Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Reskin Hind #16613

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jul 12, 2019

Conversation

@Punsho
Copy link
Contributor

commented May 29, 2019

**Hind reskinned and renamed to Black Hawk**

bhcolor

bwbh

This is also a long requested and controversial feature as Hind is a legendary Soviet aircraft has no place in the hands of Allies.

Notes:

  • Sprite and Icon were made by Inq
  • Black Hawk is not the final name and is still being discussed
  • File names are to be decided

@Punsho Punsho changed the title Reskin Hind and move its sprite to a new Soviet transport unit Reskinning Hind and moving its sprite to a new Soviet transport unit May 29, 2019

mods/ra/rules/aircraft.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
mods/ra/rules/aircraft.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
mods/ra/rules/aircraft.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
mods/ra/rules/aircraft.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
mods/ra/rules/aircraft.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

@Punsho Punsho force-pushed the Punsho:MovingHind branch 3 times, most recently from e3b1bb3 to 1a79398 May 29, 2019

@GraionDilach

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented May 29, 2019

How does this affects the campaign? Repurposing the Hind to the transport from it's attack copter role might affect mission performance. Note that in legacy RA1 the Chinook was shared between both factions, so this pretty much shifts the Hind to take over both helis' place in missions.

TBH, this already seems to be still a more promising start in all fronts than #12836 & related though.

@matjaeck

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented May 30, 2019

How does this affects the campaign? Repurposing the Hind to the transport from it's attack copter role might affect mission performance. Note that in legacy RA1 the Chinook was shared between both factions, so this pretty much shifts the Hind to take over both helis' place in missions.

I personally think we shouldn't transform the hind in a transport helicopter. One reason is that the sprite is so thin and small, it just does not look right to me. The other point is that we can not give soviets air transport as a passive ability of an already powerful weapon. You should have to invest into (mass) air transport. If soviets really need a transport heli, then let's give them the Chinook, but leave the hind in original state. We diverge even further from it with the proposed setup.

Another thing I disagree with is that helicopters are build from airfields: IMO it's a good thing if players have to decide between helicopters and planes - it will allow more variety in build orders and strategy and the helipad and its loading animation with the landed hind is something I would really miss.

I'm not convinced of the Blackhawk helicopter in its role as replacement for the hind because it is quite big and looks like it would be able to transport something - it is not an attack helicopter. It does not look right, although the artwork does look good. What might work is to use it as an armed support helicopter that can load some infantry. Then allies don't need the Chinook anymore and we can give it to Soviets, Hind is restored to its owner and allies get a new toy.

I stay skeptical because of these points and in general because it is such an high impact change. I would have hoped someone with more experience of the project and community had taken the lead here.

@Orb370

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented May 30, 2019

From a balance/gameplay perspective I think this needs more testing. I haven't seen too much wide scale testing, and I think these kind of changes need to be thoroughly vetted.

The few games I did test I didn't see the unit used, except my for my few failed attempts to abuse it.

Also, I recently realized it's a bit strange that it fires so slowly. I get this is how the Blackhawk works in RA2, but it still doesn't make sense. A fast rate of fire weapon with low damage per hit would be better.

@Punsho Punsho force-pushed the Punsho:MovingHind branch from 1a79398 to 6654cec May 30, 2019

@Punsho

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented May 30, 2019

How does this affects the campaign? Repurposing the Hind to the transport from it's attack copter role might affect mission performance. Note that in legacy RA1 the Chinook was shared between both factions, so this pretty much shifts the Hind to take over both helis' place in missions.

I haven't played all missions myself, I started this pr to get more feedback and people involved as well for having documented discussion.

I personally think we shouldn't transform the hind in a transport helicopter. One reason is that the sprite is so thin and small, it just does not look right to me. The other point is that we can not give soviets air transport as a passive ability of an already powerful weapon. You should have to invest into (mass) air transport. If soviets really need a transport heli, then let's give them the Chinook, but leave the hind in original state. We diverge even further from it with the proposed setup.

