pfmosquito

Registered Users
  • Content count

    764
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

pfmosquito last won the day on November 20 2019

pfmosquito had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

118 Salty

About pfmosquito

  • Rank
    Training Corps- CO
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Preferred Side
    Allied
  • Preferred Branch
    Navy
  • Preferred Unit
    River Boat
  1. Hey RWS, thanks for the comment. I am having the exact same thing happen with my squad recruit flag enabled. And in general with green tags, it is the general case that only 1 out of 10 seem to show any indication whatsoever that they can hear you at all. I have raised this issue with my higher ups but at present at least we don't have any other solution than to just keep trying--and that we very much appreciate it if you would NOT GIVE UP. Keep doing it. Some possibilities here are that they don't speak English and can't understand what is being said. As soon as I have a solution or at least some better ideas, I will let everyone know. But please don't give up.
  2. Hi Axe, being a trainer does not mean becoming part of HC. Its an entirely different thing. It is cool that you help people out when you can. I hope you keep doing that. Becoming a part of the training corp isn't just about the tools you get, but the ability to talk to other trainers in game and see if they are online. It would not be possible for me to PM people to see if they are on, especially if they are playing on the other side. (Eg, I'm playing allied, and you are Axis). But using the trainer command, I can see immediately who is on and can even talk to trainers logged in on the opposite side. This is a helpful thing in case we have a new guy who comes Allied but then wants to go Axis. An Allied trainer can let an Axis trainer know who the new guy is and 'hand him off.' Whatever you decide, thanks for helping new players when you can!
  3. <S> CRS has committed to rebuilding its training program and put me on point. The first thing we have to do is GET MORE TRAINERS. I trust everyone understands that it is in our own best interests to help those green tags become regular (preferably paying) gamers! Being a trainer will not radically alter your game play. We would be asking you simply to be more alert to the green tags around you and more deliberate in reaching out to them. There are far too many green tags for any one or three or five of us to lend assistance to, but if we had a good 20 of us or so, some on Allied and some on Axis, none of us will get overwhelmed. You will also be given some extra tools for assisting with the new guys and coordinating with fellow trainers. I eagerly look for your email to mosquito@warpath.us declaring your interest in joining the training corp. PFM <S> (Alternatively, you can direct all green tags to @bludngut)
  4. I'll still take them. On the day they figure out how to make real front lines, they'll have some things perfect for the job. I do think there could be some utility for these for making fortified positions and some good old fashioned ZOCs. These have value, too. It is really hard to create a ZOC right now, and suffers of course from the same 360 degree problem. But having some way to create defensible cover I think would be a big help.
  5. Now THAT I agree with.
  6. "Facts only please." Move on. It is over. Someone on the internet doesn't agree with you. You'll live. Tater, as usual, hits the right note. " This thread is about something far easier to do that can impact the entire map. "
  7. ""*** But no to this: "Fix the SP first, (spawn point), so it isn't a 3 story look out tower." I just wanted to go on the record being opposed to this"" "How come?" I said I wasn't going to belabor it, but you've said it frequently enough that I wanted it known that there was disagreement. It isn't worth arguing about beyond that. It isn't a hill worth dying on. I don't know why you want to die on it. To the extent that I have a counter argument, it was the part you didn't quote where I wrote: "I think the better solution to any issues raised by the depots--and a great many of the other things people complain about, frankly--is just to create more options for player expression. More buildings, more PPOs, more units, more, more more more, lets players solve their own problems. Hard coding in decisions always comes at a cost." Attempting to 'fix' the game by altering player behavior by hard coding solutions is not a solution, just like fixing speech we don't like is not by restricting free speech, but by engaging in more speech. All my solutions that I've proposed on these forums are based on the same basic principle of giving players MORE freedoms and options that are grounded as close to reality as possible. Ad hoc solutions smell gamey and always come at a price. Since it IS a game, there is no way to avoid a certain degree of ad hoc gaminess, but we should strive to make this the exception in how we resolve issues, not the rule. I offer this reply only as a courtesy. It is all I'm going to say about it.
  8. Yes to these PPO ideas! And yes to ladders. Anything which allows players creative expression within the parameters of what was available during WW2 seems good to me, as much of the appeal of the game already has to do with the fact that despite needing a regular 'twitch' fix, broader tactical and strategic elements are possible. Encountering the creativity of other players, even when it is lethal to me, is what keeps the game from becoming repetitively boring. I remember the days of climbing trees and buildings. I still look longingly upon certain locations which I would like to ascend to exploit their strengths, and am prevented. But no to this: "Fix the SP first, (spawn point), so it isn't a 3 story look out tower." I just wanted to go on the record being opposed to this, not to belabor it. I think the better solution to any issues raised by the depots--and a great many of the other things people complain about, frankly--is just to create more options for player expression. More buildings, more PPOs, more units, more, more more more, lets players solve their own problems. Hard coding in decisions always comes at a cost.
  9. Bump. Picked up 2 new trainers thanks to folks following up on this post. I sure would like about 18 more!
