Registered Users
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Kilemall

  1. 6 minutes ago, nc0gnet0 said:

    That must have really sucked for the operators of the tanks and ATG's  ;)

    They were given ladders to get in, but they didn't get ladders to get out safely, that's why our tankers don't leave and take risks rather then certain death touching the poison.

    Very consistent.

  2. 59 minutes ago, nc0gnet0 said:

    Driving over inf is fine, But the parked and not moving on the spawn point is pure Bs and you know it. The "touch a tank and you die" model CRS has implemented, pure BS. If you don't like the fact your precious stug has no defense against ei, then don't go out un-escorted by support inf (which by the way is how it was done). Tankers cried so much about sappers and their ability to take out tanks so they got a patch to help out. And what do they do with it? 

    Historically tanks and ATGs were coated in contact poison and so this is accurately modeled.

    1 person likes this

  3. 7 hours ago, matamor said:

    It's like saying that JWBS serves no interest to defenders to stop being rolled during low pop. 

    There is no equivalence between both ; one brings stealth, JWBS brings infinite supplies.

    Several equivalences, above all unearned movement of supply to avoid fighting except at point blank urban fights.


    One player operates both so other players don't have to, and take less manpower to defend/attack.


    Puts emphasis on the individual instead of the team.



  4. 15 hours ago, matamor said:


    Armor numbers got nothing to do with the six years and everything to do with a combo of 'give em what they want' with having a tank on tap, iconics, and those historical lists, where the efficiencies achieved in historical production means everything but the newest chassis will get cheaper to make and so more are available for the same budget.  Historically there were many more tanks made later on in the war, but they were getting destroyed AND forces not concentrating them as much as the blitzkrieg 10 panzer divisions.

    A firepower/game role budget is more the ticket, for a game.

  5. 5 hours ago, DOC said:

    Things are going well, if as slow as a lizard crawling across a glacier. I'm very slowly getting my strength back but I'm only at about age 5 years old so far. Maybe 8 if I was being generous. With the endurance of a 95 year old. Food has settled and taste is coming back to something within render range of being normal. Swallowing is still weird and I have to drink gallons of water to clear throat blockages. After some specialist testing it would appear the nerve damage to my hearing is expected to be permanent, oh well. I am enjoying being down to 180 pounds, that's about what I was in my avatar picture 30 years ago ... if only 90% of the weight lost wasn't muscle. Hormone production has resumed so if I can find the strength, watch out girls !

    Biggest issue right now is no income. I am strong enough to get out of the house  and walk around (and being driven by a desire to not become homeless in about 2 months) so I'm seeking employment now. It seems a bit dire out there for a 60 year old cancer survivor as far as I can tell so far.

    Financially this year of cancer crap has wiped me out completely. I doubt I'll ever pay back the hospital 100%. This chemo/radiation/MRI/CT Scan/surgery [censored] is expensive. Six months of it was brutal, both physically and as I said ... financially.

    Just touching base with you all and saying thanks to those who helped me out when this was just starting. I couldn't have made it without that help. I am humbled beyond words (me without words ? WTF ?) and you taught me a valuable lesson about accepting help. Something I was never able to do before, let alone be ok with. I feel as if this has helped me become a better person, and I thank you. I wish I had learned this a long time ago.

    So wish me luck at finding decent employment. My search so far, although only having just begun ... is making me cautiously concerned. I salute you one and all of WWIIOL.   S!

    Try the hospital you went to.  There is a series of stories they are posting about older people's second careers in healthcare at my healthcare org.


    Can you please drop in on my thread on the cancer topic in OT?  I was hoping you would comment.

  6. I don't think they give a damn about having separate navy lists, if for no other reason then the incredible effort of loading separate lists into that tier populator entry point.

    Seriously, other then 'naval identity' what play value does a separate naval infantry force gain us play value way?


  7. Sorella's post is an accurate example of thread hijacking.  Well done, and with two sterling subject changes.


    Now then Gav, Zeb's question is not rhetoric but the crux of the problem for CRS- how to maximize the content so that the most people have fun with it, while maintaining a competitive game with rewards for superior play but not punishment for either too few or too many on a side.


    It's all well and good to post 'this is what I want' yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa type postings, and they are valid expressions of what you want I'm sure, but it isn't actionable for CRS without looking at and addressing the fact that your lone sub or even all the others that think as you will pay the bills, they need ALL of the subs.  As such they HAVE to answer the question, literally.


    You want to get what you want, you have to persuade by helping to solve EVERYONE'S content issues, or at least the largest number possible. 

    2 people like this

  8. 5 hours ago, bmw said:

    And your point is....?

    He means he wants 2 AOs minimum because many people feel the game's action level drags too much at 1 AO.

    Problem is very low pop is stretched beyond the breaking point and pop neutrality settings would have to be ultra high to allow low pop to not be blown out of the game and all the bad stuff of TZ3 rolls rears its ugly head, worse then before.


    See, we can talk about this stuff, if we aren't whiny and beechy about it.

  9. 9 minutes ago, delems said:

    These are 2 different issues, let's try not to confuse them.

    I fully agree, nice to see lines drawn between frontline towns to make a 'frontline' and enemy MS should not be allowed to be placed behind that line.

    This would focus battles much more.


    None of these are ever separate issues.  They may be separately definable elements, but the rules of the entire combat biome impinge on the chances tactics and required player count to achieve putative success in a battle.


    On the FB thing, YES whenever I had a chance to get people to do that I would, called them Victory FB teams as they sealed off potential supply rescue.  Heck, worth doing even if no supply depot link issues, just to stop rescue DFMS.


    Whether we have the spare people to send off on such missions is another matter, unfortunately scaling down to low levels of pop has to be a consideration on anything we propose.

