tater

Registered Users
  • Content count

    12,346
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

tater last won the day on September 11

tater had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

200 Salty

About tater

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Preferred Side
    Allied
  • Preferred Branch
    Navy
  • Preferred Unit
    River Boat
  1. Then don't use that one, I guess.
  2. Too bad, since the farm ones are actually decent.
  3. How short of 100X as many people, and all of them willing to sit and wait without ever seeing the enemy? We already have this, BTW, it's called fixed spawn points. The enemy controls a bunch of contiguous towns, and we control a bunch. Include the FBs, and connect the dots. That is the meta "lines." Presumably you are against that, and you think we should all spawn in some capital city of our side, then walk/dive to some place where whe hold our ground, and wait for the enemy (or attack, alone)? If not, you are for "lines," but a different abstraction. You're fine with them abstracted at 3km resolution, but not 1km resolution, or 500m resolution? In most attacks from Prof to Anhee, you'd also own the town East (if German), or West (if Allied). Draw those circles, and only the SW or SE would be "no go" zones for the attackers (SW if Germans attack from Prof and E, SE for Allied attacks from Prof and from W). For some towns this might be really useful for defense (since any enemy coming to attack you in the rear areas has to actually approach you, instead of teleporting to you, and you might have useful terrain in that no-MSP zone). Note of course that there is a similar circle the other direction, so the Venn diagram of the 2 means a football shaped area where both sides can set MSPs.
  4. Someone has to guard CPs all the time, on attack, or defense. It's the very worst in WW2OL gameplay, and the most required. Those of us who do it are sick of doing it. No, exactly the opposite. How does a game with a small player base function when the capture paradigm of towns requires a certain minimum number of defenders vs a 360 degree attack? You need a guard per CP, and you need some people to go out and hunt/destroy the EFMSes around town to turn the attack away. If there are EFMS in multiple directions on opposite sides of town, you need more of those people than if they are "limited" to the huge arc I showed in the image above. Still huge, but maybe it save 1-2 people from looking in the wrong (and a silly) direction. Take the ultimate edge case, the UK. The enemy can be attacking your coastal town from an inland direction. Because magic.
  5. Regarding ATGs, etc, there have been borked from the start. The move too fast in many situations (driving around as silent hunters, with tons of ammo), and they cannot be deployed in decent defensive positions ahead of time (not enough players/boredom). They have no defensive weapons, either. Really there should probably be an ATG FMS of some sort that is larger in extent, but lower (berm they can shoot over?). Have a long range where they get ammo resupply, then massively reduce their on hand ammo so they need to be near that supply point, or a truck. Let the FMS for them spawn some defensive inf maybe, as well. That and/or give the CO a gun.
  6. Nope, since you have exactly zero data on the alternate suggestions. The only way to see how it works is to try, and iterate. This is why gameplay changes should ideally be using tools that are as easy as possible to mess with. Set up MSP rules once, then try them. It's not like campaigns are lasting months. Try, see what works, change it, try again. Perceptions don't matter, data matters. You claim that I am advocating a hardcoded point. A point is a single place in space (that's the definition of a point). I just showed you a map with a finite number of placement points every possible place inside that circle where an FMS fits minus terrain like trees, etc. It's not infinite, but it's a very large number of places, certainly not ONE, and certainly not hardcoded. So your assertion is demonstrably wrong. Or did you mean to use some other word, other than "point?" Perhpas you meant to say, that your idea fixes where people can attack to a single point (the spawnable CP, so we will include areas as big as a CP in "point" which makes sense), and my idea limits attackers from spawning to a very large number of points, but not all points.
