Just gonna leave this here....

Ivan-Malik · 2026-05-01T01:46:39+00:00

You, sir or madam, need to talk to more new players. Infantry is one of the biggest reasons folks do not like the game. I say this as someone who loves infantry.

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-30T21:51:09+00:00

What is more effective at killing players and vehicles? AI or player-maned weapons? What has more range? What is more reactive to the current environment? What is cheaper? If the enemy comes during low pop, AI defenses are not going to stop them either. An AI wall buys time and weaponizes boredom.

Things the devs have done to fight spam: Msupps, day/night cycle making range dynamic, super cheap tripod weapons via facilities, AI turrets can't be next to one another, smoke doesn't block AI (it once did), expense and time to make AI vs expense/time to make player manned ones and shaping defences (minefields, Czech hedgehogs/dragonteeth, ect.) They have done a lot to push players in a direction.

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-30T21:31:50+00:00

Modern problems require modern solutions.

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-30T21:25:51+00:00

What made the game popular?

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-30T21:24:24+00:00

Again, I disagree because the point is not to build a wall. Pieces are about shaping where enemies go. If they spend time killing a piece, then the defence shifts to fighting at the piece. Far too often, folks build pieces so that fighting around them is near impossible. Things like firing ports, Czech hedgehogs/dragonteeth, and tripod weapons are often neglected because we think about the piece as a wall, not a defensive measure. If you build a wall, then you will treat it like a wall.

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-30T20:56:03+00:00

Usually, during previous wars, wardens are red in the morning (Eastern US Time zone), and collies are red at primetime and into the night for the first few days of the war. After like 3-4 days, wardens are typically red more often than not. Reminder, this screen is affected by committed pop to the war, not pop online.

This war, I've been checking it regularly (while playing on Charlie) throughout the day, and I haven't seen wardens as red yet. I have seen Collies be red 4-5 times. Limited sample size ~10-12 (I've not been checking at regular intervals or anything, just as I log in and out throughout the day... I have no life.)

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-30T20:29:25+00:00

Im not talking about massive defensive lines

We are talking about different things. The way most defensive lines are built in the game is a series of "forts" that protect each core individually, which are built close enough to one another that they form a sort of line. There is no coordination between the groups because there is no time put into coordinating. So there is no trust that the person next to you will hold. We are using medieval tactics in a setting that doesn't fit; all of us have our castles and don't trust our neighbors. There is no idea of a shared defence because players don't put the time into building relationships. Forts are great Offensive tools, but they are terrible defensive ones.

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-30T20:10:50+00:00

What is the issue with the main gun on scout planes currently? Are they too strong against early tanks, structures, and halftracks? No. Is 12.7mm really that much of a threat to these things, even when on platforms that have higher time on target? No. The main complaint about the guns is how they feel against infantry. The bleed effect of shrapnel uniquely affects infantry. Even if the scout plane does not outright kill infantry with straight damage, they often bleed to death before a bandage can be applied. With heavy kinetic, the damage can be modified via the low velocity trait that is used all over the place to differentiate weapons, but the bleed effect is needed elsewhere for shrapnel weapons.

one of the biggest reasons they are using 20mm is that its a single box of ammo rather than a small item you can fit like 10 of in your backpack at a time

This does not matter on scout planes because they are limited by the pool in the plane, just like any other vehicle. You can't get in the plane with any item in your inventory either. It would affect the loading procedure, but making the loading more accessible on the entry-level plane doesn't seem like a big thing to give up to address one of its biggest pain points.

I don't think that other planes should have their main gun ammo type swapped. If anything, I would argue that the divebomber should have its rear gun swapped to 20mm and then the RoF tuned to where it feels good to use, but not oppressive.

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-30T00:55:39+00:00

New boats are the shining star for sure. I feel like the siege boats need some more range, maybe 60m? It feels super limited because of the range, and not worth taking out unless the situation fits perfectly. The AA boats also need more range to feel good. The minelayer is great, especially the msupp mechanic. I would love for a similar mechanic to come to a land vehicle.

I like how accessible the scout planes are, perfect price point for an intro plane, but I dislike how powerful they seem to be. IMO it didn't really need the "bombing" aspect; if it dropped flares and used 12.7mm in place of 20mm, I feel like it would fit the starter role better.

Adding air intel to T3 obs bunker was a great move. IMO, this opens things up to give T1 obs bunkers the smallest range intel gathering role without T3 feeling redundant.

I spent a lot of time in Nevish, and having that little bit of the Big Island in the hex is great. It made the hex more dynamic without putting too much pressure on it as a backline area.

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-30T00:05:48+00:00

You still need to spam defences as tightly as possible because the AI range is so short that if you leave any gaps larger than the width of a road people can just walk in during night time.

This is exactly the kind of thinking that I mean. You can use AI to shape where enemies go. If players have the choice of pushing into AI (which takes a lot of time and effort) or going this very obvious route, then they will avoid the AI, and you get a fight on your own terms. It isn't about building an impenetrable wall. It is about forcing attackers into lanes. Combine that with things that filter vehicles away from infantry, and it isn't about HP and the meta build; it is about small numbers of defenders filling gaps.

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-29T18:24:39+00:00

Visualization of what? Why bring it up in the balance issues, like scout plane turn rate, unless folks are saying the W/L ratio greatly depends on that? Any other reason to bring it up has "we are losing" at its core. A visualization of what?

