Solaris_Wave

I think you might be surprised to find that most of us in these forums have played at least one Jagged Alliance game. We have a pretty good idea of what the games are about. However, it doesn't mean they cannot be changed or improved upon, whatever those areas might be.

@Hendrix, according to @Tzg, this game is ("fortunately") not for you either. 🤪

Just enough ammo to be too heavy to carry but not enough to be actually useful in a firefight. 😀

@Tzg, you keep saying that to everyone else on here, every time somebody complains, and quite frankly, you are being obnoxious about it. JA3 wasn't made just for you.

This was exactly what I didn't want JA3 to be and commented many times on this. However, it seems Haemimont have gone the route I was concerned about and just made single, aimed shots from scoped sniper rifles the dominant weapon. Not only that but suppressed rifles as well. I know that the enemy militia might be fanatics and poorly trained but would they all be happy to rush out and be picked off one by one by unseen snipers from long range? Surely, the AI can be programmed to make them hide and even wait it out? If you are attacking a sector, they could wait as long as they like until you realise that you have to abandon your sniping tactic and move up, engaging them at closer ranges.

Having to wait will work out as an advantage in some ways. As you say, by then there should be one or more patches. Also, more mods will be available. I might not need any mods but having the choice is always nice for everyone. I will probably mod it myself as well. I am not bothered by CtH fanatics. I never needed it before and I doubt that will change.

I will when I am able to get back home, where my gaming PC is. However, that won't be for another month.

I have not yet been able to play the game so my words will not be as accurate as others, at this time. However, I am familiar with the general complaints of JA3, while also having experience of JA2 and other turn-based squad games. There will always be that need for character progression where your starting battles are challenging, even against introductory enemies. It gives you a sense of accomplishment as your soldiers gain skills and experience, you gain money and weapons and progress further into the game. There will always be some to-and-fro as you face stronger enemies, while advancing yourself. Now, with that said, JA3 sounds like it needs some patching to address certain imbalances. Lots of people are complaining about enemies who are bullet sponges, seemingly unfazed by even powerful weapons. These aren't bosses, significant characters or elite units, but the starting militia. The tougher soldiers will arrive later on. Ammo is too scarce, even when your mercs are using the same guns as the enemy. Meanwhile, they have infinite ammo. Right up to the point where you kill them. Then all that ammo they had becomes unavailable to you. Others have also voiced concerns about the starting enemy militia's ability to move a significant distance and still have plenty of action points left over to shoot accurately with their weapons.

That was a suggestion others and myself made when the CtH debate was at its highest. Some kind of vague indicator instead of a more precise percentage (which I never was in favour for). Showing modifiers more clearly could also help understand the mechanics of the game for some. I suggested that on the weapon profile screen, that there should be greater clarification on whether a modification to a gun created a positive or negative effect, either by colour coding the text or having a coloured plus or minus in front of the text.

From the beginning of my time in these forums, I made the suggestion (and constantly pushed for it) to remove body part aiming except for at close range and for when looking through a telescopic sight at enemies who are not performing a sprinting action (as they would be harder to hit). At mid to long ranges you can't really choose what part of a target's body to aim at, unless you have a capable enough optic and the target isn't moving around. I suggested that optional body part aiming be reduced to those two situations. All other situations would mean that you just aim at a general target. The bullet then hits a random part of the target, with the greatest chance being the torso, followed by the arms, then the legs; then head, hands and feet being the smallest percentage. If the bullet does hit one of those more critical areas, you are rewarded with a more damaging impact to the target, whether that is an outright kill, incapacitation or a crippling effect. It would also be a nice surprise to you, the player, when one of those bullets gets a lucky hit. This rule would apply to all capable enemies firing at your mercs as well. Therefore, the faster your mercs are moving, the harder the chance to hit a critical location. This overall effect on the game would reduce the emphasis on single, aimed shots (especially the obvious desire to aim at the head) and bring about the need for full-auto fire. Meanwhile, there would be no full-auto damage reduction. There would be increasing accuracy penalties the more bullets fired, due to recoil. There would also be no scarcity of ammo. If the enemy has abundant ammo and you are using the same guns as they are, your supply of ammo is on the same scale as theirs. The ammo would start off in the game as cheap, abundant but poor quality. This would entail a slight loss of accuracy and increased wear on the guns, requiring sooner maintenance. Unfortunately, Haemimont didn't do any of that. I will try to mod body part aiming at the very least, if I have time and when I can finally play the game (unless someone else wants to do it), but I don't even know if they hard coded full body part aiming at all times, despite my suggestions being put forth long before the first Developer Diary.

I have never liked bullet sponges in games and this does sound like one of those situations. You said you took down the Veteran Brute in three shots, which doesn't sound a lot. However, the types of bullets used and the locations they hit should have had a different result than him simply returning fire. Accuracy penalties, concussion, the desire to take cover or run away. Anything other than just hitpoint reduction.