The hind is thin so he can carry just 4 passengers, we could give both faction the Chinook but then the Hind sprite goes unused and the Hind / Chinook dynamic is lost: Chinook would be faster so it can get to a place quicker, have a possibility unload rocket soldiers to ward off other aircraft, and then the Hind is slower but it has a builtin airborne weapon. Also 4 slot for soviets is really good as they will be mainly transporting low amounts of infantry anyway: 4 flamers, 4 grenadiers, 2 thiefs, 1 engineer and so on

From a balance/gameplay perspective I think this needs more testing. I haven't seen too much wide scale testing, and I think these kind of changes need to be thoroughly vetted.

The few games I did test I didn't see the unit used, except my for my few failed attempts to abuse it.

I agree, more testing is necessary. I wanted to start this pr before that was done. From what I seen in games where Hind was used in, the gun was almost never useful in direct combat engagements. People always failed to abuse the infinite airborne weapon. It's doing exactly what I created it to do, nothing else.

Also, I recently realized it's a bit strange that it fires so slowly. I get this is how the Blackhawk works in RA2, but it still doesn't make sense. A fast rate of fire weapon with low damage per hit would be better.

Well my first idea was to make sounds between Hind and BlackHawk distinct, not sure if this is the best solution though.

@GraionDilach

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented May 30, 2019

Come to think of it - the aim of this PR could be split to two PRs, limiting this PR to add in the new Allied copter art and disable the Hind to be built alone and a followup readjusting the Hind into the new role. Such a method would give more time for the community to decide upon the Hind while missions relying on it would remain intact.

@pchote

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented May 30, 2019

That was our original plan, which was preempted by this PR.

@Inq8

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented May 30, 2019

Here is an alternate mh60 that was squashed & re-rendered to be similar dimesions to the original hind. how do you feel about this one?
fatshaming

  • Thinner
  • Black landing gear
  • Slightly smaller

mh60alternate.zip

@GraionDilach

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented May 30, 2019

That was our original plan, which was preempted by this PR.

Stick with it then. Considering that there were discussions about playtest preparations, I'd say aim to finish/prioritize this art replacement to Next and delay the reintroduction of Hind to Next+1 even. Sounds like a win-win for everyone - a cycle would give more than enough time for the new-Hind discussions to form up and reach a point, while the artwork replacement would already give a better light to the crowd which considered the gameplay reasoning behind the current state an excuse.

@Punsho

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented May 30, 2019

Alright, I'll split the pr if it is wanted

@matjaeck

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented May 30, 2019

@Inq8 That looks better from my perspective.

I agree that we should defer this and leave it to someone who is able to address requests. @Punsho please leave this to someone else. Your comment did not address any of the concerns that I raised. I don't trust you with this and think you are not experienced enough to handle this. You haven't made the artwork and from my perspective you are not able to convince others of the idea behind this PR.

This topic is too important to me to leave it to someone without reputation so I have to 👎 this until somebody experienced takes this over.

@Punsho

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented May 30, 2019

@matjaeck When writing my initial response I was in a hurry and thus unable to respond to all of your concerns.

Another thing I disagree with is that helicopters are build from airfields: IMO it's a good thing if players have to decide between helicopters and planes - it will allow more variety in build orders and strategy and the helipad and its loading animation with the landed hind is something I would really miss.

Helicopters land on Airfields all the time so I don't see this as immersion breaking. The decision between building Hind and Yak is very simple really. If you want to transport infantry, you choose Hind. If you want vision or to deal damage, you choose Yak. It is a shame that we lose Hind rearming animation but on the other hand Black Hawk's one looks even sexier.

I'm not convinced of the Blackhawk helicopter in its role as replacement for the hind because it is quite big and looks like it would be able to transport something - it is not an attack helicopter. It does not look right, although the artwork does look good.

Hind irl is a armoured gunship that can carry up to 8 infantry. UH-60 Black Hawk is more of a utility helicopter with a maximum cary capacity of 20 infantry. One of the solutions was to make Black Hawk thinner but people seem like the "thicc" version more. The thickness also helps to visually differentiate it from the other helicopters. Just a fact dump for context and future discussions.

What might work is to use it as an armed support helicopter that can load some infantry. Then allies don't need the Chinook anymore and we can give it to Soviets, Hind is restored to its owner and allies get a new toy.

