• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by XOOM

  1. Hope you all had a blast, I know all of us RATS did! We had the highest numbers online since our Steam debut - friggin awesome! Thanks to all of you who could make it.

    AAR Questions

    1. What did you enjoy the most?
    2. What could have been better?
    3. What was the best battle?
    4. Was there enough leadership on your side?
    5. What did you play as the most?

    If you have any screen shots please provide them as we'll be happy to feature them on social media.

  2. I'll place a comment here that infantry reload times are dependent on animations as well. This has been a major crutch we've been experiencing (infantry animations) for our team and finding the right talent to work on it has also proven difficult.

    Set expectations accordingly that we probably will not entertain too much, if any of it, for the foreseeable future. That's not by desire necessarily, but by roadblock.

    I'd also like to say a lot of these "audits" have come from the intention of making our vehicle and equipment set function as historically intended. The impression that we're arbitrarily messing with things, just because, I think is a dangerous assumption.

    There are growing pains and adjusting involved with this, but we have been trying to correct things that should've never been. Thank you guys for being as rational and patient as you can be about it.

    1 person likes this

  3. 37 minutes ago, hondo said:

    It would be nice if you guys ( Rats) could get the multi channel typing working again.  It was very helpful for the HC guys and also people posting missions to be able to do 2 or 3 channels at once.

    Should be a high priority imho

    I think it's important for everyone to note, that CRS has a lot of stuff that we want to do - that we all agree with you on. In this case Hondo, we totally agree with you. So this work being done, is very minimalistic, in fact I personally changed a couple of variables in the code and we're doing some database work that does not impact the work flow that we have currently being applied to 1.36.

    I need to find a way, and I've been struggling to do so, that makes it known that we have a variety of resources that do things around here. I get the impression that although we're doing lots of stuff, players are assuming that means we're intentionally ignoring other important matters and redirecting valuable time of our development team while forgetting the big important stuff.

    I'd like to say, that's not the case, particularly in this regard and in many others.

    Genuine question here: How do we make resource distribution more clear? Does it matter to you as players? Does it just come across as making excuses for not doing things ( even though it's not )? I don't mean to be critical in saying that, I just truly want to find a way to effectively convey this because I think, far exceeding this particular topic, it's important for players to know who's doing what and that we're not ignoring things. Perhaps only the solution in a timely manner matters and no explanation is acceptable. If that's the case, do our words matter? 

    Let me know, I don't want to create subconscious or direct irritation and this sort of feedback can be very beneficial. To anyone wishing to respond to this question, please be constructive on this one.

  4. 2 minutes ago, xanthus said:

    XOOM, please put a trigger warning in....also model a safe space and put it in Area 51. Let players spawn in with adult coloring books and have a special channel where they can talk about their feelings.



    LOL! Kudos, that was a good one :D. That is called side channel! Hehe.

    1 person likes this

  5. 10 minutes ago, david06 said:

    it's also probably not a good idea to have the primary chat channel have a big scary warning message telling anyone that posts there to only use it for serious business

    that is sure to work against facilitating communication with new players, I'm still not sure why the help channel still has a warning message

    Scary warning? It’s an informational message on the purpose of the channel. Wouldn’t call that a warning or scary.

    1 person likes this

  6. At this time these changes do not open up an additional channel selection. Those are a bit more heavy duty than we're ready to tackle at the moment.

    I can appreciate some hesitation expressed about it and I understand that for years the Side channel has turned into a defacto dump-all comms into it. That's largely part of the reason we're stepping back to emphasize OPS usage and localized chat.

    If you want to tune side chat and stay on it, that's up to you and that choice can be made at any time.

    @Kilemall asking CRS to increase moderation will result into further backlash from players. I of course encourage peer correction (self policing) where ever possible as you see fit and appropriate. These changes at this time are necessary and will go forward.

  7. In the near future we'll be updating our default chat channels to include the following:

    • F1: Mission
    • F2: Target
    • F3: Origin
    • F4: Squad
    • F5: Operations
    • F6: Help

    The big change comes from resetting F3 from side to origin. We want users who spawn from the same town to work together, hence "origin" chat. 

    Operations will therefore become the Global "Operations / Organization" channel. It will be very focused and High Command officers and veterans should have it tuned to work together and share mission invitations, battle planning and other operationally important information.  CRS will be working hard to make sure the new users understand what this channel is and how it is valuable to them. It will therefore become the new staple of operational organization for your side globally.

    What will happen to Side channel?

    Side channel, will still be available for you to tune should you choose. But do note, that upon deployment of this update, everyone's default channel listing will look like the above. It will override your current selection to make sure we properly reset the standard globally. Again, you can easily modify your channel selection as you see fit.

    Side channel will continue to be somewhat of an undefined "General Discussion" channel where users discuss a variety of topics. 

    This is part of an effort to keep comms centralized and focused on the best game play and community support experience we have to offer. We want new users to receive guidance and for veteran players in their local area to help them out. New users joining our game should feel comfortable and optimistic about their new experience learning about WWII Online as we all have over the years.