A bullet should perform the same amount of intended damage, independent of the skill of the shooter that fired it. The merc or enemy's skills should dictate whether the bullet hits or not. If the bullet does, it shouldn't do less damage just because skills are lower. I am reading things here about higher damaging calibres doing not enough damage to critical locations like the head and that is a real disappointment. It can only be worse with weaker calibres. If a .357 or .44 Magnum round to the head provides little result other than to just shave off some hitpoints, then anything like 9mm Parabellum (or lower if in the game) will take all day. Another annoyance for me in games. Clearing and securing an area and then suddenly enemies teleport in like they are from an episode of Star Trek. If an area is clear and there are no other entry points, the game should be designed to bring in enemies from another vector. It is ridiculous if you see no way any enemies can get in, turn round to leave and then get 'Kirked' from behind.

This is a problem that definitely needs sorting so the game doesn't become exhausting to play. Like I mentioned elsewhere, you are forced to play by rules the enemy doesn't have to. They are numerous and tough. You are limited in numbers. They have infinite ammo. You are always struggling to have enough of it. Your reward for killing those enemies? You now have less ammo and are not allowed to salvage it from your defeated opponents. The added problem with this is that I am guessing that most players of the game have so far only faced the starting enemies. There are screenshots showing more professional looking enemies. What is it going to be like when they turn up?

Reading comments like this, I am glad that the enemy AI is good in some ways but question why it is that good for the lower experienced enemy soldiers. However, the constant complaint I am seeing is the lack of ammo availability, even when there shouldn't be. Too much emphasis was made on the crafting system, to the point where it impacted logic and practicality. You are forced to play by rules that the enemy doesn't. There needs to be an availability of ammunition at all times, even if guns can't be retrieved, unless all enemy ammo was expended during a firefight (in which case they shouldn't be able to fire back).

Kind of like those three bullets to the enemy's head, who shrugged it off!

Again, I am talking without being able to play the game at present, but I agree a good overview of the battlefield at height would be important. Likewise, being able to zoom in to behind the shoulder or waist level would be a fun perspective when combat is taking place.

@Tzg, I agree with some of your points and I know you expressed you are exhausted with negative comments but you have to admit yours were pretty harsh. Unless Barbie now rolls with an M60 and serrated combat knife, it is hardly the alternative. 😛

I can just imagine your PC sounding like an F/A-18 Hornet on takeoff, annoying your family and neighbours, while wearing your headphones in blissful ignorance as you play the game. 😄

I read in Steam that grazing hits affect your mercs damage ability but the enemy soldiers don't have the same penalty? Is this true? If so, that is something that will hopefully be patched, either because it was a bug or because it was a deliberate decision that in reality, is utterly unreasonable. What kind of weapon were you using that needed six headshots to kill a croc? I am curious about this. It also sounds as if those shots were forced to be grazing shots due to the fog. I have said it before. Fog should limit your ability to see the enemy. It would also dampen sound. It wouldn't make a bullet weaker though. Once you see an enemy and pull the trigger, that bullet would do what it would have done in clear conditions, especially at the closer ranges possibly forced by fog. It just sounds like a "Wouldn't it be cool if…" idea that was agreed upon and would elevate a threat such as a crocodile. The thing is, you are then forced to close in with the animal to where, it being a close combat orientated creature, then gets the advantage. It also sounds, from your description, like it gets some short ranged area of effect attack. With me being unable to buy and play the game at present, I can only speculate on what it is like and as you say, it sounds like one of those 'gamey' implementations. Just reading that sounds like it would get on my nerves! There is no logic to that unless all those enemies expended their entire inventory of ammo. I read elsewhere on Steam that enemies seem to have infinite ammo and then as soon as they die, magically have nothing remaining. Ammo should almost always be available in some capacity. What happens if you run out of ammo and a series of losses or hard-won victories ensures you have no scrap and no ammo or weapons are retrieved from fallen enemies? Do you have to quit and start a new campaign? How do you continue if ammo is hard to come by, it cannot be salvaged or bought? Again, this is a question I am asking because I am currently unable to play JA3. We all voiced our opinions on those previews showing enemies seemingly unfazed by explosions. I thought that they would have addressed that. This bothers me as my first ever post in these forums went into my criticisms of JA2 (despite my obvious fondness for it) and the dominance of aimed headshots. Sniper rifles were so powerful in the game or were at least that way for me. Handguns were used as starting weapons and then done away with pretty quickly. I maintained that handguns would always remain relevant and that JA3 should employ them as such. If your primary weapon jams or needs reloading while enemies are present and in close proximity, you switch to your handgun, just like in real life. Yes, they are mostly weaker but they are quick to draw and quick to aim. They should excel in close quarters or when climbing a ladder. Hopefully, they can be patched.

That sounds stupid. I wonder why Haemimont restricted you in setting up and defending that sector in any way you choose? If the sector is your sector, you should have freedom to set up your forces and weapons wherever you want. You are defending it and not attacking it, after all.

