Kilemall

Registered Users
  • Content count

    69,205
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    90

Everything posted by Kilemall

  1. Well that should be more sexah for both sides.
  2. I thought everybody wanted to goose offense. This is like trying to determine by competing medical reports what causes or cures cancer this week.
  3. QOR is a major strategic factor in wins and losses. Not quite on the same level as say KGW, Dambusters or AEF, but on that Whips/23rd/Lancers level.
  4. I think you underestimate the coding difficulties of some things, independent of any gameplay effects. It's not a simple reversion unless it is DESIGNED to be simple, i.e. a value input for things like FMS distance. I suspect some things have been retrofitted that way, others like the spawnlist entry apparently has not when it should have been at the least database template type loads and not a painful hand process that is practically designed to create errors and paranoia/ill-will. I would say that process is a good example of why the Rats don't do more spawnlist experimentation and the coding IS a thing.
  5. Airfields are that for planes, land and fuel/ammo up, but the difference is the plane is largely useless on the ground. Having tanks instantly reload because they are next to FB tents, depots or ABs? No thanks. Ammo boxes, trucks, inf resup and despawn/respawn covers this just fine. Can't move a truck 10 feet to reach a tank cause you are that ubercamped? I'd say that's a cut supply line, short as it is.
  6. Holy crap.
  7. When I was in AHC in the old days, I used to send out Hathcock to cut approaches to town. He could stop any infantry movement of an entire quadrant. Allied players have experienced the same at Agave's hands, before that Ceska, and both sides have gotten Tatonka parasniper love. Quality snipers are gold. Run of the mill rifle inf shooting from depots while no one checks the flag building is worse then useless.
  8. It's number of vets. Most are headless chickens, 10% of the players do 90% of the effective.
  9. You guys ever think WHY the Rats 1.0 did what they did? Hmmm? EVERY single object you are talking about has to be defined, set in a database for location and capture state then apply whatever limits happen when an enemy controls X objects and what coding has to happen to make your front line and avoid patchwork mixed territory. CRS whether 1.0 or 2.0 has to look at all that vast amount of definition, placement and upkeep and ask themselves what the play value is of using limited resources to do that. I'm not seeing the payoff of 30000 new rural objects (and I suspect I'm way low) for the dubious value you are proposing relative to effort. Even for WWIIOL 2.0, way not good conception. Let's look at that map again. 52,000 square kilomters play area. Ya I had the number low. Even if we had one capture object and our tiles were 1km x 1km, that's 52,000 objects. With 800x800m tiles, that works out to something in the 70,000 object range. FIND ANOTHER WAY.
  10. Hmmm, how about a DIRECT reward? ML/org leader gives point awards to people who do as they say and extra for tasks completed? Most of us don't care about ranking up, but the newer players do. Bring them up to pay attention to orders through rank snacks?
  11. Judging by that little morale bar on the original persona, I guess they intended to really do that?
  12. You're on the right track, the one mission/one spawn paradigm screws HORRIBLY with player cohesion. Redo that and loop comms into a new org/spawn paradigm, including integral voice comms, and a lot of this gets fixed.
  13. I'd say the no-spawn in linking depots kills attack potential dead- minute you cap something, defense has all the advantages.
  14. Been that way re: FMS ever since the game went to those. The HC FRU thing is brand new after 2-3 years of the FMS truck only, truck makes such bridge dependent. I brought up that thread for you between me and ZeroAce in Barracks, no commentary from you in it. Git on over there.
  15. Here tis, have not bumped it in years, feel free to comment there though as it would be nice for newer people to get the original with new thoughts on it. Not that I claim originality for all or most mechanisms, just more the 'branding' and defining the need for PN.
  16. You are subbed and have access to Barracks, right? My original Pop Neutrality proposal had most of these and more, I'll pop it up if you want to look it over. I believe we need 3-4 PN type measures, all interlocking and designed to achieve the end without killing off the Adrenalin rush this game does so much to build up only to undercut with either ubercamping or delays. Crutch on one too much and you get bad results. They also need to ramp up to at least 90% effect range, and the actual calc needs to be VERY smart as to what it's based on- see too many situations where the underpopped side gets SD for x minutes, suggesting the calc captured an anomalous state or has some weird averaging over 10-60 minutes.
  17. Don't be whiny, back in the day we drove to battle until we either died or pitched into the bunker table, through 2 feet of snow going uphill both ways, and we liked it that way!
  18. This..... didn't go where I expected.
  19. That's an epic amount of databasing you are asking for, infinitely more likely you get throttled spawning like depots.
  20. I was and continue to be lucky to be able to play this, warts and frustration and all. No one else is crazy enough to let players run around with this much maneuver freedom. One follow-on to my 88 pull time comment, the town-based capture does allow for defenses to continue effectively past AB capture thus allowing FB opening to get outside forces in quickly even if overrun and possible ahead of time with a long haul, so there is more margin to do that with 1.36.
