Forums

  1. COMMUNITY SUPPORT

    1. COMMUNITY TECH & BILLING SUPPORT

      Players Helping Players. Windows & Mac trouble shooting in here. Billing Support contact forum.

      110,690
      posts
    2. GAMEPLAY SUPPORT/TRAINING

      Tips and Tricks to make you a machine of warfare in WWII Online. This is where your gameplay questions will be answered.

      868
      posts
  2. QUALITY ASSURANCE

    1. TESTING AND BUG REPORTING

      Repository for reports from pre-release testing and live game bugs.

      45,576
      posts
  3. DISCUSSIONS

    1. 767
      posts
    2. 1.36 (HYBRID SUPPLY)

      1.36 (Hybrid Supply), the return of town based supply (garrisons) on the frontline with moveable brigades. Any and all questions and discussions can be discussed here.

      574
      posts
    3. GENERAL DISCUSSION

      General discussion for all players of WWII Online. Includes Premium, Starters and Free Players.

      34,399
      posts
    4. PLAYER AWARDS

      Player to Player awards! Whether you're Allied or Axis, check this forum to see who has been recognized for outstanding effort!

      735
      posts
    5. FREE PLAY SUPPORT AND INFO

      New to Battleground Europe? Here's a great place to learn more. (trial or premium subscription required)

      1,583
      posts
    6. GAME IDEAS / SUGGESTIONS

      Help us make WWII Online better with your ideas / suggestions!

      11,554
      posts
    7. SPECIAL EVENT FORUM

      WWII Online special events.

      9,847
      posts
    8. 4,481
      posts
    9. MINI-CONS

      Listing of player hosted Mini-cons

      632
      posts
    10. WAR STORIES

      Player-written stories from the virtual battlefield

      2,829
      posts
    11. SQUAD RECRUITMENT

      Squads are the backbone of the game - JOIN UP! Axis & Allied squads who are currently recruiting.

      50,787
      posts
    1. Squads

      Player created squads

      20
      Squads
  • Upcoming Events

  • Posts

    • People that have stayed, are just used to look over so much stuff in game out of routine or whatever, that will never net attract people. If it's single inf smg ab caps with 29 kills (caused a mass logout) aka no fighting chance even for vets in too many situations, side switching during campaign aka the work of weeks rendered useless when the momentum turns, or one side being so weak that it can only win with help from other side. That's just on the tip of my head. 
    • It's proving a lot of things, but not what you say it does.
    • We all want more players in-game.  Most of the veteran players have experienced what it is like to have a huge in-game population (it is undeniably awesome).   It's a pay to play game, with a free-play element with the goal of showing just enough of the game that the free-players will sign on for the whole game, or at least pay for some DLC.  The flow of money into the game is they only way to keep the lights on, and to stay on track as far as upgrades to the game are concerned.  It isn't 'pay to win', although I understand why some might think it is.  Free players can still win.  No they can't kill tanks but paying players using rifles can't kill tanks either.  They can cap flags, or prevent the other side from capping a flag.  Those are the wins in this game.  COD rewards kill streaks, even in their domination game (where capturing a flag is the goal).  Here, the goal is to win the battle by either taking a town or denying the enemy from taking a town.  Doing that often enough will result in your chosen side winning a campaign that lasts for as long as it has to in order for a victory to be secured.   Knucks, how much money would flow into the game if free to players had to watch commercials in between spawns?  Hell, how much money would flow into the game if full-on subscribers had to watch commercials in between spawns?  (these are honest, i.e. not rhetorical, questions).   Knucks, those of us who have been here for awhile are understandably protective of the game---we've been lobbying and arguing with CRS for 17+ years on what should get modeled (I'm still a bit miffed about the PzIIIH, for those scoring at home), and how gameplay should be changed (or not) to make it better for all of us.  Maybe you have a perspective that would help the game.  I have to say, though, that if that is the case, it's getting lost in the general 'this game sucks' kind of a vibe that you exude.  I don't know your history, Knucks.  Were you in-game back when in-game population was way higher?  It was a blast----if the newer HC folks think they have it hard now, they should try herding some cats back when there were no AOs, for example.  Getting more people into the game is the goal, then, correct?  Maybe giving the rifleman more stuff is the way to go, or maybe giving access to some other equipment is the way to go.  I don't claim to have all the answers, to be sure.  I do know, however, that if you want to help the game move forward, and get more people in-game, posting in such a negative way isn't as much help as you might think it is.  
    • I think it shows that in mission UI? shows who is in mission and who is spawned or not?
      Or you mean something different, or a different place?
    • Perhaps a ui to show players popping into the queue to spawn in? Gives instant feedback on how many players are available.  Nothing worse than capping a co and no-one else comes to support.
    • Again, we have existing DLC's
      buy one time, it is yours for keeps. but here come the words Stingy and Greedy again.
      When payday comes, do you decide oh hell, i'm not taking that, i don't want to be greedy?
      I doubt it
      Explain that to the electric company when they would like paid for their service you used.

      You throw the words around as if you see John Romero driving out of the CRS office in a different color Ferrari every day or something.
      This is the really real world here, COLO space costs money, electric costs money, bandwidth costs money, servers which we own cost money, switches
      redundant power solutions misc hardware costs money, licensed technology costs money, equipment costs money, etc etc etc
    • I think effort toward FTP is a death spiral for CRS. Resources will go into development of monetization functionality instead of toward gameplay content, the only proven attractor of customers. There's no evidence that there are any customers out there that will financially support this game instead of one of the mass market shooters. Certainly the Steam community didn't find this kind of gameplay to their liking. There's no evidence that FTP is a stepping stone to subscribing. There's a ton of evidence that present subscribers will go FTP if it's cheaper for them. What evidence is there that aggregate revenue won't *decrease* after all that expensive development is done?
    • Geeze, dude, if you like other games so much ("better in every way") and dislike this one so much, why are you here?  All you do is tear down the game, and CRS's carefully considered work. If you think you're being helpful...well, IMO that's not a correct analysis.
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
    2. 2
      Bmbm
      Bmbm
      34
    3. 3
    4. 4
    5. 5
      ian77
      ian77
      15
    6. 6
    7. 7
      Silky
      Silky
      12
    8. 8
    9. 9
    10. 10
      XOOM
      XOOM
      11