tater

Registered Users
  • Content count

    12,505
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

tater last won the day on September 11 2019

tater had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

245 Salty

About tater

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Preferred Side
    Allied
  • Preferred Branch
    Navy
  • Preferred Unit
    River Boat
  1. Yeah, the skulls need to go, too.
  2. Stad AB was completely fileld with PPOs just now (blocking the veh, and access out of AB area (no AB walls there)). On the one hand, I'm fine with PPOs, and I indeed want more of them---though some I want will be easier to take out (doors with any HE at all). On the other hand, what was done in the AB was obviously griefing. I suppose ei can come in, blow AI, then build crap when there is no AO, and it's not technically griefing (griefing would be coming in as the side of the owner and doing that, then switching back). My solution to the former would be to have the AI automatically rebuild after some time with no AO, and have the AI indestructible and possibly 360 degrees when no AO is set.
  3. Either way, a heavy MSP would be a good thing. Some sort of deploy rules, though (max range from spawn point of truck).
  4. There was nothing on the HQ news feed (which I checked before submitting ticket), and the forum home has no announcements, etc (and the game launcher had no MOTD saying it, either).
  5. I just got connection refused, and claim of a patch. Ticket submitted.
  6. Platform doesn't matter. So do I have to manually pay every month? I think I have had to %$#! with my billing literally every month since the whole billing change debacle. I'm losing the will to want to bother.
  7. This would be a start, anyway. If we had many thousands on all the time, you'd have a % willing to sit around in a good location on the off chance someone might get bored and attack. The way the game actually is, at best you get a couple people deciding that the next AO will be in a given area, and they spawn in ahead of an attack. The idea that you could put some reasonable defenses on an obvious choke point ahead of time---where defenders could spawn in upon first reaction---is a good one. I'd also like to see the ability to have decent ATGs spawn from at least one of these (which will suck for my side, as emplaced 88s will be nasty).
  8. The big issue to me is that the players should be able to build this crap in ADVANCE of attacks, such that defenders come to the defenses already created. I can't stand the paradigm in play now where the best attack is one where the enemy doesn't show up until it is too late.
  9. THIS. The link says: What this new MSP needs is to be PERSISTENT. Ie: You drive the truck out, deploy the MSP, build a defensive position around it---and the MSP stays in place even with no players in the mission until it is destroyed or taken down. Ideally---and this could be a unique MSP, placed by a special vehicle---there would also be one exclusively for heavy AAA/ATGs. @XOOM, is a persistent MSP possible within the existing framework?
  10. I got on, Arena locked. For some reason the Mac version launches Safari with a twitter widget (showing nothing). Meaning Safari pops up (a browser I don't even use). No widget in the launcher app is visible, I don't want WW2OL telling my computer to launch an app I don't want it to launch (which in fact would be ANY app that is not ww2ol, ever). How do I turn this off?
  11. What does this mean? Lowpop and imbalance (often combined) have been a problem forever. The solution has always been to change the game so that it can work regardless of population level, or imbalance. Hoping for more players in the right time zones in the right proportion is wishful thinking. I don't think forcing sides can help, I'd not switch sides. The game is certainly not functional when one side has fewer people than even a minimal defense (1 person per capturable facility, plus some floaters?). Even AOs balanced as I suggest to operational units doesn't account for the sort of low pop in the OP example. Perhaps new gameplay could be added such that when one side is that grossly underpop (cannot possibly mount a defense) there is somethign productive for both sides to do that doesn't move the map directly? FB busting is clearly a thing (dumb is it is). If we had AI convoys (trucks or ships), trains, or other logistics, then attacking those could be a thing. Dunno, it's hard. Hey, this is a bizarre idea that just occurred to me: If sides are unbalanced by more than some amount (2:1 or greater), perhaps losses could be scaled to that proportion? Ie: in the 20:3 situation (6.67:1), every OP unit that is lost in that attack removes 7 of that unit from the spawn list (6.67 rounded up). So a tank gets killed, and 7 of that type are yanked from the spawn list. SMG killed? Ditto, 7 gone. Some people apparently care about "stats" so maybe the stats reflect this as well in both directions (OP attackers only get a credit for 1/7 of a kill).
  12. My ideas around this subject still allow both sides to play. I'd drop Garrison sizes. BDEs have more realistic movement times between towns. I'd slow resupply. I'd have AO setting a function of relative pop (ditto server-set AOs) and local unit balance. Assume a (new) Garrison is the equivalent of about 33% of whatever a BDE is. In the example above given by @ibshot the odds are 20:3. This would require that the OP side attack with at least 20:3 odds in BDE/Garrison terms. A BDE attacking a (now smaller) Garrison would be 3:1 by itself, and the Garrison in the town the BDE is in would add another 1:1, so with 1 BDE/Garrison town vs 1 town with just a Garrison we're at 4:1. They need 20:3 (6.66:1), though. So they need to look for towns with multiple links to the target town. 2 towns with BDEs vs 1 town with just a Garrison? That's 8:1, and they would be allowed that AO since it's >6.66:1. This does not stop the roll of towns, but it constrains them to places where their side would actually have an advantage commensurate to their current player OP status. The slower resupply means that any losses the attackers incur matter more, and the relative BDE strength calc is based on the actual number of units in the spawn list, not the max. So a half gone BDE counts half of a fresh one. If the OP side wants to attack narrowly (say to cut off units to the edge of the map and surround them), they might have to stack multiple BDEs to attack single-linked towns.
  13. Manual resupply is absurd and should not be a thing. Maybe if there were AI convoys that would have trucks follow the leader (including flatbeds with tanks on them), or AI trained people drove, such that the one person who thinks this is fun does it. Otherwise? Boring waste of time. If resupply was something required to win (like capping and holding CPs---which I spend most of my time doing, even though I 99.9% hate it), I'd rather lose.