  21. Easy there cowboy, you didn't have these lists with 4 88s in 1 AB, 6 88s in 2 AB and 8 88s in 3 AB. Pretty sparse Tier 0 for primary response to Mattys and fewer people free to go pull and EWS disabled for trucks until they get REALLY close.
  22. I fail to see how facility based spawnlists would be the slightest bit superior. We had what I call Base Spawnlists in the original part of the game, and this Town Based Spawnlist is utterly superior, breaking down to facilities seems to me to be big steps backwards and not buy anything other then feelgood for you.
  23. Well, this comes out in equipment philosophy where the Allied stuff is relatively easy to use and designed for medium/assault work, whereas the Axis stuff has more inherent capability/long-range/maneuver, but can be more fragile or hard to use. The Axis equipment often requires an expert with disciplined use and teamwork to employ, and if you don't have both of those they can be frustrating to attempt to use. This has direct implications in any manner of spawnlist building, as you need to valuate for the potential of Axis equipment, but not shortchange the vulnerability aspect so much as the average player is not likely using the equipment to the higher standard of handling they require. I think that's what has gone wrong with the 88 valuation among other issues for the new spawnlist costs.
  24. I have been part of the fast early defense fraternity, a number that is very small on both sides, and I'm horrified at the idea of 'x facility being capped' messages. Mostly cause it will kill offense dead. And will make the skull feature look like realism incarnate. Only way out if you went this direction is to reduce the cap timers by 2x minimum, you get one chance to clear them if you aren't there otherwise boom it's gone, Underpop would need lightning fast caps.
  25. Umm, you are assuming that again this game is going to actually go historical recreationist. It won't, it can't, not without slitting it's throat. Recreating early tier actual force mixes where the FAF is largely absent and Spitfires not allowed on mainland bases and woefull amount of Bofors against larger mobile armor brigades simulating more concentrated tank formations wouldn't be a fun game for Allies, nor would later tier for the Axis against mountains of Shermans and a lot more bombing. So. Game. No. Really. You can and should shoot for a proper feel, but it's never going to be a full sim. Including HC-driven RDP. The system had a point value for all the major units (but not infantry), intro tiers, and you could intro major units in different sequences. The system was structured to create organizational and player stresses as hard choices had to be made- would you advance your army forces or air forces, would you try to make up for technical inferiority with numbers of already intro'd units? HCs would as you expect min/max and since RDP was treating the entire force as one big 'buy', you could 'save' money on one branch and pump up another. The standard move for Tier 1 for instance was to thin out the navy and use that to boost the other two branches. As part of that, older light equipment was phased out fast, but that created more problems as newer players would have NO trainer planes or tanks to spawn. As B2K alluded to, the end result was a LOT of politics and ticked off players and advantages that drove off whole squads to sit out the period where their country/branch was 'behind'. Players did NOT look at having to 'make do' as a challenge, the challenge instead ended up being all manner of compromises and cajolings to show up, including having to promise advancing another branch in this campaign or the next. RDP bombing which could put your side behind and the fact the enemy was choosing to try and handle their internal politics AND/OR beat you caused issues, and some CinCs would go AWOL for a critical couple days when the RDP sheets were supposed to be turned in, where the Rats would then not do any RDP for that side. Some CinCs were challenged by the whole spreadsheety resource management aspect of it, and were not prepared to do this at all. Most did not care for the incessant politics- which to CRS' credit is pretty much the game equivalent of having to be the top dog deciding strategy and setting industrial output to match and all the Generals and backseat drivers and 'historians' criticizing no matter what you do. But it was too much for many. Keep in mind the Allied CinC also had to do two countries, each with their own 'issues'. I think the death knell though was when CRS started putting in all sorts of rules to make sure the T0 starter equipment was not min/maxed out and other limitations that forced a maximum on changes and how much could be shifted around, and it soon became so much of a strait jacket that no real advantage could be derived from 'playing the RDP game', CRS might as well build the spawnlists. And so it has been for something like the last 13-14 years. There is a lot more to all this and many examples burned into my hide as part of all that, and so I have a Real Hard Time seeing how people who want 'historical let chips fall where they may' have any sort of viable business plan in mind, cause mismatches in basic capabilities of playing the game at whatever level you play, tactical/kill the other guy, operational/take the town, strategic/motivate team and capture territory in sequence that wins the game, will kill it for most players and thus squad OR HC you got only hardcore to lead, and not enough.