Registered Users
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

38 FNG

About gavalink

  • Rank
  • Birthday

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Preferred Side
  • Preferred Branch
  • Preferred Unit

Recent Profile Visitors

754 profile views
  1. 1. All players on the same target see all FMS marks and marked enemy for that target regardless of switching missions or newly created missions. 2. More accurate sound proximity- someone shooting a rifle 700 meters away is often just as loud as a rifle being fired right beside you (and same for vehicles). 3. A more accurate map depicting what is really there: more and better topography.
  2. Also, black smoke from mortars and small arms fire.
  3. I'm self-employed and always looking for opportunities to hawk my wares (sell merch for you youngsters). How about a section in the forums for members to post their business websites?
  4. Although spawning into the active battle page was done for players to find action quickly, it often leads to confusion-such as when there are no active missions. Would it be better to spawn into the brigade page where its easier to see where AO/DO are and what needs missions?
  5. Nugitxx I favor an unrestricted open front like the old days but the original intention of the game was to operate with a player based squad system. Although you can play as a lone wolf, it's not what the game is intended or geared for. I support having the choice to lone wolf it, but I don't think provisions should be made to accommodate it. The game itself already discourages lone wolving. A move towards a more open front would naturally do so even more, and rightfully so.
  6. 02 or maybe early 03 (old account), whenever it was reviewed in MacWorld. Panzer Lehr
  7. Hindsight checking in- This game is ethnocentric. Players from the occident easily relate to the game. Most current players are from the west and often had fathers and grandfathers who fought in the Armies represented in the game: Western Europe and America. Those from the orient have less relatability as their culture isn't represented, therefore a less historical connection. The only major country involved in WWII that bridges the gap between the occident and orient is the U.S.S.R. Would a game based on the eastern front attract more players from the orient? And what about Russian participation? Do they look resentfully at WWIIonline as another attempt to make WWII all about the west? Would players from Russia, China ('Gina for Trumpsters) and Japan- all very large markets- come to the game if it was the eastern front? If so, how many more?
  8. Intermission would be a good place to test out ideas. It would keep me and probably many others from complaining about pointless intermissions.
  9. Again, why not have an open front with AO? Players/squads have their choice.
  10. I'm I correct in perceiving that, in general, Allies is pro AO and Axis is pro open front? I never really saw it as a side issue until this topic got rolling. I'm Axis and prefer an open front, but not because I'm Axis.
  11. You had me up until "But...", then you lost me.
  12. I like the idea of an ews triggered AO.
  13. I think the best way without losing other players is a compromise. A few good compromises have already been proposed throughout this topic.
  14. Two versions of what happened: 1. The player base was shrinking so AO was implemented. 2. AO was implemented which caused a massive loss of players. I subscribe to the latter based on my own experiences and observations from that time; When we had an open front, we had a large player base. When AO was implemented, players left in mass.
  15. Both types can survive on the same server. Why would this be more work for managers/moderators? I'm more for a compromise than segregation.