B2K

CORNERED RAT
  • Content count

    11,750
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

B2K last won the day on February 4

B2K had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

383 Salty

5 Followers

About B2K

  • Rank
    Community Developer
  • Birthday 08/07/1973

Profile Information

  • Preferred Side
    Allied
  • Preferred Branch
    Army
  • Preferred Unit
    Panhard

Recent Profile Visitors

2,765 profile views
  1. Everything potentially has a positive difference. Fixing the 109 made the german pilots happy, more of them now sortie and play. Changing the aircraft damage models to something that closer reflects reality will not only make pilots happy, but also ground players. That leads to more players. Unless of course you're advocating that once something is in game - even if badly bugged (109 rudder issue, ammunition performance, aircraft stress and damage models), it should remain in game and never get fixed. If we change subscriptions - and it does not result is generating the needed revenue to cover costs then the server closes. It's that simple. If we lower subscription rates, then have to immediately increase them again to cover costs that'll drive off more people than gained by the lower rate. Ask yourself - if you subbed at $5, but then 1-2 months later the sub price went up to $15 - would you stay subbed?
  2. I have 0 input on the account pricing. Though I'd imagine the question would be - would there be enough new accounts to offset the lost revenue from the existing price model if changes are made? *** EXAMPLE ONLY *** If we went to $5 (from the current $15) We would need 3x the current subscribed base to cover the same costs. If only 2.8x more subscribe that may not be enough to cover operational costs. *** DISCLAIMER *** I have 0 idea of the operating costs - the above is provided only as an example.
  3. you can put another channel into that slot - or make a custom channel. it is there by default nothing more, it is changeable.
  4. Generally speaking changes are only made to equipment when bugs are identified (109 fixes and future unit audits), or newer data becomes available for use (recent ammo audits). It's impossible to have both 1 unit = 1 unit AND to have those units have difference performance characteristics while still maintaining a balanced game. The only way to achieve 1 to 1 parity is to have the underlying data be exactly the same, otherwise side 1's rifle is better than side 2's so everyone goes to side 1. Neither our game engine, account system, nor the equipment models support changing things on them on a player by player basis (Ie visual stuff) at this time. It is something we are exploring, but it's not on the high priority list.
  5. Regrettably with our current terrain, topographic maps look pretty bad.
  6. I'll be looking at all the scoring over the next few weeks. There are some minor tweaks that need to be made. I had hoped to wait until after the new HC tools was out, but .............
  7. SO when we auto-pop a channel which one of your custom set channels do we put it into?
  8. top L of the game map. it has 3 camps next to each other allowing for spawning of all countries within a few hundred meters
  9. when you say limited historical supply - what exactly are you meaning?
  10. I was torn - but voted no because: As an attacker - I absolutely loved being able to drop in a mobile spawn when and where ever I wanted to (essentially) As a Defender - I absolutely hated having to try to defend the endless possibilities from all directions at all times. While the current system can be refined / adjusted I think it's closer to a 'good enough' than allowing every inf (I used to run 10 ML's in on a truck) to put in a Spawn.
  11. I've edited original post to hopefully take care of any confusion.
  12. that would be anyone what joined after 10-28-2004
  13. It pretty much is - it's sunny and clear like 98% of the time.