• Announcements

    • GVONPAUL

      Need help for incoming players.   04/29/2017

      With the looming Steam release, we are anticipating many new players to the game. This is great for all of us, and it's important that we retain as many as we can. With that in mind, we'd like to enlist players to help with the inevitable questions asked in the forums. Ideally, gameplay questions are asked and answered in-game, but it's not always easy or convenient to answer questions while playing. A Gameplay Support Forum would be a good place for those who want to help. We are now accepting volunteers for the Rat Patrol, who will provide correct and consistent info to new players in the Forums. The more new players we retain, the better it is for the game and the biggest hurdle in player retention is grasping the complexities of this game. If you are interested, send me a PM.  
    • Dodger

      Squad Leaders Contact GVONPAUL OR Dodger for Squad Forums   05/18/2017

      Soldiers!

      We are seeking Squad Leaders to volunteer their squads to help us test the upcoming Squad Forums system. This system will integrate squads who wish to participate into a self-sustained "forum within a forum." You will be able to add members to your squad, assign permissions, and create forums/calendar events on your own. The idea behind this system is part of our commitment to support squads as a integral part of our community. This service will be offered free of charge to all squads of World War II Online upon launch. Our goal is to offer all of the services a squad off-site forum can offer but free of charge and tied in to our existing forum service. So what do you need tested? We need willing volunteers to test the whole system - make forums, post threads, assign permissions, etc. The idea is to have several squads giving it a test run to point out any flaws before we launch it publicly. What are the requirements? We are ideally looking for medium to large squads - Ideally ten people or so plus, but smaller squads feel free to apply - and a willingness to use our platform. It's important to note (as of now - these may be included at a later date) we are unable to convert posts from a private forum if your squad previously used one, and you (or your XO's and recruiters) will need to assign individual members permissions. It is entirely possible that in the future this system will be automatically linked to the game's squad roster, but as of now developer priorities are elsewhere (1.37 and steam, w00t!) How do I sign up? PM me ( @Dodger ) on the forums, or email me at dodger@playnet.com - Please indicate your squad name and how many members you have. I will get back to you with more instructions.

frantish

Registered Users
  • Content count

    8,138
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Green Tag

About frantish

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Location
    Texas
  • Preferred Side
  • Preferred Branch
    Air Force
  • Preferred Unit
    DB-7