So, in other words, combat is back to single shots aimed at the head, which was what I was urging the developers to get away from as that method of play pretty much dominated JA2. Why is ammo scarce? How are enemy soldiers supposed to deal with it? Shouldn't they suffer an ammo shortage as well? Have they got special weapons and ammo that dissolve as soon as they die and your mercs get near it? I get why the crafting system was implemented but they went all-out with it, instead of making it an additional, fun feature. Even if your mercs couldn't help themselves to weapons left by fallen enemies, their unused ammo should always be be available. I would have made it so any weapon used by an enemy could be picked up by your mercs, either for use, to turn into spare parts, or to sell. To avoid having too many weapons at the beginning, I would have made them poor quality or in poor condition, except for the odd, prize weapon that might have been previously stolen or picked up off some dead foe (former unknown merc or PMC, maybe?). This method would encourage use of weapons brought into the country or bought. Meanwhile, building up a collection of weapons from dead enemies allows one or more mercs to break those guns down into parts to make one or two better quality guns (but still of average quality in total). That way, you might be able to switch to using an AKM, FN FAL or CETME that would be used by early foes, but you couldn't easily equip everybody with one. Your starting merc weapons would be more reliable. In terms of ammo availability, I would have made many cartridge types available at all times, with Soviet ammo being the most abundant, followed by 7.62x51mm NATO and 9mm Parabellum, then WWII-era. Most of that ammo would be of varying quality, being corrosive (especially Soviet and WWII), requiring sooner maintenance of weapons. It would be cheap so trying to sell it would gain very little money (buyers would already have plenty of it). Better weapons and ammo (including more modern calibres) would become available to you as better enemies arrive, for completing missions and contracts for NPCs, from sales from vendors either in shops around Grand Chien (who are sympathetic to your cause and keep those items otherwise hidden), black marketeers or dealers who can import weapons into the country. For the latter, we could call them Robby Bay's.

That is something that annoys me in a lot of games. I don't expect a definite kill with any type of bullet if a headshot is achieved, but I do expect at the very least a serious negative effect on an enemy's stats or a stun effect. Further up the scale would be incapacitation. Not death but enough to put them out of the fight and unconscious. Three 7.62x39mm shots to an unarmoured head, point blank should be a kill. If all they become is slightly miffed, it pulls you out of the game with its lack of realism and logic. Not only that but that frustration can be even greater when you don't get the same privilege and they get to do more damage to you. Another important suggestion. As I have said elsewhere, I am unable to buy and play JA3 at present because I am away from my gaming PC but when I was looking at the screenshots of the enemy soldiers/militia, I assumed that all of those would be unarmoured. JA2 didn't show armoured enemies and instead just had 'colour coded' enemies. JA3's graphics could/should allow for greater detail and variation. Therefore, enemies wearing armour should be visible. We aren't always talking about light armour vests worn under clothing. We are talking about those higher level vests worn over the top. They will be visible and it is important to identify who is wearing what and who is armed with what. It all contributes to situational awareness and allowing you to ascertain who needs dealing with first. You could say that your own mercs don't have visible armour (which was a lengthy topic in itself). Unlike your mercs however, the enemy doesn't have such apparel omitted for ease of individual identification, or to allow individual personality to shine through. Another annoyance for me in games: AI cheating. I get the fact that, as an RPG, your mercs will improve but games developers have to accept the fact that your mercs are not necessarily rookies. They have gained experience before turning mercenary. Meanwhile, your basic JA3 enemies are militia. Just because they have a gun and know where the trigger is and which way the bullets come out, doesn't mean they are well trained, highly fit, disciplined soldiers. Therefore, your mercs should have a basic advantage and the starting enemies should be random in their competence. It gets on my nerves seeing my own guys fumbling about, throwing pins instead of the the grenade, firing rockets into the wall next to them, while AI-controlled supermen supershoot you with one shot from their hip-fired AK-47, or all throw a series of grenades with more accuracy than the Harlem Globetrotters.

Pause during real-time was something that was suggested a long time before release. I can't remember who suggested it on these forums first but as soon as it was done so, it was universally liked and became immediately apparent that it was an important and necessary addition. This is not just a manual pause option but also an auto-pause interrupt during critical alerts, such as detection of mines, booby traps and enemies. Without it, you are scrambling to avoid disaster as your other mercs blindly set off more mines. The enemy can also possibly gain the initiative and turn the tables on your team, starting combat while you are still busy setting up position. I am sure this can be all the more problematic when you have to keep scrolling back and forth between mercs that are split up on the battlefield and you are trying to control them all at once, and don't have the finesse that paused activity (or forced switch to turn-based movement) provides.

I won't be able to play the game until August as I am away from my gaming PC. Right now, I am settling for just reading everybody else's comments on the game since release. Even before release I could tell that the shared inventory system was a bad idea. After reading the above comments, not only is it a bad idea but actually seems inconsistent. Your mercs can share with one another in ways that doesn't make sense. Then the next minute, each merc is too far away to let you carry out the process.

Fantastic news, Vlad! The modding tools look excellent!