• Announcements

    • GVONPAUL

      WWIIOL NEEDS YOUR HELP   01/19/2017

      Fundraiser 2017 - WWII Online World War II Online has a VERY big year ahead, with an impressive Development Roadmap outlined, and the big release of our game onto the #1 online games distribution portal, "Steam".

      We have started a funding campaign and need YOUR help to achieve these important mission objectives!   Here is a quick overview of what your contribution(s) will be going towards: Project Management software to bolster production and organization. New hardware to prepare for launching on Steam and improving existing services long-term. Supporting our 2017 Development Roadmap objectives. Please support us by going to this link. Several perks for larger donations are shown below:     As always, your continued support is much appreciated. The greatest thing about this game is and always will be the community.   Note: If you want to donate $25 or more, make sure you click on a perk to obtain the items included in it. If you forget to select a perk, send an email to http://support.playnet.com to still get your items.

Quincannon

Registered Users
  • Content count

    3,140
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

61 Vet

About Quincannon

  • Rank
    WWII ONLINE BUILDER [GOLD]

Profile Information

  • Preferred Side
    Allied
  • Preferred Branch
    Navy
  • Preferred Unit
    River Boat
  1. I will add to this. There is a discrepency between the satchels used by Engineers and the ones used by Riflemen, From what I have seen the Engineer satchel still makes as much sound as always, but the Riflemen satchel is silent until it explodes. I'm not sure why this difference is there. I have not tried to compare the plaement for sappers in relation.
  2. And on that day the Mosizalk's heart grew three sizes..... Way to go Mo!
  3. Not to be rude, but he did post in the Allied forum. Why are you recruiting for Axis squads in this forum?
  4. Not me brother. I go where needed. This map changes so drastically and rapidly, I find it hard to think of being able to play in just one area. Add to that, I can't imagine being in one town and hearing a call for defense in another town across the map and refusing to go help, simply because it "wasn't my town", and I was busy making sure that the enemy didn't get a foothold in my area. Maybe we will geta large area someday...I would like to eventually have a Squad. But if someone tried to assign me to a particular area of the map I'd tell em they can go learn to whistle "Dixie" before I do something like that. As far as town resupply. If you want to spend your time driving tanks behind the lines. have fun. Not me, brother.
  5. I agree that there should be rewards for support roles. For example, the current stats for Engineers is determined by [Kills +(Caps x5)] This makes no real sense. The job of an Engineer is to destroy FBs, Build and repair bridges, Repair AI, and Build support PPOs, such as ATG pits. Combat roles are sapping buildings and destroying Fortified Mobile Spawns. Utilizing Engineers to cap CPs or to try to use them as Riflemen is very risky for a unit in such little supply already. But their stats do not reflect ANY of their primary jobs. When they sap a bridge, they only get points for the first of 4 satchels. They get NO points for repair, rebuild, or PPO construction. Driving a truck offers a similar lack of experience or reward. The player is driving an easy to locate undefended unit, but gets almost no experience. Stats are based on sorties and RTBs, but with the new changes to placing FMSs, Trucks that place them are in more danger and RTBs are much harder to get. As far as rocketing new players up the ranks? Well, unlike other games, there are very few 'unlocks' in this game. You can use pretty much everything by rank 7. Some players lose interest in a game once they feel that they have unlocked everything a game has to offer; so by speeding up their level increase, you may be shortening the amount of time that they will play the game.
  6. You can NOT force people during the lowpop TZs to quit their normal squads and form a new Squad. One major problem is that there are almost no dedicated TZ3 players. Most play during other TZs, but either start early or play late to try to help, But they still belong to the Squads that play in non-lowpop time zones. It's NOT a matter of recruitment. Are YOU going to tell people that they have to quit the very Squads that you are espousing? I can say for a fact that TZ3 Allies are not capable of forming even a medium sized squad for that TZ, because almost all of those players belong to Squads already. In addition, a couple of the few small squads switch between sides for different campaigns, and when they go Axis, it gets even worse. The fact is that there aren't any players