• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by XOOM

  1. 26 minutes ago, augetout said:

    Welcome back, Randazzo, Doritos, and Redriver.

    Welcome to (some) of our newest members:  Bigocar and our first member from Thailand, Koontank.


    Wonderful to hear! Welcome back to WWII Online guys. Very gratifying to see Lafayette rebuilding. YES! S! 

    3 people like this

  2. 10 hours ago, Kilemall said:

    I've never understood the urge to do WBS immediately after beta.  Plenty of 'too soon' disasters that ended up turning people off cause WBS resub moneyz NOW right after a software change.  I would think start the campaign and aim more for June 6th.

    Train has already left the station so we're going for it. We've been in an open beta / soft-release cycle now for a few weeks and I'd say it has proven to be very successful in providing you guys time to learn what's all in it, and for us to make some important refinements for the best experience.

    So thanks for all of that and we hope you and the rest of the community can direct energy towards getting people ready to come back and participate so we can have a really outstanding month. S! 

    1 person likes this

  3. I did not post a Friday update today pertaining to development because it's really important for people to push the "Welcome Back Soldier" awareness and also attend this Sunday's Rat Chat.

    Here's what we're looking at for this week that you should know about:

    1. Testing this weekend (happening now) which should take care of a couple of big issues with 1.36 presently
      1. Weapon list bug
      2. Forward Base swapping around bug
    2. We have a goal of deploying this update on this coming Monday, but our testers first need to approve it
    3. If that goes well, we will do start the first OFFICIAL Campaign using hybrid supply, on Tuesday
    4. Welcome Back Soldier will start on May 1st officially, however un-officially, we will activate it around the same time the Campaign goes live

    I'd like to take this opportunity to thank you ALL for your much appreciated patience during this 1.36 Open Beta phase. As you have seen it has been very valid and worth it to get us to this point. It was crucial, and without your help as a collective community, we could not have found several issues you reported.

    Our internal testing team is filled with amazing people who know our game. Their efforts helped us solve a lot of issues in advance, but when you get thousands of other people logging in to check it out and providing us feedback, that sure beats the work that about 10 guys could do. So please give those guys a hand because overall 1.36's deployment was stellar and their efforts are no short of awesome.

    We now need your help to get people ready for the Campaign and welcome back soldier, right away.

    So get out there and use all the comms you have in your disposal. If you want the in-game population numbers to rise, CRS needs your immediate support to get people motivated. EVERYONE COMING THROUGH THE DOOR, new - present - past, will have premium access. There's no reason not to get excited and get people engaged right away.

    Once again thank you guys, S! 

    2 people like this

  4. 15 minutes ago, agenda21 said:

    Fix the "Mission Closed" Bug.

    Our guys are on this, as well as the FB flipping bug. Deployment scheduled for Monday if all goes well. They're testing and verifying things this weekend.


    4 people like this

  5. On 4/23/2019 at 5:33 PM, Chaoswzkd said:

    One core objective of Town-Based Supply was eliminating - not reducing - the complete reliance on HC to be constantly active and operating as desk jockeys shuffling flags around on the map. There is no state of TOE, except for programming a game AI to handle it, that could have offered that.

    Complete reliance being the key two words here. I think that has been done effectively and in speaking with players in-game last night, there is an overwhelmingly much larger happiness that they can access supply as they need without trying to rustle up HC officers to do that for them.

    I am very much looking forward to our Welcome Back Soldier, and we should all be setting our sights on rallying up for this and getting more troops back into battle.

    We'll see how supply and attrition goes once we get substantially more people coming back to the game and checking things out. At this time, we're not messing with the numbers because I'd rather have a little extra than not enough.


    3 people like this

  6. On 4/23/2019 at 9:05 AM, mitchrapp said:

    I like the idea to get rid of soft caps and fast maps but it's too drastic. Garrison supplies should be much less and there should be a lot more than two ground divisions. The FB flipping bugs also seem to be a big problem.

    Forward Base flipping is going to be fixed in the next release, in testing now.

    Regarding supplies, we do not want to have to little, and we do not want the move-able divisions to dominate the game world. This is what the game is currently used to because it was around for so long, but it will have a negative effect with massive cut offs and things like that - which we're intentionally trying to make more difficult.

    Back to testimonials please! There are many other threads available to provide this sort of feedback.

  7. 1 hour ago, piska250 said:

    Apparently 1.36 and roadmap are not enough.

    That and in-game numbers are the real problem.

    I hope our 1.36 Hybrid Supply release and Roadmap are good enough. If it is not... I really don't have great answers on what more we could do within our current resource limitation(s) to move the game forward and fix some long standing issues.

    In-game numbers should be bolstered by May 1st as I mentioned in the article today where we will deploy a full scale Welcome Back Soldier program for both organic and steam users.


    5 people like this

  8. 38 minutes ago, aismov said:

    From the latest news release there is a bigger builder plan option that builders can switch to. From what I see the builder perks are the same as the current builder perks. Is there anything different that slipped through the cracks?

    Will the regular builder plan still be available as well? I am co spidering to switch my primary to the SuperBuilder, but since I have 2 builder accounts already I won't be able to swing making both SuperBuilders.

    @aismov The $49.99/mo Hero Builder + (Plus) plan is purely intended for those who wish and are capable of providing more resources. It's an optional plan as the e-mails indicated.

    It will also count towards +2 the Hero Builder goal that we have set.

    So yes there will continue to be the following Hero Builder plans:

    1. $29.99/mo Hero
    2. $49.99/mo Hero Plus
    3. $359.99/yr Hero Yearly

    In the future I'll see what I can do to bolster the Hero Plus to make it more advantageous. At present it's more for supporting the dev roadmap in lieu of the standard yearly indiegogo thing at present. (That may come at another time, but this takes precedence).

