ZEBBEEE

Registered Users
  • Content count

    4,205
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

ZEBBEEE last won the day on September 4 2018

ZEBBEEE had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

388 Salty

About ZEBBEEE

  • Rank
    Steam Community Manager
  • Birthday 05/17/1984

Profile Information

  • Location
    Belgium
  • Preferred Side
    Allied
  • Preferred Branch
    Army
  • Preferred Unit
    River Boat

Recent Profile Visitors

1,753 profile views
  1. If we add these two constraints that might help keep the action on the FB side, or at least the ones with the most armored support: -limit the upgraded FMS deployment to road tiles only, 1000m out of enemy facilities (so you have basically North, East, South, West directions). It would spawn heavy AT/AA, and we could increase its damage threshold. No stealth for these but longer lasting. Heavier tank battles and CAS would also be more focused along the roads, consequently. -limit the moveable « baby-MSPs » (manned trucks and ML-centric-spawn) to 1000m of the FMS (no constraints regarding enemy facilities), offering more stealth, flexibility and repeatability but as long as you have your backup FMS up if you sum up the constraints ( deployments circles), you get a more localised higher density action, more easily deployed on the FB side, but still an organized squad could deploy behind at the cost of no stealth, But wouldn’t this be too complex to understand? This would also force attrition battles. Spawnables should then really pushed 500m out of towns to support attackers in counterpart.
  2. Think about it differently, a non-movable spawn results in endless attempts to place it as close as possible, which ends very badly most of the time. If we limit the hard spawn further of town, the setup will be much faster, safer and it will get more support, making its camping and ninja sapping much harder. And if this works as a backup spawn for moveable (weaker) MSPs, the cohesion and sustainability of attackers will be improved. In counterpart trucks and MLs can set up close to town as long as they have a real area control
  3. Expected consequences: • Weaker "manned" mobile spawns = increased fear of death near targets, forcing more combined arms coordination • Replaces continuous floods of uncoordinated infantries by higher density battle team waves • It gives UP defenders a better capability to face OP attackers • Attackers would more likely require real squads to capture and hold flags • FMS at 1 km = better chances for a truck to survive, faster MSP delivery and faster armoured support from FB, survivability of FMS improved and risk of FMS camping drastically decreased • Heavier AT/AA at FMS offers higher ranked players more opportunities for open field battles, balancing the current lack of drivers • 1 person can drop a FMS and continue its ride to the target. If he dies he can jump back into the action faster. This will motivate more players to spawn trucks and organize hotdrops from the FMS to the target. • The initial stage of an AO could be a rural battle between fire squads (DFMS vs EFMS) • As soon as attackers captured a facility, defenders would meet the same restrictions, requiring better defensive preparation • ML-focused spawn allows to better make use of the environment (windmills, farms, ruins, forests) • ML can regroup his men more easily for a real fire-team experience • It adds more objectives for engineers (build PPOs to provide safe reinforcement areas) • It adds critical targets for snipers and mortarmen (MLs and truck drivers) • It drastically increases the mean engagement distances, hence improving the game play for tanks
  4. How much would you welcome the idea of mine to push back the FMS to 1km, but allow it to spawn heavy guns? in counterpart, « closer MSPs » would become weaker options, down to 200m: - manned trucks (with its engine ON?) - some kind of mission-leader deployment (similar to manned trucks but at the ML himself), not transferred through the makelead/takelead commands. Also, if do-able, make the FMS become a 1-step daisy chain for the weaker spawns: its model stays up and destroyable but is inactive for INF as long as a weak msp is available. Once the weak spawn is turned off, the FMS offers a safer backup spawn again. the purpose would be to trade continuous floods of uncoordinated infantries for waves of better-communicating troops. This would also make deployment on the FB side more easy and meaningful, improving overall survivability.
  5. See the list of units in-game here in the premium store description https://store.steampowered.com/app/667291/World_War_II_Online__PREMIUM/?beta=1
  6. See the list of units in-game here in the premium store description https://store.steampowered.com/app/667291/World_War_II_Online__PREMIUM/?beta=1
  7. Please remind that volunteers of the CRS team are among the most passionate, the most demanding, the most critic towards our product/ marketing / business model. We try to ask the right questions and never before had CRS be so much listening to the community’s feedback. Even if some veterans could help more financially speaking, we appreciate how much they remain interested and involved. Nothing would be worse than seeing none of you here, playing and complaining else where. Right now CRS does this for you, for all of us. And Xoom is the one sacrificing the most, you would be chocked if you knew what he has given to keep the game running. Still, just spreading the motivation to play such a game would help much more to achieve our goals.
  8. Very good post I somehow missed
  9. Cap timers were reduced by 50%. Except for ninja caps
  10. The HC must IMHO stay behind and support MLs. Not lead the men to combat. He shouldn't maneuver with his LMS around town. Increasing its deployment distance could be something to keep an eye on
  11. Again, as soon as the HC commander is killed, he cannot move his LMS and needs to Respawn at FB.
  12. Btw, as soon as the HC is killed he cannot Respawn at his own HCLMS, since he cannot set it with a rifleman or a SMG. Again, this is completely different than a full LMS, which could be considered if it was deployed further of towns, moveable by small jumps only, and never beyond the frontline.
  13. We are currently compiling a quick guide that gives this insight. Something the wiki has failed to achieve for the past 15 years I guess.
  14. Isn’t it more related to the introduction of the Tiger? are you suggesting that timers should be put back at its formal levels to stale the campaign, or that ninja caps should be easier for all?
  15. I personally don’t believe that the hundreds of new players daily joining the game are disturbed by these. They must however be disappointed by something the current spawning system doesn’t manage to answer. We need to find out. If an in-game poll suggests that a feature -that was completely removed- would be very much welcomed back, we should at least try out something in between. Furthermore no one used the HCLMS so far... I personally would prefer our hard FMS spawning heavy guns and trucks but deployed at minimum 1km, as moveable LMS by feet but limited to jumps of maximum 100m, so that we maximize team cohesion. But on another part we have much more complaints about the lack of mobile spawns and camping situations, as being a « walking simulator ». The HC-placed FMS brings back a little bit of variety/complementarity to balance the current design which is still not perfect. The agile development approach of CRS2 indeed has had some complicated temporarily outcomes, but if we don’t force the system to its limits, how could we understand its actual behaviour? We are still at the very beginning of major upgrades capabilities, let’s not be pessimistic about temporarily quick fixes. Keep giving feedbacks from your actual ingame experience, however. That is very much appreciated!