Registered Users
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Kilemall

  1. Well Victarus, it's really tough to contribute in the direction you describe because we players keep getting told option A/B/C that we come up with is not feasible, even though many 'neat ideas' have been floated over the years to address this sort of thing. A lot of that sort of 'black box no' business was before your time, but still an issue for these sort of conversations. Would help knowing what the range of coding options are. As to the point of making lowpop play like highpop or 2:1 play like 1:1- you can't, not without imposing obnoxious powerups/limits/disables. The firepower/maneuver question alone means a higher pop crew can always afford to drive more tanks/planes/guns into the battlespace independent of any spawning/cap mechanics may be coded- not to mention differentiating combat potentials imposed by F2P/limited/premier account equipment access. My point with PN is to let 1:2 be able to attack and defend fast and light and force the same hard manpower time resource decisions on the overpop as the underpop naturally has. Not equal style battles, but equal opportunity for a win. Now your example discussion does spark an additional thought. For capping a town, underpop could have a victory condition capping facilities to whatever percentage the underpop is compared to the overpop. So if there were 40 overpop and 20 underpop on, the 40 have to capture a whole town, the underpop just has to cap 50% of a town to capture it. Don't think settling for a consolation prize for underpop is going to cut it.
  2. Technically they can, realistically they cannot as overpop has enough to quickly roll any town they are attacking, defend against the underpop attack AND blow the underpop FBs since the underpop does not have anyone left to watch them and the threshold to kill them quickly again favors overpop people- particularly the high FB destruct settings AND the engineer/rifle supply mechanism. The current fast cap settings for underpop are too low IMO, and have some other weaknesses in the approach. Good initial coded feature, not doing enough IMO.
  3. It's not theorycrafting, the Axis LMG absolutely is like a tank in terms of suppression and the only stat that really counts, capping facilities. If a tank is knocked out, in most cases the tanker will have to take at least 10 minutes to get in position again. Meanwhile with FRUs the LMG is back in no time at all to provide suppressing or capturing superiority. Doubly so with FMS if tanks can't suppress/cut. What is not true is that I ever advocated that Axis LMGs be lowered. Maybe some other Allied did, but I think the Axis should have non-red vs. blue advantages. Vive la difference. But I do want the Axis LMG recognized as the firepower monster it is and be firmly marked in the advantage column and not neuter the Allied spawnlist without the LMGs taken into consideration.
  4. Im completely on board with LMGs doing what they were designed to do, this mission. It's the Terminator depot sweeper stuff that sets me off.
  5. He didn't say it directly, but certainly indirectly. By allowing 'attack anywhere' which let's face it is code for eliminating AOs, that puts the overpop so infinitely in the driver's seat it would make the first two years look like patty cake. You have a habit of assuming what my or any of the HC motivations are, and I ask you to stop mischaracterizing my motivations or any of my comrades. I am not scared of large groups out of HC control in this context, I am when the game does not balance population effects. Which is the topic of conversation of this thread and HIGHLY relevant. I AM concerned that we will go straight back to Tribal Raiders of France, and once again we will devolve back to who can put the biggest squads on the longest to overrun relatively underpop people, or more of the same TZ3 shenanigans. I want to play in a war, not a squad egofest. If there was a large squad on lowpop- wait there was, the ANZACS and associated squads. But they aren't there anymore, and in large measure because of the lack of development for command tools or even variability in lowpop play for several years. I daresay Allies won a lot of campaigns on their backs, same as Axis do more often nowadays. So this isn't a side issue per se, it's a deep design issue, and will still apply even if all vestiges of HC and AOs were swept away- even more so then now or 1.36.
  6. Exactly the wrong approach. Underpop should not be denied the ability to attack by game mechanics of pop spawning and capture. Period.
  7. FMS is eating supply like crazy. I'm not sure how you can say that.
  8. I certainly did read it, particularly the line about how people just have to suck it up if they are underpopped and play defense. It's an arrogant attitude and it sucks, its about the IWin button when large groups log in, and damn straight I will speak against it.
  9. That was a logic rule problem which could have been fixed with one simple damn .fallback command being coded, and we could not get it. Some of the 'bad' or 'hardcore' or imagineering or UI problems made the thing 10x as worse to manage and control. That's why the constant drumbeat for game tool improvement that never came, along with a very hard push on the Allied side at least for squad liaisons and coded reserve officers.