  9. 1 hour ago, thomboi said:

    so...just doing .du from within the garrison will show status.  Cool! I'm figuring one of HC's "new" tasks will be to keep an eye on garrison supply.  On a related point, how about garrison size? Does a town with 2 AB's have a bigger garrison than a 1 AB town?

    Yes the more AB’s, the more supply there is.

    1AB = 1:1

    2AB = 1AB x 1.5

    3AB = 1AB x 2

    4AB = 1AB x 2.5

    1 person likes this

  10. Today marks my 9th year as a member of CRS. I'd like to thank you all for supporting me. During this time it has meant a tremendous amount, and it has given me great fulfillment. It has been an extraordinary opportunity to learn so much about what WWII Online is from within the core of the engine and our entire community.

    This year I learned how to implement completed art work, whether it be Infantry weapons, or vehicles, into the data structure. I also wrote my first bit of code, and got a little help on that one (thanks - you know who you are).

    I am proud of our team at CRS and how far they've grown. You can see the evidence of that growth when you look at the releases that were published this year, and the roadmap for the upcoming year. They're constantly sharing information and are gladly picking up each other when it gets tough.

    Being a RAT, while immensely fulfilling as a former community member, can be very challenging in the face of adversity. Anyone who wears the tag is a target for all the woes. I'd ask for the sake of our contributors at CRS that the community propels them forward.

    And finally, the part that I have to say because I see all of the moving parts... I would implore those of you who can, to subscribe, and maintain that subscription. If this is done, we will stand the test of time and add another almost 20 years to the possibilities of WWII Online. This is the most important thing that you can do, single handedly, to have a direct and sincere impact. Please don't  mistake this as just another message to discard. 

    Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU for this great blessing and faith.


    10 people like this

  11. 18 hours ago, choad said:

    Yeah I guess - assuming the issue is a software one - which of course we have no insight to. I would agree, all of the crappy lag/network issues have appeared since the last patch. I have completely uninstalled/reinstalled the game and it still runs like garbage. I for one will be taking a break from the game until you guys get your arms wrapped around what is wrong and have a solution in production for it. For me - it is border-line unplayable right now. That's all.


    You may want to connect with our support team so they can evaluate your settings, ISP, network card, etc. Make sure you jiggle net code 3 either on or off in your preferences. http://support.wwiionline.com 

  12. 19 hours ago, Kilemall said:


    Not good.  We should never crutch on SD like Rats 1.0 did, and it should never be more then 30s, but in order to not have too crazy any one thing, should be a suite of PN interactions where any one doesn't overwhelm or annoy but in concert gives the underpop their chance.

    K said he saw the SD inoperative as part of his review, I didn't realize it really was intentionally tuned that far down.

    I'm just as horrified that we are talking local calc for cap timers.  That explains a whole MESS of issues, such as cap timers that go against the underpop in a city where maybe the overpop have not shown up in yet- practically gives the overpop an easy cap especially in multi-AO situations when the underpop don't have extra people to cover everything.

    Also explains the situation where a city with a lot of overpop ends up with insane cap timers over and above the overall population ingame, cause even if you have say 30 vs 50 pop, the 50 overpop could have 30 on one attack vs. 10 defenders, 3:1 locally and maxed out cap timers when actual total pop is less then 2:1 overpop.

    This has gotta be looked at with an assessment of all the pop capture tools available and some better formulas that don't drive players mad on either side of the pop divide.

    Having spawn delay maxed at 30 seconds didn't really provide an improved result. It was thought more effective than my numbers show them to be. Since we've toned down spawn delay there has been less player frustration, more people staying for longer, and more sorties overall. These are healthy and encouraging signs.

    The balancing capture mechanism seems to be doing its job pretty effectively. At the end of the day, those who are side loyal will not switch. Their ability to cap pre-balancing capture era isn't possible to that degree. 

    You say "it explains ______" as if it's absolutely certain but I am not so sure based on what I've seen. Spawn delay... has been part of all my time here over the last 9 years at CRS and it is one of the highest customer complained about topics. At one point it reached a terrible 4-5 minutes, an unbelievable number. 

    Spawn delay works to frustrate and discourage players from staying online to play. It is left on primarily as a way to let people know that one side is imbalanced as it is the best tool we have to make that clear. If we reviewed the concurrent population logs, and analyzed for imbalance, most of the time you would see it balanced give or take 5 extra bodies - not enough to tilt the whole campaign.

    That's not to say, when there's a major strategic breakthrough there won't be a greater tilt. That just happens, for both sides, and interfering with their game play in such an intrusive manner isn't something I want to entertain further. We had years of data to review with spawn delay, and before the balanced capturing mechanism, it was the only one we had to work with. That is no longer the case and there shouldn't be an assumption of a major improvement if we upped spawn delay.

    1 person likes this

  13. 1 hour ago, choad said:

    Any update on this Xoom? I did try unistalling and reinstalling the game but it did not make a noticeable difference in my case. Logged in last night and left after about 30 min due to signicant performance issues (lag/poor fps). Thanks.

    When we do an update you'll know that we've checked in some code to support it. Our dev has indicated that she thinks she knows what's causing it but it's not a 100% bullet proof certainty as it is a bit hard to replicate it. But reviewing the logs gave her a lot of understanding of what was happening. That's all I can say for now that is accurate.

    1 person likes this

  14. 16 hours ago, kgarner said:

    and just as a side note clarification..... the "balance/overpopulated requesting reinforcement" screen at persona is a side wide aggregate.... and might not match up with s/d / cap timers in specific locations, correct?

    It's the same mechanism (logic) that considers spawn delay. So that means it'd factor number of players spawned in to the game world. That one however is global.