TO recruit for an Allied TZ3 Squad of any size. In addition, the players in that TZ work with their own squadmated first, so there are several groups of 2 and maybe 3 active players at any time. No matter what you do, unless those players quit their squads to combine and form a new one, you will never be able to have the cohesion and coordination required to even TRY to beat groups like 250 and 91st. At best we can try to hold them off, but it never works very well or for very long. Most players like to attack, and in lowpop you are almost always forced to defend. Once that happens half of the players who would play log off, making the imbalance even bigger. I'm actually firmly convinced that there IS no solution to this. Town supply isn't going to really change things. All it will mean is that no supply will be lost and no brigades will get cut off as the OP side rolls over the lowpop side. Despite the numbers online at any one time, the majority of players will always choose to play Axis unless they are bored or tired of not being challenged. The ONLY fix is to change the attitudes of players...and that is NOT going to happen. And new players are not the answer unless somehow a DROVE of Allied dediicated players who just happen to be available in the middle of TZ3 join the game, while at the same time, no one new joins the Axis for a period of several months or longer. Why? Because people try to get their friends to play. Ther are more Axis players who have more friends than the Allied players. Mathematically speaking, it is statistically impossible (for all practical purposes that the Allied players would ever be able to recruit enough new players to equal the Axis players, simply because there is such a significant player population difference. The only mechanics that I have ever seen that could potentially offset this issue would be having a ton of small pop instances for battles instead of large ones (16vs16 or 32 vs 32) which would essentially render Squads and sides pretty much unimportant, because if there were only 10 allied players and 30 Axis, tthen 14 of the Axis players would have no opponents unless they switched sides and fought each other... OR... Add AI bots to even out population imbalances, something that, even if it were accepted by the player base, would be nearly impossible to institute on a mapwide basis across the entirety of the map we use. Neither of these options would retain the uniqueness of this game, and the power gamers in the game would revolt if they had to fight AI opponents. Again... I don't believe that there is a really practical solution, short of bribing players to plat a side they don't like, which would likely cause them to seek other forms of entertainment elsewhere. We can debate it endlessly. We can suggest forced temporary solutions but as long as people find unbalanced gameplay acceptable, they are very unlikely to consider changing their play preference.
  7. If the Squad Mobile Spawn was limited to being inside a town, how is it worse for tankers than spawn CPs, really? BOTH create magic infantry spawns behind the lines. From what i heard most tankers hated FRUs out in the fields behind them when they roll into a town. This is hardly the same concept. I do agree with you that Paras could use some kind of MSP.
  8. Color me confused. I DO refer to FMSs when I talk about them; the same with UMSs and FRUs. The Idea I'm talking about is NOT a Fortified Mobile Spawn....it would essentially be what we have always called a FRU. I suppose you could call it a Squad Mobile Spawn (SMS). Did I mistakenly call a FMS a FRU somewhere?
  9. The difference between the ideas is the removal of spawn CPs. CRS doesn't want anything to take away from the truck UMS placements. The issue there is that it's hard enough to place an FMS outside a town, let alone drive a truck into town to place a UMS. It's much easier and more probable that players will just skip either idea and try to do what they have always done: cap the spawn depot and then everyone and their uncle spawns into the town from the CP, at which point the defenders go from having a decent zoc from FMS attacks to having a ton of the enemy inside their lines. This idea takes away the ability for the majority of players to sit on defense in one town waiting for that "We have the spawnable in town X" message, at which point they swap towns. Take away the Spawn CPs and Most players have to actually use and protect those FMS Spawns. Then, since Squads like the idea of special missions, the HC can ask Squads (or they can do it on their own initiative) to try to set up and help take the town from inside. The Squad has to get inside the enemy town and place their FRU, Then the Squad (and ONLY the Squad) can spawn from that FRU. This has some great aspects: Defenders can move from Spawn to