• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by XOOM

    1 hour ago, delems said:

    Merry Christmas all, but this is now day 4 with no server?

    This is the biggest logistical move we've ever undertaken. And we've run into a series of unforeseen challenges, which we're getting through but takes a bit more time. Consider for a moment that today is Christmas and that the RATS are taken a much-needed breather. On Christmas eve most of us worked until about 4:50 PM Pacific time, and several more continued to test beyond that.

    We'll get right back to it first thing tomorrow morning, this breather is necessary and we're very close to getting things online. Meanwhile, we're testing server stability and the other teams are continuing to test several scenarios on the game cluster.

    Thanks for your understanding. S!

    1 person likes this

  2. Thanks for your support guys! This is a BIG deal, and of course, there's a lot involved. We've done as much planning and prep as we could've to make this go smoothly. We're very excited to evaluate how our new router, switches, cabling, and servers are going to perform!

    3 people like this

    On 12/17/2019 at 10:48 AM, foe2 said:

    As someone who has HC experience pre and post 1.36 all I can say is that 1.36 has made the HC game boring.  There is not Strategy anymore. no challenge.  there isn't the thrill of realising that the opposition has made a mistake and you only have  a limited window to exploit that mistake and move the map forward. No thrill in capping a town and knowing that you can breakout and push the map.  There is far less thrill in cutting towns and kicking flags because flags mean so little now.  everything is basically one massive grind, since all towns have ample supply its either hit them hard and fast and cap the whole place before any defenders show up  or grind them down constantly in attrition battle. 

    Just ask players like @Silky who was always active HC  pre 1.36 who I've not seen online in game at all post it. 

    That thrill you're referring to also resulted in the worst morale conditions possible on the receiving end, which also directly impacted business.

    Let's please also remember just how badly High Command was failing on both sides to field an appropriate level of officer coverage to manage the in-game operations. The same people who are criticizing 1.36 were the ones responsible predominately for the High Command at a COMMAND level. You know what their response was for the problem? CRS didn't do enough. Well, we answered that call and 1.36 removed the total reliance on too few.

    Not too long ago the game was crippled with no HC online. While it may have been fun for some veteran High Commander's, the game's operation was dependent on a pure volunteer force who always felt they did not have sufficient manpower or tools to succeed. Put any new guy into that scenario and it was a doomsday scenario, I saw people gain their officer rank and within a week be gone because it was too much pressure.

    What is High Command now? HC is a leadership organization which is now driven towards supporting the gameplay, specifically by rallying troops, moving supplemental supply, establishing attack objectives. Now the players don't have to beg for an HC officer to be online to spawn into the game world, and we're seeing new officers joining because they're learning it's not a big spooky set of responsibilities like it was.

    You know what they were? A select few officers moving flags in the background answering to themselves mostly, ripping AO's out from under players without saying a word, and complaining about how hard it was to find a Map OIC. Yes, this stuff actually happened, a lot. Fortunately not by everyone, but there's a clear history of repetition of that behavior.

    So let's please not pretend like these changes were without consideration or years of clear evidence that High Command was overtaxed with their responsibilities and with the game's operation being on their shoulders almost exclusively, was a game design failure. How do I know this? Because I spent the first half of my time at CRS working with High Command's via our Community Management  / Game Management team(s) trying to solve these problems.

    So we had to get surgical guys, I'm sorry you may not like it as much, but we had to make the right call to stabilize the campaign. And I believe that we have done so.

  4. 5 hours ago, ian77 said:

    OK, same stale AO up now for almost 17 hours - no HC or RATs to move it..... guys log in, no ews in game, and log out.... IF we have to keep HC can a RAT at least drop in every 3 hours to see if the AO is dead? 17 hours, what a waste of a day off.

    Do you (and other veterans who understand WWIIOL well) want to join High Command to help manage the AO's, and maintain a player-driven game, or do you want CRS to program a way to automatically remove stale AO's / find alternatives to HC managing AO's, because AO's are really all they have left to handle other than rallying troops / comms.

    I strongly recommend players join High Command to help manage AOs. HC is no longer burdened with crazy amounts of responsibility as it used to be, that's what 1.36 Hybrid Supply solved, and that in fact, has been solved - ask any HC officer who is currently there now, who has had pre-1.36 HC experience.

    2 people like this

  5. 3 hours ago, potthead said:

    I think this is great, especially as it can be turned off by those who don’t need it.

    would it at all be possible to have some (even limited) for OIC of attack or Defense, one person that can place ones that either all mission leaders, or all players in the attack or Defense can see... we use shipmarks often to communicate locations between missions..


    Hmm worth discussing, I like the idea but we gotta be careful not to clutter the HUD up too much.

    Join the discussion here --> http://forums.wwiionline.com/forums/topic/424515-mission-leader-tools/


  6. 6 hours ago, dropbear said:

    I love the idea but the selected videos were super jerky and I would imagine anyone looking at that would baulk. Whether we like it or not it is 2019, and giving a taste of that would not show prospective customers the gameplay we all love and play for.

    Good feedback, we'll see what we can do to smooth it out some.

  7. 3 hours ago, choad said:

    It doesn't play on my Samsung phone. I know that isn't your target audience. Just wanted to let you know in case it was something you wanted to address.

    Roger I am aware of the mobile issue, working on a solution. Thanks for reporting it!

    1 hour ago, gavalink said:

    I like it, especially the b&w newsreel look. I think it will attract players.

    Yeah I was hoping that theme would resonate a bit, thanks!

    17 minutes ago, n8r said:

    Looks good. :) 

    Thanks for feedback!

