krazydog

Registered Users
  • Content count

    948
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

krazydog last won the day on June 20

krazydog had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

47 FNG

About krazydog

  • Rank
    Junior Member
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Preferred Side
    Allied
  • Preferred Branch
    Navy
  • Preferred Unit
    River Boat
  1. Reduced supply timers should mean reduced supply lists. It makes sense, and I agree. But its probably going to be a nasty process changing all the supply lists - everything needs to be rebalanced. There will probably be some complaining from the community - after all thats what we do.
  2. Yes, its not too good to force paying customers to beta test things during live campaigns. you could lose paying cusomers lol
  3. Actually I think it would be better to just going back to the way the timers were originally. If you slow down the timers on the frontline attack, but allow the defense timers to move twice as fast, then we might end up with WWI trench warfare and endless rotation of flags and supply. The map becomes a big stalemate, that could get frustratng too. A little bit of breakouts are ok I think. They move the map.
  4. This makes sense. Also, I think like some people said it was a oerfect Storm. Not only were the Axis lines stretched out due to the unorthodox setup, but I think Axis lacked active HC online at a critical time when the Allies were starting to get close to Leige. Someone said in another thread that the Axis didn't have a proper army flag in Leige when it got attacked. That situation should have never have happened, especially considering that the flags could have been moved faster.
  5. It might have been fun for some guys, but not for everyone: Campaign Day 1 was Sunday - it was Father's day in the USA. Lots of guys like me already had other commitments on Sunday. So I finally get a chance to log in on Day 1 at Midnight. I log in and see 2/3rd of the Axis army is cutoff. Leige is already Allied. And there is nothing to stop the Allies from taking the German factories except the 1 AO no softcap rule. This all happened on day 1 before I fired a single shot! WTF - how is that a good day for this game ? The campaign looks like it will be over by day 3 at this rate. Lol
  6. Hold on now. Campaign 139 might be so short that many people won't even get a chance to play with T0 equipment - lol!
  7. Congrats on a well organized operation! But don't pat yourself on the back too much. .. There is no way in hell that the Allies should have taken Liege on Day 1 (setting up a massive cut off on the south side) from a 1-linked town overextended snake push attack from the south side of the map. It doesn't matter how well the allies played, or however overpop the allies were, or where the flags were located- it should never have happened! Just a few good Axis vets watching the map could have stopped it. Hell if I would have been online at the time with a few squaddies you guys would never even have gotten close to taking Liege because the FBs would have been locked down around Liege before the battle even started. Again congrats on your good work, and I am not taking anything away from the Allies who were obviously playing extremely well. But what happened on Day 1 of the campaign was really more of a failure by the Axis side. No excuses really for the poor performance the axis showed on campaign day 1.
  8. If the ftp still need to rank up first then thats probably ok. They wont be day 1 players at least, and they will know how to use the equipment a little first before they touch the better equipment. if you let day 1 players have access to all the equipment immediately and let them burn through all the most valuable ewuipment without understanding the game first, then you will just get a lot of veterans criticizing them in game and thats not a good experience either for brand new players.
  9. I can just imagine what would happen now: A day 1 ftp steam player who only intends to play the game for a couple days decides he wants to play around with a tiger or matilda tank and spawns in from a camped army base. .. He spawns and dies, doesn't care, spawns and dies again, and again and again -until the tank supply runs out -- potentially impacting the outcome of entire battle for everyone else.
  10. Adding AOs may not have been the direct cause for large squads decreasing in numbers. I don't think people can make such a conclusion. There are other explanations for population decrease as well: for example this is a very OLD game - 17 years. People don't play the same game forever - they move on in life. The decrease in population may have absolutely nothing to do with AOs or other gameplay changes. It may just be the result of the fact that the game is OLD with old graphics. To be honest its amazing that this game has survived as long as it has. And this game's remarkable longevity might be the result of the game actually having GOOD gameplay mechanics.
  11. From my experience the Host Squad program is well-intentioned, but unfortunately doesn't really work that well in practice. Most new players when just starting a brand new game need some time by themselves to figure out the game. They don't even know what side they want to play yet usually. They need more in-game tutorials or in game wikipedia probably. Throwing them into a squad the first second they join the game just leads to a lot of frustration for both the Host squad and the new player. Why? Because the new guy get poked almost immediately and gets pestered into getting on Squad voice chat, and the squad people sending the messages get frustrated because 98% of the new guys never respond to the person trying to contact them. The result is the overwhelming majority of new guys are kicked out of the squad, or leave the squad on their own within the first few days. Not a great way to start off their first squad experience. It might be better to create more incentive to encourage lone wolfs to join squads: there can be lots of ways to do this: bonus experience points if your in a squad, or special equipment available to squads only, or allowing squad-only missions, etc, etc... There are lots of things - just need to be creative about it. I think after a player has been playing the game for a week or so, then that is a better time to give them an option to join a host squad or pick another squad. The first hour of the game is way too early to shove new guys into squads I think.
  12. This. its not fair to make inf players look for people to bring ammo while other guys solo tanks, ships and airplanes.
  13. Well Xoom if you are going to nerf the LMGs capping abilty, then don't forget to give the LMG better suppression fire when its properly deployed. Otherwise no one will hardly use the weapon anymore and it will be a wasted piece of equipment in game. Give the LMG its proper role in game if you are going to change it.
  14. Regarding LMGs: please remember if you are going to argue to stop people from running around and firing from the hip because its not realistic, then also remember that it is also not realistic to not model LMG 'suppression fire' in this game when LMGs are deployed in key strategic positions and covering fields of fire. It would be kind of cool if deployed LMGs in strong defensive positions were more powerful in this game and could suppress entire squads in their field of fire at least temporarily - kind of like AI towers do now. But in this game its far too easy for 1 enemy infantryman to snipe out a deployed LMG in 2 secs. So I think if we are going to propose to weaken the LMG on 'realistic arguments' then we should also think of creative ways to make LMGs more unique and powerful for other 'realistic reasons.'