Free Play Account
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Green Tag

About blggles

  • Rank
  • Birthday
  1. Of note regarding a new map: it is something of a game-play opportunity, where things like no static/all mobile FBs and other such might be tried. And it wouldn't need any more extent than a CP or two in order to be used for intermissions or special events. As with the current it could be used as it is developed for a nice change of pace. And, since the original map was all of a dozen or so CPs (don't remember the exact number) there's no reason official campains might not start at completion of the 12th CP or so (though a win in North Africa or Norway, or the like, couldn't be based on captured production).
  2. A certain amount of visible supply does add to the immersion. Maybe one day resupplied aircraft could manifest on the field as PPOs. You can keep'em, but you gotta defend'em to keep'em.
  3. Dunno about new players, but new map would bring a lot of old players back for a look.
  4. For lots of convoys/transports roaming the briny, let the captain leave a waypoint then abandon ship and busy himself elsewhere, with his vessel continuing on its merry way - a mobile PPO. No undue time commitment - more ships on the sea. Later he can rejoin and do whatever needs doing, then set another waypoint, homewards or wherever. And like a CP, his ship would send out an EWS warning of nearby nme, or opportunity, so he or his mate can spawn in and shoot the plane, or board the merchant vessel for riches and wenches.
  5. If CRS decides to improve the graphics engine, adding occlusion for the tank interiors might be very worthwhile, very good bang for the buck. The apertures in the tanks are so small and geometrically simple. I'll bet you could load the interiors with 1000s of polys. Could help make the tanks much more immersive and appealing. Then interior lighting and shadows to seal the deal. Easy Peasy.
  6. If TTs ever become an MS, would be nice if the loaded tank becomes a part of the spawn list/PPO so that the driver doesn't have to endure the voyage.
  7. Still, if the rifleman's one ammo can is replenished at the FMS or ammo box, that might constitute a part of the points. I didn't realize you got points for ammo resupply, good to know.
  8. Sounds like a sploit, and worthy of investigation, but if you set an FMS and then spawn a rifle, and you are, and remain, the mission leader, points for spawners accrue to you, best I know anyway.
  9. Most used FMS that somehow managed to stay up, I'd reckon.
  10. You bet. Helps keep the fight going, and gets folks to the battle faster. It is an unfortunate thing that join on the fly, take over someone's vehicle, was never developed. Would be very attractive to quick action, shoot-em up players. And it wouldn't be gamey or cheap, as the unit was driven to battle by a player.
  11. I wonder how much of the coding for mannable weapons is already written. That would certainly be akin to joining another player's vehicle. Maybe the progression could be: Current: join other player's vehicle before spawn. Next: join already spawned unit on the fly. Then: full control of vehicle may be given to (with rank considerations) secondary player. Lastly: leave PPO unit in the field to be "joined" (taken over) by other player (again, with rank considerations).
  12. They have us right where they want us...
  13. ^^^ Might be a logical sort of conflict-point to be found between towns with no FBs. I guess the terrain guys would have to be consulted to see whether it is feasible for new towns when extending the map. Beware though, they might be like the engineers in the movie "Alien" - leveraging their esoteric, but critical, knowledge for more shares.
  14. Yeah, the warp behind the lines is gamey, particularly on the scale of taking down one dFMS. The idea of the defense aiding to define the front might be a logical addition, however. I think it would be a great good thing if the town garrisons CRS is working on had persistent defensive missions. Iirc they once did, back before TOEs. With persistent defensive missions would come persistent dFMS'. Then the lines could be drawn and redrawn as seen fit by the players, which might then define where the attacker could set-up. Given current game tech, persistent defensive missions might be the best first step for a better flow of battle. Following that, each dFMS could be given a dozen or 2 attached persistent (non-timeout) PPOs (they'd be put on a timer when their FMS is destroyed). Now you'd have something more resembling a proper front line. Then bit by bit you could vary the dFMS' even more by style, spawnlist, and associated PPO types: infantry squad dFMS', atg dFMS' (Germans could have the 88 spawn out and ready before the nme hits), vehicle dFMS' (rear spawns to prevent camping). Next step would be something like morphing vehicle FMS' into mobile FBs. If you want more countryside fighting, a more important role for scouting, less camping, more of a realistic frontline, better flow of battle, and more variety to the fight (not the same target in the same place every time) I think the FMS is decidedly the bit of tech to leverage. Heck, maybe even the FBs could have persistent defensive missions, with resulting dFMS positions squared off against the nme: a front line with both sides staring each other down.