• Announcements

    • HEAVY265

      Crs Wants You!   01/18/2019

      CRS is looking for some volunteer live support chat staff.  Are you up for the assignment?  If so,  please send an email with your interest to,  Jobs@corneredrats.com




      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. 769
    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.


      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.

    8. 4,481
    9. MINI-CONS

      Listing of player hosted Mini-cons


      Player-written stories from the virtual battlefield


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

    1. Squads

      Player created squads

  • Upcoming Events

  • Posts

    • During last intermission we played a lot in that area 51.  In that part of the map, I forget what city, had what I am assuming a mock up of sorts of the new bunker that is supposed to make it in game soon.  I think defending that with a rifle is much easier than it is now.  If we could incorporate a building like that for a capture points (as well as the bunker itself), I think that would go a long way to appeasing those who won't/don't defend with a rifle. Maybe make it a smaller building than the bunker itself, but keep the same tight quarters with the narrow hallways that a rifleman can shoot down. For the record, I defend cp's with anything.  I've held off attacks with a sapper.
    • it has to be a blend and I think infantry specifically needs to be much closer to red-vs-blue. the arguments for historical adherence to realistic TOE have NEVER been that loud.   are you sure you guys understand the argument and you're not conflating the player arguments with your own internal biases? players want weapons PERFORMANCE to reflect history as closely as possible, pretty sure this is punto numero uno within the context of 'historical accuracy' arguments. after this, players want it to be fun. actual realistic war, as you know (better than most), isn't fun.
    • No mate - the reality is that it's hard to have it both ways - you can't scream about historic accuracy if what you want is red vs blue. If it's a mix, so be it, but come to a consensus that's what you want and give up on making any other arguements about specific historic matchups. Same goes for weapon characteristics...does this mean you want everyone to have the same smg round to round dispersion? Thats red vs blue and can be done...but don't come to the forum and argu for historic weapons accuracy if you already asked for something else. It's hard to see through the noise at times... what you are saying is that in essence the disparity in players minutes and numbers is due to the TOE structure and it's effects on defense and capture. (Smg) Is that the reason for the play time and player imbalance or is it that the allies for too long labored under an unfair balance dynamic forever...which was the issue with the old TOE structure. I assume both sides want a fair fight free from side bias.  All I can say is let the guys make their adjustments after the campaign...they will do so happily I'm sure...but the existing disparity had to be destroyed because it was, imho, destroying one side of the game in the long term, which helps no one.  
    •   I said it before my break and I'll say it again - you the players have to decide what the fundamental nature of the game will be. Is it red vs blue, historic accuracy, or a blend? Be careful for what you ask for because you may just get it - which always seems to leave someone ticked off regardless of the initial desires. You asked for more infantry only fights - you got them. In this case the initial TOE departure point for the new tools was historic accuracy and correct costs.  The Axis had more smg early on...it's not CRS opinion...it's the historic TOE and History. The allies catch up quickly, but what I'm reading isn't that the allied players don't have equipment. They do - it's just they don't want to use what they have. (Not fun etc etc)  Later on you will see the Axis inferior in semiauto rifles.  Ok - so the slider can in turn be moved to to more red vs blue with more smg even though that's not historic TOE ratios any more. If that's what the players want I'm sure Ohm and Bmbm will happily comply after discussion. It's a game and has to be fun. Thats why everyone is here, active in the forums and paying attention. The tool set now allows that to happen quickly without creating an imbalance elsewhere.  Area capture has been and will continue to be discussed, but it won't happen tomorrow. What I can say with authority is that the old TOE was not only not correct but had a distinctive tilt towards one side in two tiers..particularly in French vs Axis lineup. That is gone now. so - make your opinions known...if the desire is more red vs blue so be it...but don't start yelling in the forums about historical this or that if you opt for red vs blue.  The goal is to find the ideal mix..but to do that the old disparities had to be destroyed...and a new cycle begun. I know changes are already bring made and discussed, so have at it and post away.  Please just don't ask for something, get it, then say you want something else. That's the short toad to insanity on the other side of the fence because no matter what is done, someone is always ticked off. 
    • While I almost exclusively use the rifleman kit, I also understand why SMGs are preferred for CP action.     The problem isn't the lists on their own per se.  The concept might work with a different capture system or mechanic.  But at the end of the day you need to get inside of these small buildings for X minutes in order to capture territory, and automatic weapons will always shine in CQB over a bolt-action rifle for the vast majority of players.     That's just how the game works right now.  If a battle actually burns up all the auto supply and both sides are down to rifles, and then a fresh brigade with autos arrives for one side, that side wins the battle almost every time.     We probably take notice of enemy auto supply more than we take notice of tank supply.  Once your side notices that the enemy isn't spawning autos anymore but your side still is, that's a massive psychological event.  Every vet knows that's "the moment"... that's when the battle finally turns one way or the other.  
    • Said this on the 1st day.  When one side has a big advantage in SMGs, it's going to decide the map.  I refuse to defend CPs with a rifle vs autos. You just die 85% of the time. When the autos are gone, so am I, at least playing infantry. I'll go ATG or armor or somewhere else, and I see a lot of people doing the same thing.  The rats (and their forum sycophants)  can defend this nonsense all they want, but reality is reality. 
    • Well, it depends on what you consider an armored division.  I think most people would think DLM for armor division, which was properly speaking a cavalry division analogous to the British cruiser type doctrine.  Those are loaded with S35s and H39s, and I think one of them had Pannys attached for recon, others used AMRs which aren't modeled. The Chars were usually assigned to BCCs which were then assigned to whatever, usually an infantry division, but I think read in there about a different division type I was not appreciative of the DCRs.  They are armor concentrations, just more of the infantry assault speed type tanks like the B1, B1bis, and the R35. Looking over the stats, I think the D2 was a more kickass armor scheme then I realized, kind of like what you would get if B1bis and S35 had baby tanks.  I don't think I'd want to make it the MBT going forward, more horsepower and a bigger turret with at least the long 47 in it means a different chassis, but it seemed more like something functional.  
    • Good tips. Agree with all. My understanding is the goal is proximity chat coupled with everyone being on the "same map" regarding the target.
  • Popular Contributors