Registered Users
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Kilemall

  1. Screw their attitudes, FMS guys can drive trucks. How does that grab you?
  2. Ok, we'll see how sanguine you are if we get Italian fighters, which should be better turn fighters, and then you get 190 guys squawking about their rides being cut in half, or Italian guys not happy their stuff runs out.
  3. Well sort of, note I don't say I like Tiger/Church/S76 battles, but TD/gun ambush play. The sort of thing where they are defeated before I fire the first shot, so more smart maneuver and patience/burning reward. But that means more hulls out there to shoot, which is not a model problem, it's a gameplay/density problem. Also, if you look at my stats I'm rifle 95% of the time. A lot of times when I do indulge in ATG/tank play, I know I'm not in there doing my cap/recap/AI kill/scout/FMS kill/comms thing, and on lower pop situations that lack of a vet doing scut work shows up. So I choose winning and don't indulge. Get me more players and I am not on the AO/timer rack cause there is enough to go around and I can blow two hours messing around without harm to the team.
  4. Differ all you like. I KNOW the RAF brigades emptied out and I could watch the pilots leave and the yellow, then red squares form. The specific circumstance of X campaigns you allude to may be different, but the general rule of thumb was RAF supply was always on the knife edge of disaster. Saying 'oh look there's a bunch of P38s' to an RAF guy means NOTHING. Now if you mean kill supply within three hours of normal playtime like a single forward AF could be depleted, that's true. But RAF supply definitely was measured in hours, and only the breathing space TZ3 afforded to restock tickets prevented a general failure of supply 24/7. And air superiority/supremacy is not necessary. Air denial or contested is good enough to disrupt CAS ops. Nowadays I'll grant there is likely fewer pilots and more importantly fewer Axis pilots so the planes the Allies do fly aren't lost at the same rate. That's different from asserting attrition wasn't possible with ToEs, which is absurdly false.
  5. That may be true now with pop vs. current lists. But I don't guess, I KNOW that for years I had to juggle air constantly, move forward whatever half supply brigades were left to keep em flying. But again, RAF, FAF, and you don't GET IT or have lived it.
  6. The survey is crippled from the beginning. Example, if I had an absolute fave piece of equipment, it's an ATG or a high caliber TD like the M10 or StuG. But these all take very specific battle environment situations that rarely obtain nowadays, as you have to have enemy armor advancing on a position, you already there ahead or on the flanks for an ambush, and there isn't an inf already on the way with a sap or RPAT to blow you out before the first shot. In this case developing new armor/TD units means VERY little, it's more the battlefield mechanics and player density that affects this sort of play. Yes theoretically 1.36 will generate more interdiction opportunities, but again, density, how many interdictors are going to sit out there for hours not seeing anyone driving because everyone is against the wall getting attack or defense working or the enemy does overstock but not on your TZ, and give up? Get us more players, and a lot of poblems go away.
  7. You willing to give up the big continuous map?
  8. The rest of your critique may be valid, but the supply one I don't buy. Having been in a former game life a long term serving officer that spent months at a time on the air logistics issues and often did the rotations when air officers weren't around, I can tell you the Allied supply was not infinite and never was. Keep in mind that something like 70-80% of the Allied pilots prefer RAF rides, so the RAF brigades bleed out FAST and they DON'T go fly French when they are out Britside, they log. The DB-7s are preferred for those in the know because of the more powerful bombs but some like the Havoc I guess because of the RAF branding, so the issue is less with those. But for fighters, Allied supply is effectively HALF that of Axis. If you see some French top rides after RAF is depleted, that's because a few French pilots showed up and no one has used them. Luftwaffe should NEVER run out of planes given the total situation. Heh, I think the new brigade thing is going to hurt the Allies because the RAF on tap/on demand won't be available, but I think the Axis is going to discover new levels of supply pain not experienced before. The lack of turn fighters may well be a fun factor issue to be addressed, But supply hasn't been. Does have to be carefully handled with the new town thing.
  9. Well arguably WWII was about up and coming militarized societies seeking to capture the oil their forces and industries required. Germany was on the tippy toe of supply disaster but squeaked through, the turn south to the Stalingrad area was largely a bid to 'fuel up' on Caucasus oil. Failing to secure that hurt badly, requiring resort to coal gasification and wood-burning trucks at the end.–Tropsch_process#History USSR advances in Eastern Europe cut off other resource flows. However, Germany was not on the brink of industrial collapse until very late 1944/1945, that is accurate as well. Review the USSBS for relevant docs. An important aspect of fuel shortages was impacts on pilot training.