    This channel selection puts them in the best position to be exposed to helpful targeted information that gets them into the organized game experience faster.

    1 person likes this

  8. 4 hours ago, caydel said:

    Just to get back to side channel for a second - I have to assume that it's used differently on Axis and Allied.

    On the Allied side, it's the way that side-wise coordination happens. Sure, there's some OT talk, but I've never really noticed it being 'poisonous' the way @XOOM indicated. I'm sure we could do something like replace 'Side' with 'Ops' for team-wide Coordinator, but the OT discussion would follow there as well. In other words, I'm not sure detuning or removing 'Side' would really impact things.

    The only thing I can see is moderating OT discussion into a separate channel... but most players would still tune it, as that is the lifeblood of our in-game community.

    Most players will still likely detune it, but we'll be resetting the default channel selections to prevent new users from being affected by it.

    I'll provide some more clarity on this very shortly so you can understand better. We have another patch not too far out and I'll discuss it there.

  9. 3 hours ago, choad said:

    IMO breaking up the large towns makes it much much easier for low pop times to take a large town. They take one part of it ... move a flag in, and are well positioned to take the next piece, where their armor and trucks only have to drive a small fraction of the distance. Plus .... fewer flags for attackers to cover. Defenders really only need to hold certain key points to keep the town from changing hands., whereas attackers need to keep all that they cap regardless of it is some pointless cp.

    That seems to be the case. The hopeful intention at the time of introducing this was to make the fighting much more difficult and bring action closer, to aggregate more people in tighter zones so they could see each other instead of walking around all of Antwerp on foot without seeing a whole lot. 

  10. 5 hours ago, dre21 said:

    Huh?  The US Forces their own set of factories? 

    What do you mean by that?

    They way I read that it makes no sense, the US had no factories in Europe .

    I meant that the Americans need a factory equivalent of some sort, could be a depot or warehouse facility. Point is, something like that needs to exist so we can more appropriately integrate them into the total campaign experience.

  11. Just now, Silky said:

    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?

    Not currently on the books. I don't really want to break up all of the big towns, we did want to add some variety for others however. Can't really provide much detail beyond that. Right now I am more concerned with getting the US Forces their own set of factories in terms of terrain development.

    1 person likes this

  12. 6 hours ago, Jsilec said:

    I think a small change in starting lines would be welcome instead of fighting over same towns at map start every campaign...

    This is definitely something we've discussed. I'd like to see some updates to it as well to avoid monotony. 

    Perhaps even, we can consider who ever won the last campaign, might start a little behind their normal starting line (not excessive, but a little). Regardless, we definitely want to keep things enjoyable and not too routine.

    2 people like this

  13. All of that said, every member part of our CRS team, does care deeply about not just the game, but its community. So we strive to do the best we can. We fall short on occasion, but we try to make up for that. Perfection is not promised. But consistency, not giving up, and staying positive about the future are things we've been able to hone in well.

    2 people like this

  14. 9 hours ago, Capco said:

    That's kind of how I view the forums tbh.  

    That's exactly how I feel about it as well. And as I mentioned above, we're open to that. But we need to keep the game fun and separate some of those comms. It's simply correcting and establishing new standards for the heath and benefit of the game.

    Side channel really isn't productive, it's a quick vent and gets quickly lost and forgotten. We can't act on that sort of stuff. Typing a .report does get logged but similarly doesn't offer us the ability to interact with and move a discussion into something actionable. 

    3 people like this

  15. I'd also like to point out, that the quote I have made above, is exactly the stuff that shuts down my willingness to read and respond to @david06. When your persona becomes an agitator, writing hip-fire responses that are unproductive, you lose credibility. 

    You're responsible for putting structure and thought into your posts, if you want an appropriate (or any) response back. Communication is a two way street.

  16. 11 minutes ago, david06 said:

    also lol @ resolving the side chat problem, maybe there should be more concern about the former builders posting long, extremely negative reviews that sit at the top of the Steam reviews than a text channel that has 35-50 viewers

    We do what is possible to work on those reviews, and with Zebbeee as our Steam Community Manager, we often go even further these days to try and connect with those users. We have been able to meet some of the requests but we certainly can't fulfill them all.

    In terms of the side channel, it is a toxic place. It's a place to aggregate frustration and open ranting against other players, bias, or cheats what ever it may be at that given time. We have people who are showing up to the game and reading this, and they walk right out the door. We have veterans, who don't want to hear about this and just want to enjoy their time with us.

    Any opportunity to produce improvements to the game and community is our priority.

  17. On 3/6/2019 at 9:58 AM, enemytank said:

    In my country has a popular saying that says:
    "Dirty laundry is washed at home"
    that is, the domestic problems must be solved in the house and not in other people's homes
    I'm watching players post their sorrows on outside forums,
    This is not good.
    But why are they posting in external forums?
    I asked some who did this and the answer was the same:
    We can not post in the CRS forum. We are deleted or banned /
    suspended from the forum.
    Would not it be the case to change the rules of the forum?
    Let complain, cry, put your hurt (no personal offenses and racism etc ...) here in our forum.
    Let's settle things here!
    I think it would be a lot better.

