Registered Users
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Silky

  1. We'd pay to look at the reality of how these events pan out before introducing any theoretical change. The pragmatic mindset trumps the idealogically-driven one. What actually happens when a town is cut off, how do the players respond, what would be the unintended consequences of making the cut off town a more viable fighting force? Would any changes be utilised by the playerbase?
  2. Make command roles valuable and full of utility and players will join. Command-Control tools and genuine leadership tools. Build it and they will...
  3. Mike’s post seems kind of lonely
  4. I won't labour the point but I made my views clear on 1.36 - the trajectory the game took wasn't one that appealed to me personally, so I saw no point in continuing as HC. I noted the recent mission waypoint development, I've said for years that the reason that TOES didn't maintain the heights of the 1.27 days wasn't down to a lack of HC coverage, it was because the game didn't sufficiently allow players in leadership positions to actually, practically lead, which made leading a battle against the game systems, which became tiresome and made leading a less positive experience. I'll again paraphase Gagamel - one of the game's most effective, fearsome field leaders - 'when the best command-control tool you have is the enemy boat mark, you're in trouble'.
  5. Sorry to hear this Doc. Chin up, we're all behind you
  6. Strong contender for General Discussion Post of the Year
  7. Fantastic news Doc. GJ and here's to the road to recovery
  8. As Karellean used to say "Blessed are the truck drivers"
  9. Imded Godspeed and RIP
  10. Make HC more attractive. Bring in command-control tools, allow HC to easily see what town a bde falls to and where it's going to fall. Allow moves to be stacked and timed, eg "move Bde X to town Y in 31 minutes". Bring back HC uniforms. Create better chat channels, more fit for the game. Tweak the TOES set up to mitigate JBWS So many things could have been done to retain the key advantage of TOES, namely a more realistic simulation of a front line and to provide complexity and variability to the game
  11. The major factor I would look to address is 'survivability', or - Give players more of a feeling that they're engaged in a battle before they die. Environmental clutter, cover, concealment, debris, even increased weapon sway and inaccuracy, terrain-hugging abilities to allow players to spawn in to a close quarters infantry fight and not die so quickly. The cover available in an infantry fight is minimal at the moment, so our players are denied the ability to hide, protected, where they can absorb the intensity of the battle going on. I recognise it's technically challenging, but it's a key battle to win if gameplay's to be improved. Developing the spawn mechanics and the UI are useful paths to push, but secondary to how the game actually plays. I'm a keen proponent of the devs developing a vision for how individual game sessions look and doing everything possible to then achieve that. For me, that initial trailer for PS blew my mind, just from the intensity of the infantry play, greatly aided by the suspense and adrenalin rush that was the pre-cursor to the actual PvP. Being safe but knowing there's a battle going on is a major reward of a combat game.
  12. Axis were spoiled over the years with TOES naming convention haha try remembering 4thmacrd or 2ndlmd or the various French brigade codes which were completely random
  13. Are there any plans to develop a XP/Ranking system that can reward and encourage players to play the underpop side? I'd suggest such a system would really help this game, across various different areas ripe for improvement
  14. The lack of meaningful points/XP system means we have a huge when it comes to shaping or incentivising game choices I’m sure it’s not on anyone’s road map as it seems like an irrelevance but it really isn’t. It would be a key element in getting players to do things that benefit the game
  15. I guess the thinking is that if you remove the map catastrophe element from overpop tz3 roll, it’s less of a problem
  16. So how are we not supposed to see this as ‘we trialled something, we didn’t like the results but we’re just going to live with it’
  17. So does this mean Antwerp will be returned to a single large city? @Merlin51
  18. It’s a shame Lux isn’t planned for a break up. Lux always proves a strong point in the far south that inhibits more interesting activity in the area.
  19. Breaking up Ant and Brussels has changed the ebb and flow of the initial parts of each campaign. When might we expect Lux and Liege to be deconstructed into smaller chunks?
  20. Topics like these are welcome in OT
  21. This is worthy of a broader, more extensive discussion and ultimately a dedicated task group/project team with full CRS involvement. Fundamentally, attacking a town - or more accurately, setting up and implementing an attack that feels coordinated and engages and stimulates players - is way to hard, too sluggish, too prone to being shutdown, too reliant on small numbers of individuals, to drive gameplay forward. Worthy of a topic of itself @ZEBBEEE @TMAN
  22. Maybe give players a Rambo mode, with all restrictions removed on their 100th, 200th, 300th etc sortie each campaign reward players who log sorties just an idea
  23. I'm not totally convinced this is fateweaver's first experience of the TGTCWTF forums