Forums

  1. COMMUNITY SUPPORT

    1. COMMUNITY TECH & BILLING SUPPORT

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

      109,453
      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.

      372
      posts
  2. QUALITY ASSURANCE

    1. TESTING AND BUG REPORTING

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

      42,983
      posts
  3. DISCUSSIONS

    1. 240
      posts
    2. GENERAL DISCUSSION

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

      16,540
      posts
    3. FREE PLAY SUPPORT AND INFO

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

      1,376
      posts
    4. GAME IDEAS / SUGGESTIONS

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

      5,841
      posts
    5. SPECIAL EVENT FORUM

      WWII Online special events.

      9,753
      posts
    6. 4,400
      posts
    7. MINI-CONS

      Listing of player hosted Mini-cons

      605
      posts
    8. WAR STORIES

      Player-written stories from the virtual battlefield

      2,790
      posts
    9. SQUAD RECRUITMENT

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

      50,398
      posts
    1. Squads

      Player created squads

      13
      Squads
  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
  • Posts

    • Correct. Some sort of supply in every town is the only way to stop the massive cut offs that destroy morale and cause people to go play WoW instead. This issue with soft caps is the same issue that was out there from day one of TOEs. People log in to play a war game against other players; not to stand in empty CPs waiting for a meter where there is no danger. Bad for both attackers and defenders. Even the solutions I proposed won't stop the cut offs. All they will do is stop the ridiculous rotation of new supply during battles. Potthead was telling me not long ago about a 15 hour strategy to force some attrition on divisions so the map could be moved.  Let that sink in for a minute. A 15 hour strategy... Who the hell plays for 15 hours straight besides Potthead, Potthead 1 - 75, oshelia (or whatever the that undercover Potthead is named), and Lob12 when he goes all Emo about something that was said in the forums?  It's too much to ask of one person and you can't expect map movers 6 hours from now to be executing the same grand strategy; communication over super secret secure forums or not. Squads should be able to get together on a squad night and have a reasonable chance in a reasonable amount of time to take a town in a fashion other than catching the other side with their panties down with a quick over run. 
    • *** The Axis have double the RDP bomber supply.   Interesting, but means nothing if axis has 200 bombers and allies have 100.  Completely a moot point. If axis only has 20x 111 and allies have 20x db7, then we're talking. (for the whole side)   If either side has more than 30 (maybe 40 to be safe) bombers then the bomber supply is irrelevant. So the questions are, do the allies have 40 or more db7 and do the axis have 40 or more 111? If those answers are yes, then supply can be completely removed from any analysis.  
    • There are 10 bomber brigades per side (if you count the HQs).   There are only 5 French bomber brigades with DB7s, but all 10 LW brigades have HE111s.     The Axis have double the RDP bomber supply.  
    • *** Again, respectfully disagree. You are getting confused with the math between 9 and 18 factories.   No confusion at all. It currently takes twice as long for axis to do the equivalent damage, presuming both sides MIA, or presuming both sides RTB. If axis MIA and allied RTB, then yes, it might be much closer to 'even'.  But that is an unfair comparison as it is apples and oranges. Guess at that point we'd have to see what % of pilots on each side RTB or not.  Until that was determined, best bet is both sides MIA/RTB about an equal rate. Meaning, it still takes twice as long for axis to damage the factories. AND, this takes no account of the intercept issues, which w/o any doubt favors the allies - far easier to shoot down axis 111.  But, I have been counting intercept as even for both sides.   Your one point however, is interesting, and I'll have to check it out. If it is true, that the allies side gets so few bombers, that they have to RTB, and the axis side has so many bombers that they can MIA every flight and not care. Then, and only then, I'd say it might be more balanced.   But, I have serious reservations about allied and axis air supply.  Both sides have so much it's ridiculous.   PS how are you getting 50 flights?  It takes you 2 bombloads to nearly destroy a facility.  So 9 factories x 2 flights is only 18 flights; It only takes 18 flights to destroy every axis facility. PS2 and 111's don't need 36 flights, they can destroy them with 18 flights (to 88% anyway)  I think you need to check your math on the flights.  
    • Wow.  You (and the three people who liked your post lol) really need to work on your reading comprehension.     In that quoted post, I just expressed my DISbelief that TOEs is fixable, and that any tweak will NOT solve the main issue of no HC, and that moving to some amount of town supply is the key.     As for the rest, ask anyone who has ever worked with me how much of a dictator I am.  My actions in game speak for themselves.  
    • Yeah, I'm just here to remind everyone how long the games been heading in the wrong direction.  Its kinda disturbing that anything else is being worked on over fixing the mess that toe/hc delivers for gameplay.  While town based supply is certainly not the best option, it blows away toe hands down by bringing back regional attrition, fixed piece battles of tangible supply and will go along way on making attrition the important game shaping aspect it should be. Not to mention the removal of the deplorable softcaps, cutoffs that ruin campaigns, and actually having battles on the map in places that haven't see much action in 10 years. It frees the people who want to lead in the game to do so instead of playing map daddy.  That's really only half your problem though. You cannot exclusively rely on hc to run the ao's either.  How did I know hc would fail back in 2003? Try running a squad with 100 plus on daily for awhile.  The average burnout for command was around 6 months.  That was just from planning and executing op's.  You can't put hurdles in leaders way like bartering and waiting for ao's, or even worse things like subjecting them to some appointed clowns whims.  You need to give the game back to the players.  Leadership is earned/developed not appointed.  The game was once filled with players that were able to log on and take their gameplay down endless roads of possibilities.  You have a map filled with a ton of places to choose to play, the gear to set up endless combinations of combined arms op's and you reduced all this to p1 flood the box as the only choice. You would have to pay me to play that awfulness. In doing so, you completely removed the grooming of real future leaders that are completely essential to the games success and dumbed the game down to cod.  It all starts with one person saying let's do this here.  If that person sucks people don't follow them, it's pretty simple.  Allowing this natural selection and trial and error delivers people like deadlock, dinker, etc.   Don't get me wrong Hc has its place, as its crucial to wrangling up all the people who want to be wrangled, but once you open the door for real leaders, you enable the game to do so much more and appeal to a far larger audience    Love Oj  
    • GAMEY DOG !!!! Ya...I have edited....but not lately. Sometimes it doesn't seem to take properly.      
    • As demonstrated in our recent Campaign adjustments, we are extending an open and actionable ear to ideas and concepts being proposed. In other words, I have seen Saronin's post and other ideas and am considering future alterations as needed, while monitoring the recent changes we have made, very carefully.
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
    2. 2
    3. 3
    4. 4
    5. 5
    6. 6
      Lob12
      Lob12
      19
    7. 7
      Capco
      Capco
      18
    8. 8
    9. 9
    10. 10