• Announcements


      New Community Volunteer Opportunity   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


      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.


Registered Users
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6 Green Tag

About wockawocka

  • Rank
    Monthly Hero Builder
  • Birthday April 27

Profile Information

  • Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
  • Preferred Side
  • Preferred Branch
  • Preferred Unit
  1. Nowadays the launcher automatically downloads an update, and installs it -> That is great. Other games do it, why not this one. But while coming back into the future, lets include some other "good habit" measures, like: remove old patch files, all but the latest rename the folder created from "Battleground Europe" to something that actually describes what the folder is for, like "updates", or "automatic updates" even do a lot of betatesting on this, we do not want to have that old bug that wiped computers... delete is a powerful command. And if "on a roll" why not try to make the playgate launcher use the "libtorrent" technology, which means no CRS bandwidth will be used when players update. As long as at least one player has the launcher up, it should seed to all others with the bittorrent protocol.
  2. Also like this idea, because it will encourage (radio) contact between air and inf (when voice comms are integrated) And trucks is the fastest way to get this. Although if allowing myself to go a bit off-topic, if modelling of fuel truck is possible (because I agree we have to many trucks, and they are already a kind of "no-name attack vehicle") then I would suggest a "repair vehicle" as well, for both tanks and air.
  3. if we have local voice comms, we will NEED this But on a very sparse level, so that it doesn't garble the sound... maybe just a short "white noise" before (and after) the actual transmission. Like "_*kshh*_Roger_*kreekit*_"
  4. Agreed the cloud could give better world coverage, but AWS S3 costs money, and RATs already seem to have their own hardware (and internet line) Still, creating a torrent link is free, and the only thing CRS needs to do is post that 12kbyte .torrent-file on their webpage. -> Done. ALL data computations from there on are "distributed" and more stable than any cloud solution. Downside is of course the need for a torrent-client, so other games (like world of tank) is using their launcher to create a torrent session. Would surprice me if there are web pages that can mimic a torrent session as well (although with some security issues for sure -> read .net)
  5. Last one with "Facility" and "FMS" appeals best to me. Warp should not be announced. So let's keep Facility (even if the correct name would be cool like "Louven depot in Brussels", for example). We need short names on buttons. But not TO short. FMS... hmm... Facility is a bit vague, why not make that button vague as well... like "Mobile Spawn"?
  6. Agreed. But when searching forum there were a lot of threads about the FRU placement thingy. So if the re-supply thing is easy to do, then this thread will be a placeholder for that feature request. Although now when thinking about the re-supply thing, and how it was in real war: Fairmiles should be able to re-supply other ships. Not sure if a destroyer ever gets out of ammo (never survived that long, hehe) but maybe fairmiles, or troop transports, should be able to re-supply a destroyer.
  7. If it is broken, then we should deffo fix it. I was not here in the days when night REALLY was night, because today night is much brighter, and kind of more of an annoyance. My five Swedish öre on this is that we go further and bring back pitch black, for 36 minutes. Attacks could get that extra element of surprice. If attacking: do we have enough time for our tanks before darkness (where sappers will obliterate all shiny metal)? should we try load para planes at sunset to drop at darkness, with risk of dropping in front of AI-towers? (or sync with demo team that take out towers when needed)? So what I am probably saying is that yes: I agree that working in almost darkness is a bit tedious. But if that was pitch black I would accept that if it were for 36min. This game needs pauses, where all voice in chat what they think next step should be. HC could have a go at asking all what to attack next, etc... When I think about it more. I would even try 17min of pitch darkness, and 2hours of play. Would give more pressure to end battles after 2hours. Kids of today wont stay longer than 17minutes without any action
  8. Why not let Fairmiles have the ability to re-supply and reload infantry, tanks, atg, aa-guns etc... ? Especially on rivers there is always a road next to the river, which could make the fairmile a unit that interacts with other arms. And this could not be that difficult to implement, right?