  7. This is an assertion made without evidence, so it can be dismissed without evidence. I am not seeing any obvious problem at all. Assume the Allies control Profondville (or vice versa) (snapshot of current map, but wanted 2 close towns to show facilities in 1). The attacker from Prof can place an MSP inside that circle (minus whatever the enemy facility limit is now X hundred meters). So limiting. Note that nothing prevents driving a truck full of men to anyplace you like, or driving armor anyplace you like, or having ATGs have to take a tow---anyplace they like. This ONLY limits where armies of men can spring forth.
  8. I'd rather the attacker be able to chose what they attack, but be slightly limited in where they come from. I think the 2 systems (small MSP limitations and your time limit system) are not incompatible, either.
  9. What hardcoded point to start from? Half the available area towards the town you came from is a "hardcoded point?" Maybe the City CP has a large exclusion zone for MSP placement (1km? More?) and other facilities have much smaller ones, then taking the cty ends up allowing MSPs much closer to town?
  10. Take a paper map of an AO area that includes the attacking towns, attacking FBs and the target town. Set compass to the distance between the center of town (City CP?) and the attacking town. Put the pin in the attacking town (this is the town you spawn the truck from, or the town linked to the FB you spawned the truck from). Draw arc. That's where you can set MSPs, inside that circle, minus some exclusion circle around enemy facilities (whatever that is X hundred meters). That's basically ~50% of the area around town for each attacking town.
  11. I'm not seeing how limiting the spawn points for attackers to half the available compass directions (which is the maximum limitation in such a scheme where 1 town attacks 1 town) makes battles nonexistent. Your own scheme where you take the spawnable limits battles to a single CP, after all.
  12. That's interesting, I guess, but why? So that we force the defenders to constantly sit in the city CP we've been telling everyone to ignore forever? Not against it, though clearly that doesn't work in the kgarner concept up the thread (which I really do like for the way it slows rolls low pop, in addition to the sense of front vs random islands of capture). I suppose the MSP rules could be pegged to distance from spawn point to the target City CP if enemy owns it. If you own City, then that range becomes infinite. What would happen if they cap it back? Your FMS all get auto-pulled?
  13. Better gameplay can't hurt. The only way to get more players is either better play so they try it and stay, or maybe lower price. <shrug> The MS rules are basically a way to change one small set of rules, without changing the entire capture mechanics. Your idea up the thread has some real merit---but I think it is likely more work (MSPs already have some rules, after all, so change them a little), and interestingly your idea is an on-sides sort of gameplay. You take spawnables, then move across town away from spawnables... almost like, what to call it... a front.
  14. What's funny is that the @kgarner idea up the thread is basically on-sides spawning, without the player placed (MSP) addition. Spawn FB. Capture spawnable (generally on the same side of town as the linked FB). We're all on sides right now... then capture nearby CPs to the spawnables (still on-sides). Linked, spawnable depots were precisely to make it so we could have more fights, short of driving in on trucks. They are de facto an on-sides paradigm. All attacks to really have a chance vs defense needed the spawnable. Now, with MSPs... not so much. Spawn and warp in. Spawn and simply jog in if it is close. Spawn right there for HC FRU. So the FMS killed the on-sides nature without modifying anything else in return, or any MSP rules that matched the old paradigm. Look at river or island towns. The spawnable usually on the right side of the river meant that you'd blow a bridge and the towns stay separated, or you literally have to drive attacking troops over some other bridge (or they swim down river someplace safe). Now? Do that with 1 HC, or a single truck. Assume the @kgarner idea up thread. 1 CP at a time comes live for capture, plus spawnables (presumably all those are up for each linked town, right?). Every single attack is then required to take the spawnable to progress. In that case, on-sides MSPs change nothing at all. it's not like you're gonna set an FMS on the W side of Antwerp to capture the ECP, and the only CP you can start with is the ECP. The defenders KNOW what you are going to attack (just as they do with on-sides rules). How is this different? I am literally proposing the same sort of gameplay, but without changing the capture code, just with MSP rules (and as I said above, I sorta like your idea).
  15. With some exclusion range around enemy facilities, yes. Though easier would possibly be no further from the truck spawn point than the range A-B, so it's an arc.