We can't give Black Hawk powerful weapons and passenger slots at the same time as ammo and passenger pips in one unit look awful and confusing. Without that your idea falls apart.

@Punsho Punsho force-pushed the Punsho:MovingHind branch from aa35815 to c168b33 May 30, 2019

@Punsho

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented May 30, 2019

Replaced Black Hawk cameo with the Inq's fixed version

@GraionDilach

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented May 30, 2019

@Punsho I believe from the sheer amount of thumbsups on my previous comment that a consensus have been formed upon the scope of this request. Please remove all yaml edits you made on the Hind and give it a ~disabled prerequsite.

@Inq8

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented May 31, 2019

Hind irl is a armoured gunship that can carry up to 8 infantry. UH-60 Black Hawk is more of a utility helicopter with a maximum cary capacity of 20 infantry. One of the solutions was to make Black Hawk thinner but people seem like the "thicc" version more. The thickness also helps to visually differentiate it from the other helicopters. Just a fact dump for context and future discussions.

The helicopter modelled is actually a MH-60L DAP, its not a UH-60, its a gunship used by the SOAR unit in the US Army. It's the closest thing to a Hind in the US / NATO arsenal. While a normal "Blackhawk" (MH-60L) can carry 20 guys, the DAP (Direct Action Penetrator) sacrifices that carrying capacity to put as many guns, missiles & rockets on the airframe as possible.

Its loadout varies on its mission, but typically it has a 30mm cannon, x2 Miniguns & a rocket pod. It is also possible for it to carry Hellfire missiles & Stinger AA missiles.

DAP

DAP2

@Punsho Punsho force-pushed the Punsho:MovingHind branch from 45cf272 to 98123aa May 31, 2019

@Punsho

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented May 31, 2019

This pr has been split into #16618 as requested.

@Punsho Punsho changed the title Reskinning Hind and moving its sprite to a new Soviet transport unit Reskin Hind May 31, 2019

@Punsho Punsho force-pushed the Punsho:MovingHind branch from 666704e to d00c8a8 Jun 30, 2019

@Punsho

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Jun 30, 2019

Rebased and AttackType: Hover added

mods/ra/rules/aircraft.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

@Punsho Punsho force-pushed the Punsho:MovingHind branch from d00c8a8 to 9bab596 Jun 30, 2019

@abcdefg30

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Jun 30, 2019

Imho we should let the AI build Hawks instead of Hinds too.

@Punsho Punsho force-pushed the Punsho:MovingHind branch from 9bab596 to 0186906 Jul 1, 2019

@Punsho

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Jul 1, 2019

replaced all hind references in ai.yaml with mh60

@Smittytron

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 1, 2019

I'd just have mh60 inherit hind and not give hind build prereqs. I want to leave hind in the game for future campaign missions that have soviet hinds.

@abcdefg30

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Jul 2, 2019

That won't work together with #16618.

mods/ra/rules/ai.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Punsho Punsho

@Punsho Punsho force-pushed the Punsho:MovingHind branch from 0186906 to 8532976 Jul 4, 2019

@Inq8

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 6, 2019

Whilst I contributed the artwork to this PR, I have refrained from commenting for or against, until now.

I do believe @reaperrr summarises it best:

Some players are against new artwork, full stop. (Classic Players)

Some players are against additional new artwork. However, those same people currently tolerate the 3rd party chinook, Flak truck & AA APC sprites. (Hypocrites)

Others are indifferent.

In addition to above, people are against the Allied hind - this comprises of two groups:

Players that are against changes to the original unit trees ( Classic Players) That flat out reject any changes made no matter what.

Players that are against a historically iconic Soviet aircraft being fielded by France & England. (Lore Players)

Finally the people for the Allied hind:
Players that disregard the previous two arguments in favour of gameplay. (Gameplay Players)

Taking all groups into account, I firmly believe that a re-skin is the best way forward.

As it avoids changes in gameplay (doesn’t aggravate gameplay players) & also avoids criticism from lore players.

It will upset hypocrites & classic players... however you will always be criticised by “Classic Players” no matter what gameplay or artwork changes are made. Even if the Apache was added rather than the Blackhawk.

