raptor34

Registered Users
  • Content count

    774
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

raptor34 last won the day on July 24

raptor34 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

49 FNG

About raptor34

  • Rank
    Advance Member
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Location
    Canada
  • Preferred Side
    Allied
  • Preferred Branch
    Air Force
  • Preferred Unit
    Spitfire
  1. I hope that we see significantly reduced air supply for 1.36 with more realistic squadron/wing numbers and composition. I agree that air supply is almost impossible to meaningfully attrition with TOE.
  2. WW2OL 2.0 first and formost.
  3. Let's do it. I am an Allied player and I want to see everything work as realistic as possible. Makes a better wargame for all of us. Side bias, "nerfing and OP" have no place in this discussion. The aim should always be to have things work as authentically as possible.
  4. I agree. Hopefully, that will include more accurate Sherman to Tiger numbers as well.
  5. It’s far from a “complete disaster”. Rage unsubbing is never productive or helpful, they are trying to improve the war game and you leave at the drop of a hat. Rifles should be the main weapon by a significant volume for both Infantry and Armoured Brigades, full stop.
  6. I for one fully support our flags becoming more historically accurate and differentiated. Fighter and Bomber squadrons could also use the same treatment when the time is available for that. Keep up the good work Rats.
  7. @HATCH, I agree fully with the ideas brought forward. Mobile spawning has its place but it shouldn't replace cohesive groups of players working together. I always wanted to play pre-MS days.
  8. As far as I am aware CRS is not required to have the campaign game ready and available for you at any time you like. Asking for a 5-day refund due to intermission is completely silly. It is along the same lines as asking for a refund when a Tiger or Spitfire is not supply (as I swear I've seen people complain). WW2OL has limited supply, its a wargame with simulation elements, and you can't have everything you want at all times. I would wager that the vast majority of players understand that and that it makes up a good part of the reason they play WW2OL in the first place. Getting upset over an intermission isn't much difference, it is just the reset time that they decided. Personally, I don't bother with intermission and just do something else. Take a break, go for a hike, play any one of the many good other wargames out there if you like (ARMA, PS, IL-2 BOX, the list goes on) and come back to WW2OL ready for a new campaign with a positive attitude. Continuing with that positive note, I came back to WW2OL this summer due to special events like the Battle of Lille event with its limited supply and objectives. I think the idea of mini-campaigns/special events with special rule sets (like limited supply and historical setups) are great and need to keep going. If it is too much work even just a very limited area and tier to simulate a battle/mini-campaign is also good because it gives players something to do. Keep track of the wins/losses and get players into them. And if not, intermission is always a good testing ground.
  9. I would love to play a full campaign of tier 0 with a setup like this. Something much closer to simulating the real Battle of France. Alas since I never had the chance to play in 2002 I doubt I will ever see it.
  10. I was not around for the pre-TOE days ( I bought in 2002 it but my mother was mad at me for the price at the time so I had to take it back, but that's another story! ) but I have been thinking about what scale is the ideal for a game like WW2OL. All this talk of AO and no AO has me thinking on how best to model size to population in a wargame. Most of this is going to come up in the design of WW2OL 2.0 but I don't get the feeling that a super large game word is required to make a good "operational" level wargame. I'd say that a smaller, more highly detailed map might get away from some of the issues we see in trying to have a large open world with so few people in it. I see many vets taking quite fondly of their time in a much smaller gameworld. Not saying a battlefield map here guys, just an open discussion. The area AO sounds like it is the hybrid compromise to AOs as 1.36 is to supply. Might well be worth a shot.
  11. While I am not sure about supporting a para MS, I like the idea of an ammo point. Good suggestion Kilemalll.
  12. Agree, town to town resupply makes the most sense as far as making the reward/cost ratio worth it. And gives more space for interdiction to happen in.
  13. Will integrated voice communications include mission chat and local area "shout" chat?
  14. Allied players will adapt and overcome. I still think the current supply rule is more realistic and I support it from that point of view. Sane and thought out groupings of national forces should minimize this concern. Paying attention to the areas of responsibly between national forces (or even just other units in the same army) has been a part of military strategy throughout history. In end, after the stable release of 1.36 and the current roadmap, I am more interested in the development of WW2OL 2.0 than any further development of 1.0 if it is a battle of limited resources.