  9. Even if plans are that RATs will buy more bandwidth, it is still possible to save bandwidth while giving your customers a faster download. Firstly: I think this game needs a download mirror in Europe Secondly: If RATs create a .torrent-link (or meta-link) on the download page, that will use your customers bandwidth Details on how torrent downloads work: Torrent files are small files (about 20kbytes) that take about 10sec to create for a file, or a folder. Nowadays you do not even need a tracker (server that keeps tracks of all uploads) instead DHT protocol is used (distributed tracker protocol that do not need a server to be run, in short: it just works) And if (the customer in this case) has a torrent client the download starts automatically when clicking the torrent/meta link on the web page. And what the torrent protocol does is that it will let ALL downloaders to upload to other downloaders while downloading. This will even work if your download isn't finished. So especially those days when a new patch comes out, the load on CRS network will be minimal, because all players will download from each other, and always using the fastest local links. For the lucky ones getting a link to my client you will get a taste of how it is to download from a 700mbit upload link, located in Europe Of course you could integrate a torrent client into the launcher. But that is probably overkill considering we are going Steam. And just a note on how steam does this: In steam almost all downloads use a similar peer-to-peer protocol like torrent. Lastly: All customers/players could create a torrent-link that works over DHT tracker network, but because the file downloaded is an installer, it is better if CRS publishes an official torrent-link. Otherwise we could end up with people publishing fake exe-files.
  10. Anyway the game "was coded" this should be looked into. When attending the Buckeyes ceremony last year the overflying planes were not visible (due to many soldiers standing on airfield). I completely understand the limitations, but some smarter algorithms need to give a plane making an overpass priority over soldiers not even aiming their weapons. In real battle there will always be soldiers lying in bushes, being in buildings. All those should not render to the plane, and vice versa. Freeing resources to make it possible to actually see more stuff. And not a fan of "fog of war" (or what it is called when you add fog to mask the limit in rendering distance, but the DD example should have some fog of war. Like render up to 10km, but between 6-10km you could make objects go different grades of transparent, to simulate a very far object. At least make the "blink effect" go away, when riding along the 6km limit. And programming this "extra mile" is not wasted. This "transparent programming class" could also be used for ground objects being in bushes or similar that are not "confirmed". Making it more realistic and at the same time freeing resources to render more of the combined arms around you. Of course, if a player aims continuously towards a bush, then yes, make it render fully, but not on ambient objects in side of view. But what I am suggesting is just having another "status" of an object, as to being able to free rendering resources. Maybe this game is so old it actually renders EVERYTHING in your 6km circle, but then the solution is even simpler: Just do not render objects behind walls, and if further away than xx... etc... Who knows: Maybe this "confirmation levels of objects" even could be used on network traffic, saving bandwidth. I mean, why send a location of a player that is not visible in a bush. Put it as low priority package with lower update frequency...
  11. Also would firstly like to add (as elmoking33 was about to say in first post, hehe) that by focusing on Audience you could adapt the description of the game to pitch what makes the game unique, and at the same time be VERY OPEN that this is "not CoD". For example: "Although our arena is one of the biggest single map simulations, with hundreds of deaths a minute (at peak hours). The sheer size though could mean that you won't always see action for long periods. It is like real war where a soldier could sit for a long time hearing the enemy prepare a big assault, but never fire a weapon. Just to be overwhelmed the next day, and die to a stray bullet during the first seconds of battle." And more to what saronin said: I would even go further and say that we probably need a "simple UI mode" for steamers, and maybe a ".command" that brings some more advanced stuff back. Your right, even if we extend the veteran player base to like 700-800 players, the sheer amount of 2-hour-players will be much much higher, which could make this game get "drowned by 2hour-player reviews". Doesn't matter if I (and many others) write good reviews. But again I think part of the solution could be by informing the "steamers" about the limitations. In short: CRS should be very honest in describing the game on Steam. I mean DEADLY honest. In that way no-one should be able to write reviews, which get high percentage on "Think this review was helpful". Because if the game never said it had "high end graphics", then no-one "should" rate a review as "helpful". Also rating reviews lower moves the review down pretty much, and hopefully the overall counters take that into account. ------------------------------------------- So lastly I like to talk about possible solutions that need to be put in-game before Steam launch: Maybe that "instant action button" everyone talks about, actually should be complemented with an information box, that is part of the