spawn to check. They aren't locked down protecting one single CP. Defenders can more easily maintain a ZOC. Attackers must use and fortify mobile spawns. More emphasis on the importance of FMSs. UMSs are still viable in large towns. Attackers will need to work on their own ZOCs but will not have to focus on any one particular CPs to capture. Defenders will not know which CPs to focus on or camp. Defenders who lose an AB but still want to hold the town will need to run their own FMSs and UMSs for supply, instead of being able to spawn from a linking CP Squads will finally have a unique Squad specific mission. They will be able to get behind the lines and set up their own attacks. They will not have to worry about anyone else spawning in on their missions. Squads will matter more because they will be the only ones who can set up FRUs inside an enemy town and spawn there. People will not have to worry about entire armies sprouting from FRUs hidden in the surrounding countryside. Since they will be limited to Town placement and to Squads, they will be easier to find, and will not normally spawn overwhelming numbers. Squad FRUs will only spawn infantry, so no longer will an attacker suddenly spawn ATGs inside an enemy town from a spawn depot, to help camp the defending AB and destroy defending armor before they can spawn. I really think this could work.
  10. Spawnable CPs have always been a nightmare for defenders. Just by getting around defenders and capping one or two spawnable CPs, suddenly, the defenders are facing an army inside their own town. This makes gameplay fun for the attacker, but not so much for the defending side. Urban Mobile Spawns should be a logical replacement, but unless they are being deployed in a large city, it is almost impossible to get a truck placed MSP inside a defended enemy town. Squads have been asking for more control over what they do, and for Squad only missions. I have an idea that might help with all these issues First, get rid of spawn CPs. Second, create a special type of SQUAD mission that allows the mission leader to set up Squad FRUs with infantry, BUT ONLY IN THE SAME PLACES A UMS CAN BE PLACED NOW. That means inside a town or city. This would NOT be a fortified FMS, and only squad members could use it. If we considered this. it would get rid of overwhelming spawning, and spawning of enemy ATG or vehicles from a spawn building inside an enemy owned town. BUT it would allow a Squad to move inside a town and place a UMS without the need for a truck and the accompanying audio. It would allow the ML to be tricky, placing it in hard to find spots, and defenders would not just be able to camp one spawnable. The fact that it would be a SQUAD ONLY spawnable would mean that not every enemy player could spawn from it. It would need to be guarded, however, as it could be destroyed just like any non-fortified FRU/UMS.
  11. I just tried and can't reach the homepage either. www.Battlegroundeurope.com still seems to be up, bnut most of the links from there including pricing link to the main homepage and aren't working.
  12. I like both suggestions (Sparre's and JPhartt's) with the possible exception of the renewing 40 ft AOE... Although I think 8 hrs might ba a bit much and would simply suggest a flat 6 hr lifespan. (No special coding and a cdecent time frame) I am especially in favor of this because I find it frustrating to spend an hour or more setting up defenses in a DO, see it dropped, THEN have the town become a DO again a couple of hours later and have to rebuild the same PPOs all over again. The PPOs are a fantastic addition, but I believe that they need to last longer, or people won't feel that it isn't worth it to build anything extensive.
  13. If it were possible, I could see the Branch only subs IF the Navy were fleshed out enough to merit it. I love Navy, but I don't see players shelling out an equal subscription price for the 4 naval units and smaller land forces it provides. Then again if Navy access was offered with either Air or Ground forces, it might work. But I'd see it as more of a $9.99 pricepoint for full access to either one of those options. And all would depend on the ability of CRS to set it up. Consider that, currently, if an account goes from Free to Premium and the player decides to drop back to Free, their account cannot be changed back to Free and they need to create a new F2P account. I would assume that they would need to upgrade their subscription capabilities before things like this are seriously considered.
  14. Funny, based on past situations, I have been under the impression that people CAN shoot the ceiling from the first floor and kill someone laying on the 2nd floor. I have often heard someone shooting below and I died at that same time. I figured bullets could penetrate the floors.
  15. it makes sense.