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


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



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


    1. 925
    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.


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


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


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


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


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


      WWII Online special events.

    9. 4,490
    10. MINI-CONS

      Listing of player hosted Mini-cons


      Player-written stories from the virtual battlefield

    1. Squads

      Player created squads

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
  • Posts

    • The A-20 for WW2OL should get an upgrade in 1943 to the most built (2850) version, the A-20G: Gun nosed, it started with 4 20mm guns (60rpg), and 2 .50 cals (350 rpg), but the low rof and jamming led them to remove those after only 250 built, and the bulk were built with 6 .50 cal (350 rpg) in the nose (most of the original 250 went to the CCCP). 2000 lbs internal bomb load, and 2000lb external. An interesting loadout would include an internal honeycomb rack with 72 23lb parafrag bombs. Each tube had 4 bombs, they were usually dropped all at once (which meant serially, one tube at a time, leaving a long trail behind the aircraft), but for ww2ol, likely 4 at a drop in a row).  
    •   I would make the server tell people CPs are being capped. There are different issues here. One is that there is an abstraction in the game of large forces (in being) that are only serially played by small numbers of players. One aspect of that abstraction are the AI units, awful (in both good and bad ways) as they are. Another is EWS (many hundreds of troops means they have pickets, etc). The server already tells us a facility has fallen, it could just as well tell us/mark that a facility is contested. I guess I can see a slight change in the map that acknowledges the abstraction, to make it seem less modern/scifi. We in a sense represent groups of men at once due to the spawning abstraction. So within areas where we have forces, there are people who know things, but we only get to play 10 out of 400 at a time, for example. If that was the way the magic map was thought of, then it can make some sense. None the less, it's still too perfect, IMO. Giving us location, AND precise facing, for example. I'm less concerned with marking ei in a CP than I am with marking the precise location of an ATG, ET, etc. How about the position is not a point, but a fuzzy circle (position is within the circle), and has no facing. The longer you keep the map open, the better the position gets (location back in the day to any precision would have involved a compass, visual landmarks, etc). Regardless, sharing that information I still think should be limited, even with the abstraction that we are 1 of many (invisible) troops/units. Sharing between ground an air? Short of a dedicated FO with a radio, that's not a thing (and I think most ww2 CAS coordination was done at a higher level, not guys at the front). So maybe all on a mission can share, but not separate missions? HC sees all? (that at least pushes unit cohesion). I don't think inf should get to share with non-inf units, however, and I think tanks should only share if they had radios in RL (that is something I recall reading about an advantage the Germans had in RL in the BoF, and I say this as someone would would suffer from this bit of realism). Anyway, I think that while comms is out of CRS control, the map/icons ARE under control, and should be used in a way that drives desired gameplay goals. What's the goal, and could changes in map/icon use be helpful?
    • This has happened to me as well...Yesterday and today. Lets use this thread as the main communication on this situation since i have more than a few support tickets ongoing Thanks
    • Xoom responded, in part: The question, I think, is where is CRS's design boundary. Would the above quoted suggestion fit into the "more work to be done" category...not with a commitment for immediate accomplishment, but nonetheless something that customers could consider a goal, by which they could be motivated? Or would it be disallowed from that category in line with the below quoted thoughts: which other customers, preferring the game-style as discussed, would prefer?
    • @XOOM, is the current player GPS map , and player icons something that can have settings changed for the server outside of regular play for testing? It seems like it might be interesting to try a scenario/event where icon range is extremely low (like no name til you'd be close enough to recognize a face), or even off, and with map contacts not shared, or not shared except to specific players, etc. The map is obviously a very useful tool for organization, but IMHO it can be perhaps too useful. It instantaneously communicates to everyone, and everyone knows exactly where they are. It makes ambushes impossible, the map, and icon "skulls" both have this effect. The current state of play is that everyone has to always move. Muzzle flashes (excessive, IMHO) give shooters away at distance, and skulls (or even exact player positions) mean that we know exactly where all the danger areas are. This actually harms thoughtful play. An attacker sets up a good base of fire to cover people, and the muzzle flash, plus skulls, plus the ability of anyone to look at him, then draw a line on the map to where he is literally singles him out for destruction for combined arms. It's partially a realism thing, partially just a survivability thing, and partially a gameplay concern, honestly. In the last case I think it makes for an an etirely different game. You cannot stop global comms, so units will always be able to call in strikes from tanks, aid from inf, or attacks from air in a way that no ww2 military could have dreamed of, but what you can control is the MAP and icon situation. Giving players a GPS was always a mistake, IMHO. I would ideally have the map mark the origin for the player, not his current location. Perhaps it could be reset to current location as certain places (a CP, for example), though it would not move, it would center on that facility. I'd not allow map contacts to be shared between services as a start, at all, and I'd eliminate icons air to ground, entirely. I'd also dump the skulls on the map, and as icons, and reduce icon range substantially on the ground. I'm sure many will disagree, but I think that a little less information will actually improve play, and force a little more cohesion. FF has always been something that is hard/impossible to add, but we all know how trigger happy we are (how many times have each of us shot someone coming into a CP or bunker who is a friend?). If we didn't have icons until closer range, we'd not harm friends, but we'd waste ammo, or give our positions away---this would incentivize IDing targets before shooting, not as much as FF, but more than magical icons doing it for us. Anyway, it might be fun to see what it looks like as a non-campaign event.
    • We are still investigating, but it seems to be an issue with a function in Windows 7 itself called “Game Explorer” (gameux.dll) which was removed in Windows 10.. We are looking to see if we can do anything about it on our end.  Good way to see if this is your issue is if you open up your task manager processes, open the game and log in, then there will be a run32dll running at 100% and the game won’t open.  There seem to to be a few advanced things to try out on the web in order to fix the issue but I wouldn’t suggest anyone fiddle around with them unless you really know what your doing and could recover from breaking something else.
    • It would be interesting to look at town losses as a function of total defenders vs total attackers. Both sides must have this problem at different times of day. It has always seemed to me that the real issue is when there are fewer than some nominal minimum number to have a chance at defense. A lone, or even small group can luck out if they can arrive soon enough to kill the trucks, for example, but that really is just luck for low pop (higher pop means more of a chance for random people to be spawned in where there is no ews just in case). Usually, though, you need at least enough people to cover the CPs and bunker (which is sometimes hard to get folks to do even with a crowd of them in town, lol).
    • Had that issue with win10 - had to run it as admin. 
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
    2. 2
    3. 3
    4. 4
    5. 5
    6. 6
    7. 7
    8. 8
    9. 9
    10. 10