GUI which contain tips (a bit like the "did you know"). Like: "Last mission you survived 32 seconds, let's try to use cover next time! Understood soldier? Supply is not unlimited" *with picture of angry officer* "Last mission you ran 3,2km. IF this was intended, then fine. But remember both big and small battles usually have some way of getting into action faster. Click here to get more info" "Last mission you accidentally fired upon x friendly soldiers. Check your fire soldier!" *with angry face* So with this information box in-game, you continue to "lower" expectations to players, which is VERY important. And hopefully we are going to see some "achievements" programmed into the game, which also gives a retention boost to "camped newbs". Like getting an award for dying 10 times in a row, without killing anyone.
  12. There is a button for this. As said: Game has been designed to be able to kill friendlies with one simple setting (or two). But probably (was not here then) it did never work. Although (being in the suggestions thread): Why not keep the current protection of friendlies, BUT punish the ones that register hits on friendlies with a demote in rank points? I never understood why each game always gain rank, and never demotes. If implementing rank point deduction no player gets affected, but the one blindly firing the door of a CP. The client registers the hits on the friendly players, it is just the server that ignores the hits (with a configuration setting).
  13. Only played this game with MSP:s, but still have my best memories sitting on a truck and talking to other players. Any incentive to "play the game right" is good. So why not points? *thumbs up for this idea* Although we need at some point talk about points (nother thread). Because it should not be possible to advance to fast, or without any kind of achievement system. To just play the game and gain rank without understanding why you gain rank, is something we need to avoid. No-one wants important gear to be taken by a guy that is throwing grenades into the same room as same team is in. We do not have friendly kills (and it must probably stay that way when Steam rolls in), but would like to see penalties in points for doing friendly damage that would kill.
  14. Yep technical thing, deffo. Although I agree this could be made more graceful, instead of using a fixed value. Like for starters make a limit based on how many players you have around you, and in SOME conditions render infantry further away IF possible. And also create a smooth animation if a player (6000m or 700m) is near the "limit", like introducing some kind of "fade away" tech, that do not use full resolution on movements on objects that are far away. Even a DD fight feels wrong when ships just flip into sight without even a hint of fog effect. Somehow I understand that a quick filter is very "cheap" to implement on clients. I mean WHY would you like to render an infantry that can not make any damage from that distance? Also if talking about "scouting", then what IS a reasonable distance NOT to render? I have been using scope in real life watching a bridge 4km away. Sure: I could see a man walking over the bridge. But what uniform is he/she wearing? Oh, wait, he does not have a friendly tag, so therefore I will fire my 12" cannon shells (not cheap) and give away my position by audio to other infantry units sitting in foxholes for at least 40km around me... Still like that these limits are put into the light. Personally I would like some kind of automated map reporting if making noise. An infantry firing a weapon around a frontline-town, should trigger EWS even if further away than 400m. A DD firing 40km away, should give rough EWS (like the air radar) that enemy naval activity has been spotted in area. There are many other consequences of removing these range limits (even if clients would cope with it) like the DD could become the ultimate artillery unit (due to rendered players would be killed by DD-shells at longer distances). And a consequence of that is in a way that you would need to allow friendly kills (or otherwise a couple of skilled DDs could prevent ANYTHING from spawning from like 5km away). And with friendly kills allowed... oh dear... then you would need some kind of demoting system, which automatically demotes players into recruits for killing to many friendlies.. etc...
  15. *lol* Most weapons I used in Swedish Navy were different kinds of 9mm, subsonic weapons. They were old looking, so just thought they must have sticked around since the 50ies or something. Never been shot at, but as Viggen says: In games like Arma you more hear "clicks", which probably is more realistic sound of a supersonic bullet. But also in Arma due to these "clicks" I can not hear from WHERE the shots are fired. So is directional awareness also lowered with supersonic weapons? Today when learning rookies to play BGE/wwiionline I teach them to understand the difference in sounds the enemy guns make. If the air gets filled with "clicks", we could ALL need to re-learn the game. Just imagine 2-3 machine-guns making suppress fire on a FMS. IF we want realism, "all hell will click loose". The only thing you will hear are "clicks" about 3 times a second. Still I am fine with it