  10. 17 minutes ago, tater said:

    Mobile spawns with no "on sides" rules mean that linked facilities are far less important, any depot can be warped to by attackers.

    The first order of business should be on sides rules for all MSPs.  Abstraction of force dispositions behind one's own lines are fine, however it is decided to do it.

    Well, more to the point, the ENTIRE set of spawning and capture has to be looked at as a whole to create 'healthy' battles with a chance for both attacker and defender, the biomes of our war.


    So for instance, Delems wants those autolinked depots to be delinked and  force a drive-in from the defending FBs.  The difference between before when the linking autodepot supply made sense and now is you aren't bouncing brigades out as a default and towns fall fast after so linking brigades made sense (and were limited to where linking brigades were located).  Now, the town's supply is still active in depots AND ALL linking D towns get depot supply.


    If we were to follow your rule or something like it (I think it needs to be a bit more articulated towards facility lines rather then town lines), then that empowers the defense and the linking autosupply to depots definitely needs to go, as the defense is then really only having to worry about 'facing' depots initially and can concentrate better.  Offense needs chances too, so limiting to just town supply makes sense in that scenario.


    Want to maintain the FMS all around/warp option AND depots?  All right, but one of the key differences now is that remaining attacker potential spawnables still has town supply in addition to the now EVERY defending spawnable link supply.  In that case, best to knock the town supply entirely out with AB capture as before and only have the linking depots supplied by outside garrisons/brigades.  Then the attacker gets the reward of both no instant armor in town AND easy take of remaining direct link spawnables while the defender still gets a boost of all linking defense depots.  Not quite what Delems has in mind, but not a big multiplier of supply either and more a sense of 'lines' as more attacking supply is brought to bear.

  11. On 8/28/2019 at 10:28 PM, delems said:

    Missing the point.

    Completely unfair the defender can draw JWBS supply from linking towns when attacker has no way to do the same.

    It is completely non interdictable and non destroyable - terrible game mechanic.

    Not to mention, has no alignment to real life, how real supply/troops work.

    For a game based on reality, this aspect falls short.


    I would presume destroying linking FBs would shut down the depot supply.

  12. 3 hours ago, drkmouse said:

    LOL that brought  backon e of my memoreis fo defedning a  depleted fb agains rush after rush, last one was  a  para  drop attemp,  I shot  her out of ari with a STUG before any para got of :D

    Heh, fourth best alltime FB memory for me.


  13. 16 hours ago, Jsilec said:

    shooting that opel made me smile especially when the panic began and all the axis engies started bailing out haha

    One of my most cherished game memories was defending an FB and knowing there was gonna be an old school rush for it.  Had a bofors setup as we were low on supply, here comes the hot dropping opel with 8 engies on board, blamblamblamblam.


    Probably a similar rush for para plane killing fighters- so much weeping and gnashing of teeth.


    Also, killing your friends is a sweet sweet nectar.

    2 people like this

  14. 1 hour ago, blakeh said:

    The Germans did not need to put a lot of troops on shore to overrun the UK -- the BEF was destroyed, there were few tanks and artillery available.  All the Germans needed was a toe hold.   Get 5 or 6 divisions across and it would have been over very quickly.

    If the Germans had control of the air, they had control of the English Channel.  No RN ship would last long there.   Land based aircraft trump warships.    Sorry, but Britain was beat in 1940 and only the RAF saved them.  If the RAF had broken, Britain would have been lost.   What saved the RAF and Britain was the foolish change of tactics by the Germans, switching from pounding RAF airfields to bombing British cities, allowing the RAF to recover.  Another foolish decision by Hitler that cost him a victory.

    A few other mistakes, missing the significance of the radar sites, and not putting the KM all on subs and not surface fleet raiders of dubious results.


    On the other hand, Germany was not in shape to invade successfully.  The delivery options were mostly barges, readily sunk by small boats and destroyers even in an air superiority environment, and using paras and an airhead to get much more then a division across and supplied was sheer fantasy, and doubtful even that.  The Dutch portion of the blitzkrieg had been wildly successful, but at a cost of Ju-52s.  They had 800 Ju-52s going into the Blitzkrieg and by the end of June 1940 only about 200 flyable.   Of course a lot of those would be repairable, but still we are talking probably only 400 possible.

    Could be the Dutch saved the UK from invasion.

    1 person likes this

  15. 29 minutes ago, ch0ad said:

    Is it coincidence that the CTD issue seems to have cropped up while the game is being primarily played in a section of the map that generally sees no action over the course of a campaign (England)? Feels to me like that may have somethong to do with it?


    That's what I was thinking, that this cluster isn't as 'compatible to 1.36 as the other more used clusters.

  16. 1 hour ago, delems said:

    You will never be locked out of your side or from playing.

    If you play with the side that has 31, and you're 31st.. you can't spawn into the game world (enemy has 20 spawned in).

    SOON as an attacker dies, you can then spawn in. (it will be 29 to 20)

    So, it's not like you can't play; you just can't spawn in until someone dies or another enemy logs in.

    Players die ALL the time, first player dead means 10 seconds for you to spawn in before that dead player can try to spawn back in.


    If  it's 100 to 20, than ya, 70 players will be in the chat room; 30 in game world fighting the 20.

    When any of the 30 die, 1 of the 70 will be able to get in game.  Mind you that is 5 to 1 and probably never occurs in game.

    Go look at the player pop chart, I see only 4 times the rule would even be in effect, and it looks for less than 4 hours of the day.


    And again, who cares about squads when there is no game to play?  All the squads in the world won't matter.


    Given the screaming fits you unleash on just a little pop neutrality, I can't imagine what you would do if this was actually in play and you got more then 30 SD regularly.