So just reiterating what @reaperrr said,
I fully support this PR going ahead into a playtest to see what public criticism is made & it can be adjusted from there.

(Whether that is cancelling it for release, or replacing it with the Apache)

@pchote
pchote approved these changes Jul 7, 2019

@pchote pchote added the PR: Needs +2 label Jul 7, 2019

@matjaeck

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 9, 2019

Some players are against additional new artwork. However, those same people currently tolerate the 3rd party chinook, Flak truck & AA APC sprites. (Hypocrites)

Your mixing quite a few things here: 1) this is a RA PR and you come up with the TD APC. 2) the chinook is not a completely new unit but an visual enhanced existing unit that would iirc otherwise be used in two mods. 3) the paradigm you outline here leaves people two options: uninstall the game, leave the community, delete all their stuff and never come back or be a stay involved but be a hypocrite. The nowadays active OpenRA community doesn't give a shit about old RA - what else than tolerating things like the flak truck shoud the "classic" people do in your opinion? Shut up or leave, right??

@pchote you can pretend and maybe even believe "asset thief is not going to happen under your watch" but reality doesn't care. The subject of this PR is not a fundamental problem, but the attitude and paradigm here and in other issues and PRs is. It will be the death of the project as you know it, and the stolen assets are going to be everything what will be left of RA. So be it.

@reaperrr
Copy link
Contributor

left a comment

I don't think we'll make any more progress purely by discussion among a few people, so LGTM if only to get a larger sample of feedback through the upcoming playtest

@reaperrr reaperrr merged commit 37325db into OpenRA:bleed Jul 12, 2019

2 checks passed

continuous-integration/appveyor/pr AppVeyor build succeeded
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details

@Punsho Punsho deleted the Punsho:MovingHind branch Jul 22, 2019

@Jehoel

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 25, 2019

If it's not too late - another option is to give the Hinds back to the Soviets (where's it's almost redundant with the Yak, I know) and let the Allies get the Longbow without the Tech Center, but the Longbow won't have Hellfire rockets until the Tech Center is built (and the Longbow always uses guns against infantry, but Hellfire rockets against vehicles and structures), i.e. upgrade logic?

As for alternative name suggestions, I might suggest Huey (1956) or Cobra (1965) as being more role-correct and more period-correct than the Blackhawk (1974+) if you're in the same lore-school as me who maintain that Red Alert 1 takes place in the 1950s-1960s.

On the subject of helicopters, can we bring back the Helicarrier too? :D - though perhaps in an alternate capacity or role?

@matjaeck

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Sep 16, 2019

what else than tolerating things like the flak truck shoud the "classic" people do in your opinion? Shut up or leave?

@Inq8 that was a serious question btw and your reply is still welcomed since I still haven't found an answer for myself how to deal with the hypocrisy blame / participate without being a hypocrite.

@Inq8

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Sep 17, 2019

Hey @matjaeck, my comment was a general statement & a personal opinion on why it is so difficult to please every party on a PR like this.
It wasn’t intended as flame-bait.

I personally like to play the game in a more classic style without the flak trucks & with Soviet hinds, but with benefits of the RA2 style UI. Therefore I enjoy playing OpenRA more than the original.

At the same time, I understand there is a competitive multiplayer scene within OpenRA - and in this reimagining of RA it has new units to fill holes in the questionable/poorly balanced factions of the Westwood version of the game.

I accept that my imagining of how the game should play is not a popular opinion & therefore don’t force anyone to play it that way, however with the flexibility of OpenRA I can still play the way I want to with mods & mod maps etc.

Therefore to answer your rather loaded question.
I would say either;

  1. Play mod-maps or mods to make the game play how you want.

  2. If you think your opinion is shared with a large portion of the player base, Garner enough vocal support to get the game changed to play the way you want.

@GraionDilach

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Sep 17, 2019

Come to think of it, the RA Classic mod could be offered as an official bonus download somewhere to give it a PR stunt, since it's already within the OpenRA account and semi-completed for the most part.

@matjaeck

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Sep 17, 2019

@Inq8 Thanks for taking the time to answer. I'll accept these things and look around for something new that is compatible with my interests and motivations.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.