Registered Users
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Green Tag

About Zebbeee

  • Rank
    Free Play Account
  • Birthday

Recent Profile Visitors

375 profile views
  1. Depot spawning came as first solution to AB camping, indeed. But it resulted in permanent ninja-capping of spawnables over the fronline, and made attacks almost impossible to succeed as soon as defenders showed up. AOs came to fix the ninja-caps by allowing defenders to set up, but it further resulted in fortifications almost impossible to capture. Despite forcing attackers to group up, the loss of OIC leadership due to the destruction of squad-based orbat resulted in a FPS-style game. WWIIol lost most of its community at that time. MSP>FRU>FMS came later to fix this, but it was too late and - combined to depot spawning - contributed to further spread ressources over the map, further diminishing the in-field influence of OICs and sensation of "group" action. Poor figures of retention from steam is the proof of this, people just don't understand where to spawn from and where to go. Today, with the new fortified version of the mobile spawn + defensive PPOs + defensive backup FBs (suppression of brigade-spawning), depots have become obsolete as spawn origins. By removing it we can give back better control to OICs and simplify our game system. Otherwise the 1.36 plan will fail to raise new leaders. Defenders should use defensive FRUs to simulate areas of control. They should avoid using ABs if it is camped and counter-attack from the rear-FBs, or protect it with PPOs. No-man's land towns offers the best tactical battles. It must become the standard. I guarantee that AB camping will be impossible to sustain with all the ingame rules we have today. It definitly deserves a try during intermission. Although the respawning/warping ability remains a key feature for group cohesion.
  2. Both SPAA and AA models definitely need those armored plates.
  3. Should we consider this feature ? I believe trucks should be riding soldiers from a ZOC to a battle area, giving more influence to the OIC. Eventually increase minimum range for FMS as counterpart.
  4. Fixed. Q : can we consider an intermission with all depots unabled to give it a try ? (although the respawning feature is the actual critical idea).
  5. CONTEXT : As announced for 1.36 : EWS-triggered AO will be great [edit : correction - still being discussed, but that wouldn't impact the idea bellow] Garrison-based towns with extra moveable supply will also be great. In 1.36 defenders will have a rear FB to counter camping situations Once this is done, we should focus on the depot-spawning thing which is 10 years old and also contributed to decrease the creativity of battle plans, hurting the motivation of OICs. Because of depots, most battles only start when a spawnable is captured in town and stop as soon as it is retaken. Floods of uncoordinated lonewolves result from this, leaving OICs without much power over ressources. Defenders also got no power over the missions spread all over defensive depots. No wonder new players are lost with this as well. SUGGESTION : Thanks to our current FMS concept and with those expected changes, we can finally consider to REMOVE depot spawning both for attackers and defenders. However, we could still consider a useful re-use of depots : If a unit (infantry, truck, gun) dies within a 200m-range of a side-owned depot, it can respawn from that depot but only with the same weapon (or swithing to riffle, still supplied from the original spawn). It is like the current warping system, but only when dying. If someone want to change his weapon, he needs to leave again from AB/FB/FMS. CONSEQUENCES : Removing depot spawning (as initial spawn location) would instantly ease the centralization of players departing from the same origin, hence providing a better immersion experience. Allowing to respawn at depots would allow to keep a group/squad cohesion. It would also add a new fun way to use paratroopers (they paradrop on any depot, capture it and can hold it until it is recaptured). Attackers would also less spread over the town, giving defenders the opportunity to set up coordinated counter-attacks on depots, mostly with an attrition-style battle. OICs would finally get back their influence over the battlefield, suggesting coordinated/grouped moves from depot to depot, with everyone leaving from a fortified spawn (FB/FMS/AB). Please vote.
  6. OT is about a default mission for lonewolves. There used to be such a default mission in the area51 to let newbies fights each other. The idea to exploit this feature on AO-ed towns was discussed 8 years ago but never investigated further. Instead they even removed that training mission. I still believe this would be a good idea, as missions should more probably be used by real squads/teams working together on a specific objective.
  7. Thanks guys for the contribution, but still nothing about the OT
  8. I don't believe SPAA will have an impact. As some people said, they are defendless and can easily be sniped. The reason classical AA stay close to the AB/FB spawns is because of the lower probability to be sniped. I rarely see an AA spawn from a depot or a FMS for that same reason. According to me it's a good thing Rats proved they could work on new vehicles as well, but there are other much more interesting units to work on.