  10. Ladies and gentlemen, you may have observed news this summer that I have been appointed leader of the training corps. You may have further observed numerous remarks diffused through the forums and your own experiences, to the effect that we need to better retain new players. Many proposals are out there that one way or the other boil down to helping to train them. Indeed. CRS is very aware of this, which is why they have sought to revitalize their training programs. Giving me point on the issue illustrates their commitment to addressing this need. Well, my friends, I need you to step in and step up to help me. While there are many things under discussion and even in various stages of implementation, right now I am asking you to join the training corps. Preferably, I'd like 10 allied and 10 axis to join my team and become trainers. Trainers get an additional set of commands to help bring new players up to speed. This is their primary duty: reach out to green tags and try to get them hooked on the game ASAP by removing obstacles preventing them from having enjoyable game play. Here is what you need to understand: by helping others, you are really meeting your own selfish needs. The more people playing, the more fun you have. While being a trainer is thankless work in some respects (even establishing comms with a green tag can be a chore), everyone understands that these new players represent the future of the game. I'd invite you to be one who does not merely understand this fact, but one who owns it, and joins the training corp with me. Interested? Email is best for me at mosquito@warpath.us however you can send me a private message on this forum or chat with me in game. -------- Quick notes. Strictly speaking, you don't HAVE to be an 'official' trainer in order to help a green tag. Right? If you see one, reach out to him. Explain what CPs are, how to find action, and how to communicate, including how to PM. Don't bad mouth them. Also bear in mind that whatever it is you were doing in the game when you encountered an aimless green tag is temporary--forgotten in a day, probably, and after a month just a faint memory. But SUBSCRIBING new players are potentially forever...
  11. "*** The success of any video comes down to dopamine. Simply put.... the game needs to be addictive. Agree, needs to be more consistent battles." Daisy chained front lines.
  12. Thank you, @sorella, for following up in a way to salvage my dignity after my brief descent into abject silliness. You had some ideas I hadn't considered, which makes me glad I wrote what I wrote. The idea is to create an ownership mentality. Owners behave differently than users. Example: when I was kid, I was made to do yard work and various chores. This was work I detested, and I did a [censored] poor job of whatever it was I did. But now I am an owner. The yard work is a joy. I wish I was doing yard work right now instead of writing this post! My kids, on the other hand, detest the work I give them to do, and do a [censored] poor (but improving year by year) job of whatever it is they do. Ownership brings to the table an entirely different outlook. Investors also have different mindsets. An investor says, "If I put $5 into this game, I might get $20 out of it up front, and $1 a month til I die. Aw, heck. Let's give that a shot!" And to get that sweet deal, you need to get 4 peeps to sub for $5/mo for 6 months; you get their sub money on their sixth month, and henceforth you get .25 cents from each sub for however long they are subbed. An investor then realizes, "Hey, I've been incentivized to follow up with my recruits and help them along in the game." Providing you have a working system here, now you have an investor say to himself, "Self, I've sent $1,000 to CRS in donations in the last 24 months. Glad to have done it. But I bet with $1,000 to spend on advertising, etc, of my own design, I might get me 100 new subscribers because of my access to [insert here], etc. I potentially could get my money back and then some. Heck, I bet I could score 250 new subscribers with an outlay of $2,000 and get three times my money back in a year..." Now, merging these mentalities, what you have here is a situation where that owner mentality is combined with the belief that one might get a return on their investment beyond enjoyment. But remember this: investors put their own money at risk. So, all you have to do is build the affiliate system, and let them do the rest. People might be willing to pony over more dollars for the cause if they feel they can direct it how they please, and have a belief they might get their money back over time.
  13. " Well I have some skin in the game, I have been paying for a long time (off and on since 2001) and want the game to be successful and grow." Throwing a very random thought out there, but maybe there is a way that the players could be invited to be investors. Not donors, but investors. And an absolutely insane, crazy stupid idea, maybe a cash incentive for recruiting. How about finding a way to make into a MLM! That's the dumbest thing I've ever said, but I offer it seriously, in the spirit of generating some ideas. But not so dumb... I played from 2001 to 2005 and then took a few year break. When I came back, after awhile I did a post just like this. I strongly recommended free to play. I still do. I know its hard on the pocket book (at present), as experience has probably shown CRS, but the bottom line is that this game NEEDS PLAYERS. That, I think, is a baseline requirement for future success. In other words, if it were possible to lose money for a time but build up to a steady 500-750 people playing all the time, I think it would have to be the choice that was made. Look, the game can appeal to us die hards and survive a while longer thanks to us, but eventually we're gonna die, even if just from old age. We need the boots. Now, retaining them is a problem, and finding a way to generate revenue from them is an additional problem. But my point is that they're not going to stick around or fork over some dough for 30 folks online at a given time. I stand by my daisy chained front line idea as the number one way to bring the thrill into the game (on a consistent, reliable basis) for the twitch players--without whom, we won't have a game. (And we all have a little 'twitch' in us.) That said, I will do some more thinking and brainstorming in my mind to see if I can come up with something. Hopefully it'll be better than World War Two Online, the Advocare Edition.