    Where there are no contestants there is no progress
    If everyone agrees with everything, nothing will change.

    CRS needs to lose fear or lose players.


    Our team has been extremely lenient over the years with a multitude of hardcore attacks against us, as described by Elfin, which exceed any sort of normal sense. Being here in these forums is a privilege. We want to engage in discussion with you all, even if we don't agree with what you're saying, we hear you out and want to come to some sort of common ground. We can't always do that, compromises are made where possible, otherwise things happen pragmatically. 

    The Rats including my predecessors have been very open to discussion more than any other developer I've engaged with. I've tried to continue that tradition and have personally been on the frontlines, because I know as a player what it means to see the "Head Rat" out there talking. Not long ago that wasn't a thing, I hope you guys find it valuable as I do enjoy it (mostly :D) and recognize more so the need to be transparent and communicative.

    My leadership within CRS might give you a some clues on the environment that I try to cultivate. First, it's inclusive: opinions that are constructive and intended to produce a good outcome for all MATTER. Second, I am capable of admitting that I don't have the right idea always. You can see that demonstrated with the initial implementation of 1.36, I budged, greatly against my own code of not having move-able flag supply. I stopped, listened, processed and agreed. Third, I intentionally do not surround myself around YES-MEN. This doesn't help me stay balanced or therefore my decision making process. Yeah it can get brutal at times, but I appreciate strong people who step up and say what they believe / who have good intent.

    Now to the subject at hand: Everyone has an opinion. Not everyone is capable of demonstrating those practices as described (inclusiveness, accountability, appreciation of differing opinions). Stating an opinion does not mean it's the right way to go. Saying it louder, with some four letter words, doesn't change our mind. Saying it louder and losing your ability to have a productive discussion (aka: toxicity) typically ends up in a break from here. Why do we do that? Because the people who are here don't want to see someone who gets toxic and turns into a WWII Online basher.

    I have said this before and I truly mean it... we don't intentionally go out of our way to displease anyone, or not listen to you and your specific opinion. We value our entire community, and it is our duty to protect the community. Yes... our community expects us to do something about people who are ruining their experience.

    The question should be: Why is it unattainable for these people to have a productive civil discussion? Why can't they restrain themselves from losing it? If they haven't tried to have a discussion with us, they might be pleasantly surprised in how we respond, providing they don't go full ape crap on us. That won't last very long, and we can't.

    You want to encourage the productive and discourage the destructive. Isn't that just common sense?

    Managing a gaming community can be pretty difficult. Just be sure to know that there's two sides to every story, and not everything you hear is accurate. We're a forgiving company and want only the very best for our community and game. We share this project with you guys immensely in a way that no other developer that I can see does. Because we value the entire experience with you that much. Honor that, take pride in it, but don't take it fore-granted, please. S! 

    8 people like this

  18. I think the general statement I can make here is, anything that we can consider at CRS to improve player fun, happiness, therefore retention and conversion, is worth consideration and discussion. Therefore I have asked our team internally to discuss and review this topic. 

    By saying this, it's purely an acknowledgement, nothing more. 

    4 people like this

  19. S! WWIIOL Community,

    We're getting awfully close to 1.36 Hybrid Supply coming to CLOSED BETA. We'll be inviting our Builders and High Command officers simultaneously to try it out, for up to a week, and we have a hopeful goal to be in CLOSED BETA of 1.36 by the end of this month, March. Barring any major item popping up, we reserve the right to be in April if required on this. But that's our goal, end of this month - YES it is getting closer!

    Our developers and testers have been working on this hardcore and understand how urgent it is to stabilize the WWII Online Campaign experience. So this should be wonderful news to you all.


    We'll be going into Open Beta immediately following Closed Beta / any fixes required during that time. Open Beta will be 1.36 deployment on the LIVE CAMPAIGN SERVER and will require a full-stop interruption of the Campaign. Regardless of the Campaign's state, when Open Beta is ready for deployment, we will be calling the Campaign to a DRAW. So be ready, you've got the heads up.

    The decision to place 1.36 on the Campaign server comes from me directly. Not to upset anyone, but to ensure maximum play-testing and getting you all up to speed with what is happening.

    Open Beta should be considered a "soft-release," and after that two week "burn-in" period, we'll be calling 1.36 officially live and run it alongside a Campaign.

    I need everyone to understand how important this is and be excited about what's before us. This is the most anticipated release of WWII Online in a very longtime, as it impacts the way the Campaign is played out. So we need maximum activity and positive / collaborative feedback rolling throughout. Everyone should be stoked who has been looking for this.


    Once we've passed Open Beta and our team has knocked out any last things that creeped up, we will go into the regular Campaign. We will run a "Welcome Back Soldier" so that all of our players can come back in and check things out, alongside our new product plan offers (which will be announced shortly).

    I hope you're ready - it's almost here!

    3 people like this