  8. At the top of http://www.wwiionline.com I've added a video behind the text (in black and white) to show game footage and tell a bigger story, automatically about the game. I'll be monitoring website results carefully to see if we're seeing an increase in users signing up, and what sort of retention we'll be gaining in terms of using staying and watching it.

    My question is: what do you think?

    2 people like this

  9. Veterans assisting new players is not a new task, but it is ever vital. Especially with the return of Free Play, we've seen a 40% climb in players online, only further illustrating the need to hand down that knowledge and have structured training sessions which produce future long-term members of WWII Online.

    There are many players who come through WWIIOnline.com and our Steam channel who have a lot of questions and need support.

    If you'd like to share your knowledge and help create and train others on really important curriculum, @pfmosquito is your guy and I highly encourage you to step forward and give these new players a shot at being a successful member of the WWII Online community.

    Your participation and sharing of wisdom is a vital component to this.

  10. 1 hour ago, Mosizlak said:

    Where to hit, what range to start firing (or not), and angle. 

    Unfortunately people just open fire at anything they see, then whine on side chat about super tanks and how CRS hates our side by nerfing us lol. when he tried to kill a churchill7 from the front at 1000 yards with a pak36...

    Yeah that’s a pretty accurate statement. Sharing wisdom is going to be a key part of all this.

    I think it’s safe to say we’ve effectively given Free Players the ability to move troops and setup mobile spawns effectively. Since the topic is focused on towing guns, the only guns that free players have can be towed by this vehicles as well, so they do match up in terms of competency and usage needs.

    1 person likes this

    2 hours ago, delems said:

    Not sure allies having this issue, but axis seem to be running out of bolt rifles before most other infantry types?

    That doesn't usually happen.  Might look into, maybe need some more bolt rifles?

    More players online? :) 

    2 people like this

  12. One word of caution is being able to put bunkers within terrain tiles. Terrain tiles are FLTs and require us to build the game client out with bunkers in them. Referencing past experience, this proved to be pretty challenging. The easiest and most sure fire way we can achieve these sort of things is by adding environmental objects (buildings, fortifications, debris, random stuff like the broken cart) on top of terrain, since it doesn't require us to manipulate our existing terrain, which can get finicky and risky.

    3 people like this

  13. 9 minutes ago, flong139 said:

    got cut 2 weeks off went thru new billing wont let me do my month to month only cleared me for 44.99 3 month bs xoom

    good thing i got that wanted to play an i will but thats stinky like stankey

    Fixed that, thanks for updating things. Please make sure next time to submit a support ticket, this is not the place as your information can get lost quickly in the forums.


    32 minutes ago, nc0gnet0 said:

    I can't get in says plan Id invalid. Was on month to month, always used paypal. Even when I added a debit card won't let me pay, even though I should be good until Nov 20 (last payment Oct 20. 

    Thanks for submitting a support ticket. Should be workable now, let's communicate via your ticket.




    Thread intentionally locked as we pursue providing better service in the support page (link above).

  14. 14 hours ago, GrAnit said:

    Nice! Will they go in piecemeal with upcoming patches or all at once?

    There's a strong probability that this will go in all together on one patch, that will be our goal. As @OLDZEKE has rightly indicated, there may be some unforeseen issue preventing that, but it's our goal to achieve this in one swoop.

    Presently, we have a hotfix coming to correct a recent issue that crept up with the patch, as well as pushing rapidly for 64-bit refinement/deployment.


  15. 4 hours ago, stankyus said:

    This sounds very appealing and interesting... with one mmm not so sure.. 

    If you are removing the walls of the AB are you or have you placed buildings on the E side of the VEH?  Even with walls its difficult to spawn armor with 88s in the hills. There is very little manuevering room.  Likewise adding the buildings near the inf spawns adds the protection needed not just for the inf, but to the VEH when the Allies get tanks across to the RR station. TBH, the EAB should get a series of buildings on the E/W and S sides if we are looking for a more interesting E side fight then what we have already.

    We looked at the nearby bunkers in the area and we'll be positioning / moving items around to avoid camping and creating a situation where defenders will have a solid opportunity.

    We want Verdun to be a tough nut to crack, and we believe these changes will make that play environment quite challenging and memorable.

  16. Okay just got done with our chat with the Production team, and we've come up with an official list that we've now put into motion.

    Thanks for your participation and feedback, we incorporated that and some additional ideas. I don't normally share this amount of detail before something is implemented, but it does make for great discussion and gives you some insight in-advance for what's coming.

    New placements for Bunkers (Starting progress)

    1. Dinant: Pentagon bunker (Westside)
      1. Update WAB AI Zones of fire
    2. Schilde: City Bunker (Cement)
    3. Grobbendonk: Pentagon
    4. Leuven: Pentagon
      1. Face bunker entry to the NW
    5. Namur NAB: Pentagon Bunker
      1. Remove walls and non-military buildings
      2. Maneuver fortifications to better defensive positions
      3. Add in ruins or other militaristic (non-start) buildings nearby
    6. Verdun EAB: Pentagon bunker
      1. Remove walls
      2. Adjust positions of infantry spawns to avoid camping
      3. Adjust AI positions for maximum bunker coverage
      4. Add spawnable depot at Notre Dame to maximize fighting/hilltop command
        1. We want that hilltop to have more climactic battles
      5. Add ruins on the mouth of the east forest, 45* angle facing NW for defensive positions and/or offensive positions
        1. This will add a different flavor in the area here
    7. Longwy: Swap both bunkers to the concrete bunkers
    8. Ramet: Pentagon, facing east.
    9. Tielt: Pentagon, south bunker
    10. Vlissingen, cement bunker