Recent Profile Visitors

279 profile views
  1. Word of mouth is one of the best ways to get new "customers" Here is a place that will be a place to post. http://ww2live.com/en/categorie/wargames-noticias-y-eventos
  2. I disagree. Many of the rivers in game where large enough for a Fairmle to sail on (Mosel, Rhine). Locks did not prevent passaged, just slowed down, and bridges usually built high enough for passage (unlike games city bridges). Yes, some rivers could not cross. As for resupply, I think it is trucks that should resupply boats! (Although a boat resupplying an infantry is OK, but that would be a lot of extra coding)
  3. I wonder if the hit models will be made more accurate? For instance the crew actually look like humans, internal components look like engines. Not asking for WarThunder like precision, just better.
  4. Since this game relies much on the community to function, should that (or is?) effort rewarded? Meaning those to put a lot of effort for the benefit of other players to learn and enjoy the game. Besides the typical "free month for each new player joining", efforts such as Total game time as leader in active zone (50 hours?) Number of FRB created per month (200?) Total time as truck/transport/supply unit (ship TT will need 1.5x modifier) Total time transport pilot (Ju 52, C-47) Resupply brigades (if still applies after changes) Besides that some kind of mentorship program to help new players learn intermediate skills. Boot camp stuff? Other ideas? Criticism of suggestions?
  5. VVVV My thoughts too. We need better ways to deal with pop-imbalance, this is one.
  6. Seems like a Proxy service for Discord and many other sites had a small issue. "Cloudflare disclosed today that they have fixed a bug reported by Google’s Project Zero that was very rarely exposing sensitive information in random requests (0.00003% of all requests) since September 2016. There was no way to target specific information and the exposed information was random" https://blog.discordapp.com/safety-jim-psa-cloudflare-security-issue-77a4ecc48298#.sn0at7nd1 So they recommend PW change.
  7. I would too, however that involves far more coding. I aim for improvements that involve little changes, could be implemented in an hour. biggest bang for effort. Then go for bigger improvements.
  8. No. Well, I did read something, but did not realize it was that.
  9. BTW, tell us about this > (_!_)
  10. For many years from 2003 to 2009 I was heavily involved in RDP / Strategic bombing, a rather notorious fella (ask SNIPER62). Besides that I was also a Beta tester and worked with the Rats on improving the game by tweaks (the aircraft Bail-Out feature was worked out by me, ask Gopher) A complain said by many on both sides was the long flight times that only got longer as the front moved to the losing side. This only added to the frustration of a faction and was a source of many attempts at a remedy. I formulated my own solution, one of 2 for a better but balanced Strategic bombing system. I first posted this years ago, 2010 I think, but for several reasons was not worked on. With the excellent and refreshing leadership of XOOM and others at CRS, I dust this off and present again. ====== There are areas of the map that are rarely ventured by pilots in the game. Most notably is the area of Zeelands around Hellevitus and Den Haag (the Hague), simply because they are far from airfields, and usually in an area mostly devoid of combat. Proposal: Placing 2 new airfields in rear areas that provide a base to ressupply (respawn), but not spawn new units. This will even out airpower but not break the existing setup. By linking those 2 new Airfield town to a town owned by the opposite side it effectively prevents anyone from placing an airforce of para brigade in that town. On can land for RTB, resupply, even respawn, aiding in temporary projecting of air power, but not extending it. Example: Give Den Haag an AF, and a depot linked to Ipswich (port town on UK). One can never place an Axis AF brigade in Den Haag, but the LW will be able to use it support the Kreigemaire from Hellev and Den Haag which are often attacked by EA unopposed, a major imbalance for naval play No Axis advantage, details: Placing a "RTB AF" in Den Haag does NOT give Axis any unfair advantage. 1. Air units must still be flown in from other AF's (Gilze for instance) 2. Den Haag is about 15km distance away from Hellev, and 44km to Vlissengen (same as Vliss to Gilze at 48km!) (*distance measure not game scale) 3. Factory bombing mission cannot be launched from Den Haag. For that matter... Den Haag encourages Strat Bombing, but not give axis advantage: After bombs are dropped and have left the combat zone, most times the trip back can get very boring. Many players simply despawn bomber then fly home, much to the disgust of anyone who does try and pursue the eBomber. Reducing the RTB time some will encourage the player(s) to make the flight to a friendly airport. So how much is the trip reduced? Gilze to Whitstable #7 is 136 km DH to Whitstable #7 is 119 km 17 km shorter, that's it! But it does shave 10+ min off the slow He-111, especially if damaged. 10 min is a time in game. Allies receive a AF in trade, at Haguenau Haguenau is close to the easternmost tip of France, behind the Maginot line, and historically had an operating airfield used by the allies before the Germans captured it. Because it was behind the Maginot line it was not captured until about the time of the French surrender, so it is historical situation. Haguenau is also far from the German factories. Brussels to Dusseldorf is 83km (the current closest AF), and Haguenau to Frankfurt is 80km. Haguenau to the other German factories is 50% farther, so even if it was an active AF, Haguenau is still to far away to be launching point, but it is still a good alternate RTB airfield because 99% of time axis players know the DB-7 is going straight to Brussels. Haguenau is a perfect allied RTB base far to the east. These airfields balance the Strategic War A major unbalancing issue with the current map design, it is easier for the winning side to strat bomb (RDP). Why? Simply because the air bases are closer. Turn around times are shorter, less chance for interception, and naturally players do not want to fly over an hour to be shot down. Consider: Axis line has moved west, from Reims in south all the way to Antwerp in north, with Brussels also axis and Maubauge contested. This adds 50% to the distance for the Dambusters to fly their missions, losing potential escort pilots, and using more time. Meanwhile, even with the He-111 the Axis can rapidly bomb Amines to rubble from Reims. With Haguenau in the rear, Allies can RTB sooner and form up a new mission in retaliation, maintaining some balance to both sides RDP Same with Axis forced to take off from Monchen-Gladbach for a very long flight to bomb UK can at least save a lot of time by RTB to Den Haag for a follow-up RDP mission. Simply have Haguenau linked to Zell to prevent any Allied air brigades from moving in, by the time Allies get Zell, they will be using Hahn and Bitburg instead (or some other rear non-AF town). Win-Win all around, both sides, for the AF, for the navy, and for CRS The number of positives strongly outweigh negatives. +++++++ Have a picture or two to add to this, tomorrow
  11. I was thinking of Steam and improving the most glaring limitations of game as possible.
  12. Yes, that is an issue with the game. XOOM: Solution is for aircraft to always be visible, a possible shortcut would be to add a modifier to aircraft Viz range so they would be calculated as closer. Only concern if other calculations also use that same value.
  13. AWESOME!! Last time I checked the map was 1.28.7, but that was a couple of years ago and did not see any change. TY and TY to guy who made it. Now put plotter to work
  14. Unfortunately Discord has reliability issues. It is tossup.