chaoswzkd

Registered Users
  • Content count

    187
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

48 FNG

About chaoswzkd

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Preferred Side
    Axis
  • Preferred Branch
    Army
  • Preferred Unit
    Anti Air Gun
  1. I don't think they can go below ground and be usable (so no underground rooms). This is like a foundation that can be sunk into the ground; it's for visual effect only. If you've ever played an RTS that has irregular terrain and building, you've almost certainly seen building models with this extended foundation that clips into the ground so it doesn't look awful.
  2. It is though..? Reto made it exceedingly difficult to unlock anything through gameplay, and those things include damage reduction, increased health, decreased spawn timers, more damage, faster rearm timers, flat-out better equipment, basically everything to do with the Generals mode, etc. If they haven't changed anything in a couple years, there's nothing strictly premium, but someone who drops $100 on the game with 0 hours will have far better equipment and soldier buffs than someone who spent $0 with 100 hours.
  3. Not sure if the engine can accurately render flames in any way that looks good. The 2d flame exhaust from tank barrels fly only because they're briefly visible.
  4. There are too many issues with side-locking. What if people stop playing actively, what if there are major imbalances, forcing people to go against squad policy and getting kicked, etc. Too many reasons why it'd be a direct threat to game health.
  5. Listen. Shhhhhhh. Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
  6. Moving to offer the same thing as barely-successful (or very unsuccessful, [censored] you Ace of Spades) would be a death sentence to the game. Just because 2.0 has a plan doesn't mean it won't continue to need funding from 1.0 to proceed.
  7. Pretty sure he drove a truck off the land onto the water and the truck bounced off the water. I don't fully know what it would take to modify the engine to have more realistic water and therefore more realistic bouyancy, etc.
  8. I'm pretty sure (but not 100%) that the current water in this game is a solid surface and nothing below it exists except for a void.
  9. I really don't want to see this thread locked, guys, so please distance thyselves from any possible ToS violations (personal attacks, etc.). This thread discusses an extremely critical issue with the game at the moment, it is active, the discussion has a lot of different viewpoint, and there are a lot of ideas (some good, some bad) getting thrown around. Let's not ruin that by taking things super personally or trying to undermine arguments by attacking anybody. Focus on facts, stats, math, persuasive arguments, appeals to reason, etc. Please. We really need an active LW for the game, so let's focus on keeping that goal in mind.
  10. The F2P model I joined the game in back around 2011 was that F2P had access to Rank 2 equipment (all), but could not cap, could not set FRU, could not make missions, etc. Like the OP, I was a college student who could not afford the subscription but did end up loving the game. This was a pretty fair F2P model in my opinion, as I only really got access to stuff subscribers basically never used, or did use but there was so much of I could never realistically put a dent in it. F2P at the time gave a much more well-rounded feel of combined arms to the game. It wasn't just top-equipment vs. top-equipment, and the full spectrum of available supply was used. Then CRS at the time (old-CRS now iirc) changed it to only rifles, but gave them capping. This upset me so much because the things I really enjoyed were running out low-tier armor as scouts/infantry support/armor support, or running trucks for ammo/tow, spawning 20mm FlaK to shoot at planes, etc. Despite loving the game and the squad, it robbed me of what fun I had playing the game and pissed me off enough that I quit. It wasn't until in the past couple years that I took a second look to see what was up with the game and decided to drop some money on a subscription now that I had any amount of money to my name. That was around 2016 I think, and I've been around since. A good F2P system will hook players, get them interested in the game, and compel them to support it. A bad F2P system won't. I personally feel that the current F2P system is a bad one, but I appear to have the minority opinion.
  11. The engine WWIIOL operates on is proprietary, owned by CRS/Playnet (not sure on the exact split there). The name of the engine is Unity. It could have any name, such as Fiddlesticks, but they chose Unity when they made it. There are 3rd party programs and libraries that are used by the Unity engine to render things, create assets, etc., but the engine itself is in-house. Unity3D is a completely separate engine, totally removed from anything involving CRS/Playnet/WWIIOL. Making an engine that renders things as good as UE4 requires writing said engine. It's doable for sure, but it's also hard as hell. It's the difference between building a car using freshly-machined parts and buying a car and then painting it or adding accessories yourself. Upgrading an engine that was never meant to do the stuff you want it to do going forward can sometimes be more pain and misery than just building something new from the ground up.
  12. All PPOs do not degrade over time if there are players nearby. Nearby player presence refreshes the despawn timer to 0. At least, that's my understanding. I couldn't see riflemen being able to do it, but I could see engineers getting an ammo cache ppo.
  13. In any case, a Forward Base is an abstraction of front control between two towns on a front. I'm not sure we want to implement anything that ignores that unless it involves commandos, paras, partisans, etc., of which we only currently have paras.
  14. You may have misread some of my points if you think that's the take-away. I suggested making it easier for an attacker to place charges, easier for an attacker to keep up a consistent attack, and easier for an attacker to blow non-AO FBs. I also suggested that, in order to remove the inconsistency we have with EWS/AWS and FBs, a message should be displayed when they are damaged. This would allow one person with a nearby FMS to blow any non-AO FB given enough time, because they would reset the repair timer every time they hit it, and most defenders aren't going to sit at a place with no action for so long. It would allow a team of 3-4 engineers to blow a non-AO FB maybe instantly. And it would still keep AO FBs things that need to be fought over, but a long, protracted AO would pose a significant threat because persistent engineers could eventually whittle it down by continually resetting the repair timer.
  15. WWIIOL is not built on Unity3D, so I don't understand what you're saying @Zebbeee. IIRC, using a 3rd party engine means signing a licensing agreement with the party in question, giving them some portion of funds. That'd be true for Unity3D, Unreal, CryTek, etc. I always thought that WWIIOL had a proprietary engine with 3rd party libraries to handle certain things, but I could be wrong.