  10. Hope that mischaracterization of HC guys doesn't include me.
  11. This is something I've been for for a long time, or even having to 'rank up' to become HC through dedicated experience and support. Alas, as I understand it CRS is looking to junk the whole system because of the drastic things that happen with HC mismatches or more likely no HC on. Any system we do come up, town based or other, has to consider the man-hours and motivations of people to want to do it.
  12. I don't think you are thinking this through.
  13. Pop neutrality or bust.
  14. And exactly the sort of thing that contributes to the cycle of suck.
  15. Completely, utterly disagree. Months or years of having to be the defense TZ drives off players, contributes to the cycle of suck, and really is cheating the people of a particular TZ out of half the game, offense for the underpop and defense for the overpop.
  16. My answer to this is simple and consistent. 24x7, either side can successfully defend and attack, no matter the pop imbalance. That's what I mean when I use the phrase pop neutrality.
  17. Thread in Premium Discussions, they wanna know whatup.
  18. The problem with your conception Knucks is that if the Rats put in a whole progression for free, who will pay for the game to continue operating? At some point money has to go into the game. A serious issue is cannibalization of their own cash flow- if everything or at least 80% of what a player wants is free, why sub? Many paying players would switch to F2P- for rifle/SMG guys, many already have. Who pays the bills for the servers or any dev going forward? Part of what makes this game the unusual gem is precisely that there are no unearned powerups, so handing out sparkle, XP for sub money or powerups as part of the sub goes against the very ethos of the thing. About all I can see is something like access to new camo skins/paint jobs, uploading your own clip to be an official brigade/squad patch, etc. I am curious about something, you did see that there is a $5 intermediate play option, with access to better stuff but not all the premium to be earned, yes?
  19. I live here of course. It would greatly help knowing the effective area you are working in as DFW is a big place so transit time is a factor, and if dinner is to be part of this meeting. We have to be careful with our choices as many venues are busy on Saturday night, some might even have live entertainment events. Dave and Busters is a sports bar/video game venue. There are meeting rooms as I recall but I expect there are charges for them.
  20. In one way I agree with you, F2P is NOT an enticing experience if you are not gobsmacked by the whole Big Battle/War thing. They don't give it a chance, they don't convert to subs. On the other hand, there has to be a reason to pay, at some point the superior equipment has to be behind a paywall, and if too many items are F2P, the Rats gut the existing paybase who just then switch to F2P permanently because everything they want is there. So, criticism is easy, architecting solutions is hard- where do you draw the line with the different accounts to achieve both objectives?
  21. Er, there IS no Allied 75mm ATG, anywhere. Closest is the French 3" tier 2 gun, which most Allies hate due to it's tendency to tip in a light breeze. So the answer is no it isn't, and I expect very little increases with it in depots, especially after the first few rounds of inf hero with no battle lines. If you mean the French 47, it's the first thing used in T0, almost no one uses the 25mm except in desperation like the baby Pak (although I often do because I can get nearly as good results and it is much more nimble rolling over rubble). British 2lber is by far the most popular gun, except when the 6lber becomes available, and people then prefer it over the 17lber, for the same reasons Axis have issues with 88s. But as an Allied strategist, I fear the last depot camp and the destruction of ANY way to stop Tigers if players do what they do and insist on playing Alamo to supply list destruction. I gotta tell you, hate your suggestions re: field bunkers. Major bleh. I would much rather have a mini crew with the AT so the truck, crew and gun are one thing and I have dedicated inf I can switch back and forth for, and an engineer for building up light field protection. As for Axis tanks, I've already been on for some time about the nature of the game vs. historical German tank design. Putting 17lbers and M5s in the depots isn't going to help that, and 88s rolling out will be meat (except possibly to Matty drivers, who have similar problems to many Tiger drivers).
  22. I think this is one of those Axis/Allied things- the 88s are more likely to be worked over by Allied air, Allied big guns in depots are more likely to be worked over by inf or camping 232s.
  23. Won't argue with you on all three points, just not magic ATG beans or forts. The SPAA though, while useful for what we really need, forcing air to stay up and not get laser bomb accuracy, will I predict be used more for heavy anti-inf work. I should mention that most Allies are PRAYING for the MG shield. Might help with inf or bofors, but tanks will more readily kill those crews and guns. I always thought the way to go with the shield was hold them out for an 88 higher tier model, the one with absolute killer ammo rounds. T3 weapon, especially if we get around to T4 tanks.