakthrough, and only then will he go into a head-on.

link

• Have worked on interfaces. Including updated metagame interface, which we will show in the future. Have made templates for commanders, so that in the tests you can start the game in two clicks.
  
• Have set up and deepened shooting mechanics. At medium and long distances, precision was increased for rifles and aiming for mortars. We set up a different radius of auto attacks for cannons and vehicles armed with armor-piercing shells to reduce the amount of random and ineffective shooting and avoid the situation when the AI ​​attacked without even a chance to pierce. For example Pak-35/36 will start shooting only from the distance of guaranteed penetration of the armored car, and BS-3 from the distance with which it will be able to precisely penetrate a medium tank. Fine tuning of each gun in the game continues.
  
• Have conducted tests. Including the intensity and duration of the session. Have increased the session time, the number of points needed to win, reduced the limit of units and so on.
  
• Have fixed game mechanics. For example, we fixed the ability to dig or not dig trenches on each individual type of terrain to avoid underwater and above-asphalt trenches in the game. With the help of smoke grenades, you can now hide the tank or SPG, but only in the case that it does not create much noise from the shooting and is not spotted on the minimap.
  
• Have added new units and replaced the some old models. Amongst which we can find the leFH 18 from the render and Pak 43.

link

And as always we fought with bugs. The last two months have passed under the sign of a Drifting Stug. Because of the bug in the settings of the new Stug III Ausf. G and StuH 42 Ausf. G, suspension worked incorrectly, so they moved as if they came from a new part of The Fast and the Furious. At the same time the infantry was forced to cross the swamps of the map of Polesie only by swimming, which greatly complicated the infantry battle, especially in combination with the underwater trenches. And you could go inside almost any object on the map using Direct Control. Imagine a floating infantryman in a freshly dug trench in the middle of a swamp. Add a tank hiding inside the stone and decorate this with the drifting Stug. This rare sight is only comparable in it’s madness with the The Last Judgment by Bosch. Fortunately, all this you are not destined to see.


link


In the development tree, F-22 and Pak 36 (r) cannons have made a sudden appearance. As you know, these two are essentially the same cannon fought for both sides. F-22 was a successful implementation of an unsuccessful concept of a universal anti-aircraft-divisional gun. Although it was created just fine and with the use of the latest technologies, it did not cope with the tasks set. By 1941-42 more than 1250 guns were captured by the Wehrmacht. After studying being conducted by German engineers, it turned out that the F-22 has a good safety margin and is excellent for upgrading to an anti-tank one. That was very useful, because the existing AT-devices could not cope with the Soviet T-34 and KV-1, and the production of Pak-40 had yet to be adjusted. So Pak 36 (r) appeared on the battlefield, for a penny modernized from the F-22 and became formidable only in battles against the side that created it.


link

In Soldiers: Arena this sad story is reflected. F-22 is a universal, but in all respects a weak second-level gun in the USSR tree, which has a weak penetration and low rate of fire, and is the predecessor of the ZIS-3 divisional gun. Pak 36 (r) is an anti-tank third-level gun in the German technology tree, successfully coping with Soviet medium tanks and precedes the Pak-40. With such an elegant solution we filled in the gaps in the technology trees, upgraded the Pak-40 level to the fourth (it was too strong for the third one) and saved work on modeling. Isn’t it great?


link

Friends, what units that fought for the several parties would you like to see in the game? Preferably, not those that were bespoke designs. Write in the comments and we still wish you all the best.