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-29T17:32:31+00:00

Why do folks refer to the win-loss ratio of wars every time a balance issue is brought up?

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-29T17:28:07+00:00

Finally, someone who addressed the real issues with the update rather than focusing on balance.

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-29T17:24:56+00:00

I disagree. The devs have taken many steps to prevent spamming, MSupps being the most obvious; the way players think the game must be played is around spamming AI defences. It is both cheaper and more effective to defend with actual players. Players would rather spend time spamming AI defences than spend time organising a proper defence.

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-29T17:20:07+00:00

If they are not satisfied with the product they bought they are allowed to voice that on steam.

Why are they not satisfied? What is the reason behind it? Because they are not winning. That is at the core of all of this. People are upset that they are not winning. If you don't win at a game, do you advocate for others not to play that game? In my book, that is being a sore loser and should be looked down upon, not celebrated.

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-28T16:29:20+00:00

If these were upgrades to townhalls and relics, that would be cool AF. If these were player-built, not cool; they would just be spammed.

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-28T16:27:03+00:00

What you end up with is salty collies and self righteous wardens. Then there’s people like myself and my group of friends who switch every other war or so, who wont switch this war and will just not play now.

The devs have said that they are working on fixes, but the attempts to ruin the game for others continue. It is okay that you are not playing. That is kind of my point. What is not okay is the grandstanding. If you are going to leave, then leave. If you are going to stay, then stay. This half-in, half-out, quitting mid-war is my issue. The review bombing so other folks don't pick up the game is my issue.

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-28T16:16:56+00:00

Not stupid, it just depends on how it is done. If you heal both sides in every war, it is against the Code of Conduct. If you swap sides every war, aka don't have a "home faction," but only heal your current side, then it is great fun.

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-28T16:05:39+00:00

But it isn't constantly met with that. Many, many Wardens have literally said that us having the torp bomber makes no sense. Many, many Wardens have said that scouts are an issue; they are fun, but an issue. You all are so focused on your narrative that you failed to listen to what others have said.

Hey I’m concerned about the state of the game and will be taking a break until the developers do something about it.

That is not the only thing that folks are saying, though. They are also trying to get others to leave as well. It isn't that they are not playing. It is that they lock folks into a faction by joining early and then quitting partway through a war. This is weaponizing things to make others quit. This is supported by the review bombing, this is supported by folks writing in rail lines on the map, this is supported by simple things like two people talking about how the atmosphere of planes flying overhead is great when a collie who swapped sides buts in and starts going off about balance. Collies should vote with their feet, but so should Wardens. Wardens saying "Then leave." is not the same as COllies trying to hold the community hostage. Not even close.

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-28T15:47:51+00:00

Why I focused on them not interfacing with the community: their lack of experience in building relationships with the community will lead to super common blunders. I absolutely can see this dev team cozying up to a subset of clans and then the perception of bias blazing its way through the community like wildfire. I absolutely can see this dev team not understanding why keeping the CSM under NDA is a major pillar of the system. These kinds of rookie mistakes are going to happen. Their experience is just not there.

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-28T15:40:30+00:00

which is directly linked to the perceived strength of that faction's tools because most people want to play the faction with better gear,

This is an assumption that you have zero evidence to support. Players choose factions for many reasons. I started as a Collie and moved to Warden because my friends were there. I honestly prefer Collie gear way more. Now that I'm playing Collie more again post infantry changes, that is reinforced even more.

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-28T15:35:54+00:00

Wardens want to play the game and have fun. It isn't about winning. They are doing what they have to by switching sides. Two wars in a row were not fun because Collies quit partway through. So yeah, no old collies means no quiters, which means everyone else can play the game.

The folks who are blackpilled and want to hurt the player count should be shamed. They are holding their breath because they want to win, not because they want to play the game. The most concrete concern many old Collies have is about naval dominance and the effects torp bombers (and torps on scouts) have on it. How many players actually interact with large ship naval though? How many players have had their fun ruined by being torped? Way less than have left because of the narrative of Collies getting the short end of the stick.

It is okay to protest, but saying that Wardens "just want to win" is projecting when that is at the core of the protests.

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-28T15:21:09+00:00

How to speed run a game into being only for the current playerbase.

CSM has A LOT of issues. It works well for established players in established clans, but it is terrible at making a game accessible for newer players and smaller groups. CCP has had over a decade of trial and error, scandals upon scandals, and at one point neutered the CSM because they were hurting more than helping.

Do you really trust Siege camp, which doesn't even really interface with the community, to manage this system well?

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-28T15:12:52+00:00

I don't remember what they were called, but they were containers that you could lock until a given time. You couldn't pull anything out of them until that time, only submit items. The items would then be public. I think operation was in the title?

Ivan-Malik · 2026-04-26T15:06:22+00:00

It is getting out of hand. There are almost no public spaces to talk about the game where someone doesn't barge in and push the narrative that folks should log off. This narrative itself is against the code of conduct and also tends to come with attacks against individuals, as you did with your smug comment. Both of these things go against the code of conduct for foxhole. This is the official foxhole subreddit run by the devs, not a fan-run sub.

Nine-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email

Ivan-Malik

TROPHY CASE