  9. As I have been asking for population-triggered AOs for 8 years now, I may answer as well : There were two purposes to AOs : - Prevent the old camping + instant-capping, which happened in 90% of attacks, by bringing some kind of actual attrition battle - gather lonewolves on large-scale attacks lead by HC OICs, and no longer let them make ninja-actions over the whole frontline However, the "manual-triggered" AOs combined with a brigade-based supply simply KILLED the old squad-based orbat. Indeed, the old orbat had efficiently organized squads in areas with local objectives to be worked on 24/24. Now squads had no means to get their own battle area nor equipment (brigades' supplies were depleted after a single battle). Hence everybody just waited for an AO to rise somewhere over the fronline, all rushed there without any sense of preparation nor coordination, before jumping to another location when brigade's supplies were depleted. This killed the roleplay part played by squads and which was the only USP of WWII online... The population-triggered AO will allow squads to take initiatives again. Let them prepare a battle-plan and deploy as they want. Combined to garrison supply, some old big issues will be solved while still keeping the intended advantages of AOs. I just hope they don't put a limit on the number of total AOs. Just need to have 10 people on the target. Extra mobile supplies are a great idea and this is exactly how it should have been designed from the start. Pity they couldn't fix this before Steam.
  10. I had raised this issue of separated communities. Empty steam forums + negative reviews = missed re-launch opportunity. I wonder how many of the 50 online steam-players are paying players? http://steamcharts.com/app/251950 For 9 years it has been critical to fix the squadplay/teamplay. I have been asking for EWS-based AO's for so long and despite a successful test during an intermission it has never been implemented. Plenty other old ideas here : https://wwiiol-ui.blogspot.be/search/label/1. new UI design introduction
  11. Q: You still speak about those "extra supply flags" as being actual "brigades". Have you considered to separate two fundamental concepts : "Orbat deployment" vs "Supply convoys", allowing HC to settle up battle plans for brigades (squads), without interfering with the tactical deployment of extra supplies over the map? i.e.: - "Supply convoys" : specialized inf/tanks convoys (=extra supply flag) arrising from the large factories and being moved indepently up to a targetted garison town. The more the factories are destroyed, the slower new supply convoys are produced. Equipment is just parked in town, not supposing it being linked to actual combat forces. - Orbat deployment : virtual brigades visible on the map, composed by real squads, that can be ordered (short- or long term) objectives to defend/attack, but with NO INFLUENCE on the supply of its hosting town. It would just improve the roleplay part of the game. Cool features could arise from this architecture: captured supplies would not be routed but somehow transfered to the enemy (except when .fallback), squads achieving HC objectives may receive some extra privileges to be used ingame...
  12. Since October 1th, we have already seen 3 campaigns going fast: Campaign 142 : 6 days Campaign 143 : 9 days Campaign 144 : 4 days Since October 1th also (highest peak of 448 players online), charts mention a 50% drop-down in average steam numbers, instead of seeing an increase: http://steamcharts.com/app/251950 In your announcement you mention that Tier-0 will last only 24h in the 145th campaign ; Do you believe it is because of being stuck to Tier-0 equipment that population is down? This could raise discussions about the whole RDP concept, which is the point of my topic: Current gameplay: manufacturies produce R&D points, which triggers new Tiers. Each Tier opens access to more advanced equipment, to keep an overall balance. This seems to work fine but results in situations where sexy units are not seen ingame for some days (I don't have figures). What are the possible alternative gameplays to let all units being available without hurting the balance? With the removing of brigades and the re-introduction of town-based supplies, should a town be given its own Tier-level? What about seeing each town produce its own "local" RDP points that would give it access to better equipment (full Tier within 72 hours, +50% if local factory in destroyed state ), with a reset as soon as ownership changes ? That way HCs could organize plans to defend towns to let it develop/stockpile advanced Tier-Units, while bombing adjacent towns to keep it low. The more the frontline advanced however, the more probability you will reach a town already-stockpiled with advanced Tier units. Large factories, however, would still provide RDP points to be "spent" by HC on towns where they want to boost local RDP and eventually immediately reach advanced-tier equipments. This would avoid situations where counter-attacks would be impossible to stop, or allow to pursue an offensive from a newly-taken town. HC-view of town-based RDP : Features/details to be thought about: The .fallback command could fallback the Tier-level to a rear-town (with a lower RDP level), if the related depot is still owned. The .haac could transfer a higher RDP level from a rear-town to the targetted town (equipment level switch), if the related depot is still owned. Manual supply transfer/overstock would still be possible (and recommended) Eventually the other side would not know about the enemy's town-Tier information
  13. Engineers could be given the ability to build ammo boxes as well. This would mortarmen a lot.
  14. Team play improvement is on the TODO list for 10 years now
  15. Just read the title, interesting idea. what about removing FMS/fru on défensive objectives ? Keep it only on attack missions , even on defensive ao’s