nc0gnet0

Registered Users
  • Content count

    147
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

nc0gnet0 last won the day on April 4

nc0gnet0 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

61 Vet

About nc0gnet0

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Preferred Side
    Allied
  • Preferred Branch
    Army
  • Preferred Unit
  1. I am talking in comparison to all the other wheeled vehicles, and this came in to play after the coasting "fix". It's obvious you tweaked the setting again to add even more terrain penalty to the morris. Honestly, you guys do realize that if for some reason you see the Morris has an unfair advantage, another option is to add to the opel, rather than subtract from the Morris, right? Or is it CRs's intent to have even less people driving trucks and setting up battles?
  2. come on guys, are you just trying to make this unit completely useless? Now driving across country almost puts a guy in epileptic shock as the things shakes uncontrollably.
  3. How long a map lasts isn't what brings people to the game. Good even battles are. I have seen many an attack stop dead in it's tracks upon losing the spawnable depots. Granted, I am coming from a tz3 perspective, where multiple fms isn't practical when you have a player base of 4-6 people on the attack. What you say is true, if you have 30-50 people logged in per side. But i digress, it isn't 2010 anymore. The "would like to see maps longer" so we see later tiers is a non-starter in my book. There is nothing preventing the introduction of the tiers in a quicker fashion, just that CRS chooses not too. Any modification to the game in it's current state should focus on increased action in an attempt to increase the player base. Lets not cut off our nose to spite our face.
  4. I like the idea of the city cap meaning something, not sure if I like the idea of it meaning the FB becomes indestructible. I think there are better ways to give the city cap more value, preferably on the supply side of the defender. Or maybe a mandatory 5 second spawn delay added to the spawn timers of the defending town. I also like your idea of the stopping the mole attacks, but not sure of the repercussions it might have on tz3, when either side might struggle to get a full EWS. How many peeps does it take anyways? I have seen a lot of battles in TZ3 where the ews teeters between single and double EWS
  5. Hate this idea. So if a town has three spawnable depots to the attacker, all the defenders have to do is lib the city cap and the attack is stopped dead in it's tracks? Do you want to see maps/campaigns last 3 years? Maybe if the spawn depots remain active even after the city cap is libbed, maybe. But I think what your asking requires too much coding tbh. We have to be realistic here.
  6. Is it crazy to ask that ML should be able to redefine his mission in game without having to go through the whole convoluted process again?
  7. I don't disagree, and I don't think what Quincannon faced should be allowed either. As far as the area capture debate, I think an interesting dynamic might be to place a capture flag between the town and the enemy fb that must be captured first. Losing this flag should result in some sort of penalty to the defending side (reduction of supply perhaps, or loss of all AI, not sure what, but something). This would do away of the annoying "whack a mole" game play and give us more focused attacks and overall better game play. Similarly, losing non spawn flags should also result in a penalty to the defending side, at least the City flag which should have more in game value. Granted it would result in longer campaigns, but overall better game play IMHO. so you would first have a battle much akin to a FB vs FB which would be akin to area capture taking place outside of town, then move on to the normal city cap situation.
  8. This is only slightly less nauseating than using a second account to log on to the opposing side. I can see allowing second accounts to perhaps spawn in trucks, but anything else still gives too much of an unfair advantage. It gives the two account player real time information as to where the enemy is (or isn't) without sacrificing man power to do that.
  9. I could not possibly agree more. To add to this the map won't stay stationary through this whole convoluted process.
  10. Explain to me why this is even allowed, and not a ban-able offense? The only thing a second account should be able to do is to drive a truck, period. This rates right up there with intentional clipping in regards to cheating.
  11. This could be gamed quite a bit though. Op side just has a few players log out for 5 min to go underpop, then they log back in, etc etc. Be a nightmare in TZ 3 when total numbers are low.
  12. Clubbing baby seals is hardly an accomplishment. And slowing the advancement is an accomplishment in and off itself. The objective is to make it so the players on the underpop side just don't say "screw it" and log off, making a bad problem worse. Another option might be to for a roving squad of players that are allowed to play for free, but only on the underpop side.
  13. My point is that your making a bad thing worse. And with the majority of the map being decided when a minority of players are on, well, careful what you ask for. but your right in the fact that everything CRS has done in regards to underpop vs overpop has failed to fix the problem, I agree. OTOH, I can see the point others make by wanting to play now (NOW NOW I MUST PLAY NOW!!!!). Let me offer up another avenue to explore in regards to overpop. divide the game into three distinct play times (what we refer to as TZ's) Once daily make an in game correction. If during tz 3, Axis was Op by a 3-1 or higher margin, and captured 10 towns during that TZ, give 6 of them back (not sure of the actual number here, up for discussion). At least this gives the underpop side a sense of accomplishment in just trying to slow the attack to some degree, and appeases the NOW NOW I MUST PLAY NOW!!!! crowd. A lot would need to be decided on how to go about this, as far as what towns, how many towns, when does this kick in, etc, but it's not something that necessarily needs to be hard coded into the game.
  14. My guess this would require a lot of coding. Most of the changes we see with spawn timers, cap timers, etc I would guess are really easy from the coding side, kinda like flipping a switch. With that in mind I think the time (coding) would be better spent fixing problems that have existed since day 1. I really can't believe after all this time clipping (cheating) and body parts sticking out of brick walls is still a thing.
  15. How much satisfaction do you really get when you take a town knowing full well you outmanned the defenders 10-2 or 20-4 though? personally it kinda leaves a dirty taste in my mouth, like I just finished clubbing baby seals.