• Announcements

    • Dodger

      Seeking Squad Leaders!   04/09/2017

      Soldiers!

      We are seeking Squad Leaders to volunteer their squads to help us test the upcoming Squad Forums system. This system will integrate squads who wish to participate into a self-sustained "forum within a forum." You will be able to add members to your squad, assign permissions, and create forums/calendar events on your own. The idea behind this system is part of our commitment to support squads as a integral part of our community. This service will be offered free of charge to all squads of World War II Online upon launch. Our goal is to offer all of the services a squad off-site forum can offer but free of charge and tied in to our existing forum service. So what do you need tested? We need willing volunteers to test the whole system - make forums, post threads, assign permissions, etc. The idea is to have several squads giving it a test run to point out any flaws before we launch it publicly. What are the requirements? We are ideally looking for medium to large squads - Ideally ten people or so plus, but smaller squads feel free to apply - and a willingness to use our platform. It's important to note (as of now - these may be included at a later date) we are unable to convert posts from a private forum if your squad previously used one, and you (or your XO's and recruiters) will need to assign individual members permissions. It is entirely possible that in the future this system will be automatically linked to the game's squad roster, but as of now developer priorities are elsewhere (1.37 and steam, w00t!) How do I sign up? PM me ( @Dodger ) on the forums, or email me at dodger@playnet.com - Please indicate your squad name and how many members you have. I will get back to you with more instructions.

    • GVONPAUL

      Recruiting drive.   04/16/2017

      With the anticipated influx of new players on the heels of this summer's Steam release, there is a reasonable expectation that forum traffic will increase. I'm looking for volunteers, not just to moderate, but to help answer new players' questions or direct them toward the correct answers. The forums may be a player's first contact with the game and we want to ensure that it is a positive experience. A happy player is a player who sticks around and the more new players we can retain, the more resources we will have for development.
      With that in mind, we are looking for current players with a positive attitude and posting history. PM me if you are interested.

Silky

Registered Users
  • Content count

    30,165
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    14

Silky last won the day on April 21

Silky had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

240 Salty

About Silky

  • Rank
    Imperialist Red Coat
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Preferred Side
    Allied
  • Preferred Branch
    Army
  • Preferred Unit
    Rifleman

Recent Profile Visitors

403 profile views
  1. Or, direct intervention - CRS pays or subs 4-5 players to play a side and role of their choosing, eg if a side is grossly underpop, they defend a town Costs them 4-5 subs and mitigates this issue without artificiallly distorting the game
  2. The answer - as it usually is in business - is marketing.
  3. Another chat channel is a must for me 6 isn't sufficient
  4. The question, though, is whether disabling captures in TZ3 is more or less likely to encourage more players to play
  5. Not sure we're headed to uncharted territory, though - we've been there before and things were such that people decided to drastically change things by implementing TOEs. So, I'm onboard, I'm not looking to disembark but I'm hoping the seasickness I fear is coming won't be as bad as it might
  6. Agreed, and it's impossibly frustrating. But there was no alternative, other than a ridiculous handicap mechanism that would somehow mean that a period of sustained over-pop didn't result in major gains. I don't believe in funnelling people to play one side and I don't believe in artificial handicaps of that nature. What could have been done was some slight amendments to TOEs to mitigate the Line collapse and morale collapse of a breakthrough, such as use of the Corps units or keeping HQs rear in order to back up the line with covering supply, but we missed that boat.
  7. The first thing I'd change is that when imbalance goes over a threshold, CP cap timers are slashed, as is the contested-to-AB-hot timer. A grossly over-popped side should win, numbers should take towns. But the opposition should have the ability to pinch back and punish sloppy over-confidence.
  8. I'm assuming the surrender mechanism will be retained?
  9. 1) Increase the debris and detritus of war, the flotsam and jetsam in the streets that will provide cover, concealment and 'stuff' to create the atmosphere of a busy, intense battle scene. The cover and busier environment would really increase survivability of players, leaving more players aware of being in a war zone before dying 2) Develop the Air War into a meaningful, long distance, high altitude bomber-interceptor-escort meta-game
  10. I've always thought a decent long range air war would bring a whole new audience to the game. And we have the foundations already in place.
  11. Don't worry, I'd love to see the Ju 88 and Dornier 17 in game on the Axis side too.
  12. Would love to see the Wellington in. But only if the Air War is significantly developed beyond the current RDP mechanic.
  13. Anywhere that isn't Roosendaal, Breda, Tilburg, Turnhout. I hate that part of the map.
  14. I wouldn't favour rank earning abilities that improve combat effectiveness. You're then giving the most experienced players even more of an advantage. This must remain the game where a day 1 player can kill the enemy CinC But I desperately agree that the rank system needs an overhaul.
  15. RIP Sevenedg, one of the major players from yesteryear. I'm sorry to hear this sad news