  10. I threw out a proposal that was intended for an eventual 'players build their own brigade', sort of the evolved version of the RDP process where the brigades would be customized. One of the tradeoffs was how many trucks you had versus how much gas guzzling equipment the trucks were supporting. I figured the easiest method was either dividing the tonnage or the point value by the carry capacity of each truck x # of trucks,. That value would determine brigade movement speed. So just a rough example, say you had a 5000 point inf brigade and a 10000 point armor brigade, 50 trucks each. Inf would have a speed of 100, armor of 200 (slower). Then that speed would be reduced by number of trucks destroyed, and you wouldn't get brigade speed back until your replacement trucks arrived or you got overstocked. Overstocking before losses could get you faster. So you could have someone that overloads the tanks but are always starved for road movement fuel. Of course not worth devving now with the current direction in mind, but just shows a mechanism that could highlight the sluggy French and relatively light fast logistically equipped Axis units, then as the war goes on the Axis equipment gets heavier and more capable but the truck park remains the same so they get slower, while the Americans are overloaded with trucks and therefore have better road speed and faster strategic movement.
  12. I always understood our divisions to be the cutting edge mechanized ones, not the follow-up ones.
  13. I'm in the same boat, had to dump help for the other channels to get everything for battle. I could ditch air channel I suppose but its too handy for calls for help and assessing who is out there.
  14. Of COURSE you have a UI for HC with that list, like I said an adhoc chain of command that fits what players do and org, not force them into artificial RPG roles that have no functional bearing. AO/DO commander screens too. No, you don't force squads to display on that screen or talk to HC- facilitate, not force. I got long experience telling me forcing doesn't work.
  15. What part of have to get LMG on bipod to get low dispersion is not clear?
  16. You have a full set of channels you can set now, the numeric channels from 01-99. Talking people into using them is the trick.
  17. If I had a squad comms/force list tool as an HC, I'd be more inclined to HC. Just another HC tool that has been needed for decades. Course you would need a .squadon/.squadoff so squads could drop off if they don't want to be visible to HCs. Don't forget Squad Liaison, it was working great up to the point that Allied HC collapsed and SLs were driven off by being mistaken for HCs. Code it right.
  18. I'm famous for being perturbed with the CQB use of the Axis LMG. However, having played on the Axis side solid for several months now, there are issues with the Axis SMGs. I would say options 2 and 3 Xoom for all the LMGs AND the autorifles when hip fired. Bipods for LMGs and shoulder fire for autorifles should go to low dispersion.
  19. Whats wrong with it?
  20. We're pulling for you!
  21. Originally Allied Comms channel standards covered countries (no allied channel except for CinC Ops), division and brigade channel. Kind of started breaking down with the original shot at voice comms and whispers for hierarchical comms, the move to ToEs, an emphasis on 'comming Allied/Being Allied', and eventually a breakdown in standing working country/div/brigade formations ingame. The minimalist approach just mimics the flattened to no command structure. Interestingly both sides use 30 for Navy, which for the Allies was the RN channel, maybe the ZIC one too. The air channel for Allies, 55, was originally RAF, FAF was 90. That should tell you what the real allied airforce is. For Axis I'd recommend doing what Delems has been trying to enforce, channel 10 for official HC comms. If you have active people watching it, you could make or look for calls there, I expect I will continue to make my emergency calls on Side though, just because I'm more likely to pull in more people faster when I need em. A lot of this is returning players out of practice, or new players who have no idea any of these channels exist and talk on the side channel for tactical, because there is no HC, trainer or squad telling them otherwise, or no interest in comms discipline. I spent a LOT of my advisor time on the comms thing. I'm still convinced that how you comm is how you org is how you comm, and requires the highest attention of CRS to the intended gameplay experience. I also know that people use the comms that works for them, and that these things go in cycles, according mostly to how the most effective leadership comms- so a good HC will get people going one way, a stronger non-HC organizing will get people comming his way, and all the channel modding in the world won't change that.
  22. That's why I always say the spawnlists should 'feel' historical without being historical.
  23. Okay, what do you propose that does not involve autowin for either the defender or the attacker?
  24. There never should be perfect balance, especially enforced, because that way lies stalemate and boredom. It needs to be dynamic and have player actions matter, the point of my crusade on pop neutrality is that then the underpop can attack effectively if they have their act together and so their Player Actions Matter, without gimping overpop to the point their Player Actions Don't Matter. I liken the needed system to being like an F-16- on the verge of stalling out or departing controlled flight, but the computer manages it and so it's super maneuverable. Less march of whoever is overpop, more roller coaster ride.
  25. Problems with the Hatch truck rider qualify FMS paradigm too, biggest one is defenders have infinitely greater spawning potential then attackers that 'committed' to a truck ride, and also pop neutrality impacts as an underpop side doesn't have time to ride around in trucks while towns fall (same reason why driving a truck to enable brigade moves was a no go). There are other organizing principles then just the truck ride, that's why I'm on about the task force, as it gives squads tools AND supports adhoc groups like a new version of channel 94 or the previous Allied superbrigades or Axis divisions. Having a comms channel and a group for a player to 'come home to' and sign on for instant organization is a powerful thing, and still decouples that from the one mission/one spawn crippling spawnmess we have now.