david01

Free Play Account
  • Content count

    589
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

24 Green Tag

About david01

  • Rank
    Free Play Account
  • Birthday
  1. lol did you guys seriously make a stealth change to a core gameplay mechanic? This is why the game isn't doing well.
  2. The silly way degunning is handled in this game alone is enough to push both vehicles together. The tiger has some really large hitbox for its gun and its hitpoints are so low that the french 47mm ATG can degun it in one shot from the front. Then there's the overwhelming emphasis on close range combat that this game has. Also the S76 is matched up roughly with the Tiger 1 in both World of tanks (both tier VI vehicles) and the War Thunder. And those games actually have longer range combat, and don't have so many externalities, such as the tiger being one of the most bombable axis tanks and the shermans being the most difficult in game to bomb, or the tiger being frontally vulnerable to lower-tier ATGs out to several hundred meters with the S76 easily shrugging off frontal hits from the pak 38. So I don't see why you continue to sperg out about this when people think that an advanced medium tank from 1944 squares up with a heavy tank from 1942. Maybe if the map was turned back to wide open areas with 4km view distance and we had mapwide armor movements, but not now with everything so close together. A lot of the performance ingame doesn't correlate at all with what's on paper due to [censored] modeling or game decisions, for instance the 250kg bombs on the He111 are actually worse for bombing tanks than the 100kg bombs of the DB7 due to the higher blast while still requiring a direct hit. I still think that if the Ju88 is ever modeled it will be a larger, slower, overall worse version of the Me110 that's already ingame due to the way damage is applied to wings and the lack of any stress modeling.
  3. The thing is chaos that the game isn't running hot 24/7, it's 1-AO about 16 hours a day now with a brief 2-AO prime time. Then consider the weeklong ending phase where one side has given up, cut-offs when there's nothing to spawn and no fair fights for days, and intermissions and suddenly you're looking at very little proper game time. Especially if you can only play on the weekends or at specific times. And this is all assuming that HC is staffed and working properly when you do log on. So you pay a monthly sub, but you don't get anywhere near a month of good playtime. Also the starter account is a bad reference because it's a total ripoff. With a starter you pay every month and still can't use essential units of the game. This is a $15 game don't pretend you can play it for $8 option. Any talk about not being pay2win gets defeated by the players not being able to spawn effective counters to tanks. You got to look at the realworld value not the value on paper. I just got done playing a bit of Planetside 2. I put a lot of money in to that game over the past years (just like I did here) and all my stuff is still there minus some minor benefits. Constant 96 vs 96 fights and smaller all over the map, lots of action. Pauses in the fighting are only a few minutes if that, and even then it's because players are moving and organizing not because of some arbitrary game mechanics. I can play at odd hours and no one flips out about late-night captures. No one gives me [censored] for being a F2P player. The game community is active. Now look at WW2online, do you think that the allies are going to recover and there are going to be lots of good fights this weekend? Possible but most likely there will be a slow crawl westward that will take all of next week, with next weekend being an intermission. These things all devalue the sub IMO.
  4. I like how after all these years people still reflexively attack the player base in other time zones instead of the brigade system. As if suppressing the players worked. And at this point it's players that play during the 2-AO period upset at the 1-AO players. Big cutoffs like these are the "map variety" that CRS is trying to preserve by going to some BS hybrid system instead of canning it entirely and as soon as possible.
  5. Of course it was widened. The surrendering mechanic gives the side that makes the cut free towns regardless of activity or effort. Like right now there are 16 towns under cap despite there being one AO. It's the awful strategic layer that everyone loves. Retards years ago said that they hated soft capping and dealing with pockets, and now it's easier than ever to make big cuts and softcap to victory.
  6. I don't think that you guys thought this through. Steam games have tags, and tags are put there by users. You release a game as F2P you can't just retract everything without some confusion, especially if technically offer a F2P option on your main site still. It's a marketing disaster.
  7. Other FPS games that are one-time purchase or F2P, and have equal or greater numbers of players involved along with much better FPS mechanics. Other games like EVE online have solid guilds and are persistent 24/7. Which is why I've been repeating here that the game needs to increase the activity level improve the FPS gameplay, and get squads back rather than piddling around with flags. Hosting and bandwidth costs have plummeted since 2004 which is why other games are going full F2P instead of retreating from it like this one. If you are still wondering take your argument to the main Steam General Discussion forum and ask why this game isn't worth a $15 subscription. At any rate the only thing I can think of is a "pay this for a permanently lowered rank cap". It would be even better if a person could buy it for other accounts. But there's not much to work with considering that the points system is still broken and neglected.
  8. Lost opportunities? I don't think that there's anything that you can squeeze out of the current user base that would make up for effectively pulling the game from Steam. That's a huge amount of people to shut out. More active users in game, more things to shoot at and more activity is the only way to make the game valuable enough for a $15/month sub anymore. Gotta expand the user base to rebuild the subscriber base, which is why after the Steam launch I was pulling the fire alarm about what a bad time the F2P players were having. Everyone is still talking about pop balance being the problem instead of low activity too so there's not really agreement on gameplay fixes either. Your suggestion about squad accounts sounds nice but it requires new squad features, and is also related to the health of squads. So it won't be soon and it might not bring in all that much revenue, especially since squads already use communal accounts. Pre-paid builder accounts sort of defeat the purpose of a builder account which is to willingly pay more money. An elite package works in other games, but not here because CRS can't modify units on a per-case basis. Also many of the special features and abilities that you might think about selling to players or squads conflict with HC and the supply system. The only thing I can think of in terms of special features is to pay something and have the rank cap on all units reduced to three or something like that. It would actually synergize with the very poor decision to introduce the first planes in years at rank 7 with no welcome-back promotion. There are three personas per faction and frequently you have vets that don't have rank in the other faction, or do but not in the appropriate air or naval persona. In Planetside 2 the main benefit of buying something with "station cash" instead of certs is that it's available for all of the characters on your account. Not sure how much people would be willing to pay though, and again it would just be gleaning revenue from existing users.
  9. I'm pretty sure that was the intent. What was the point of rushing to release on Steam though if CRS was just going to bail a few months later? There's going to be a scant fraction of people trying the game now.
  10. It would encourage players to storm and hold depots as teams while making the solo cap-and-run virtually useless in most towns, it doesn't matter if the feature itself is arcadey. Far less arcadey than having parts of town captured out from under you silently. It would actually make both attacking and defending easier which is why I wonder that it hasn't been done.
  11. 1 minute capture timer or so, with a flashing icon and/or message alerting all town defenders when the cap starts. It's not rocket science you just have to know a little about FPS games. If people are really that scared of the map moving then crank up the bunker timer from 10 min to 20 min.
  12. Since you are all volunteers now and Xoom is asking for help with marketing let me give you some marketing advice: The cordial gripes here are almost irrelevant. You should be concerned about getting annihilated on Steam. Just look at your store page. The discussion forum there doesn't have any positive content at all; no videos of ops, AARs or anything. Get these debates about new vehicles out of this thread and over there so there's actually something besides stickies and angry Steam users. You have devs arguing with reviews and mods arguing with users. I know that you guys think that you are defending the game but Customer Service 101 says that the absolute worst thing a company rep can do is make a customer feel like their concerns are being disregarded. No one is winning any victories in debates they're just burning customers. It's also futile to try to build subs for a current project by showing off concept art of new project. The game hasn't established itself on Steam yet there's all these messages about holding on for something new. FMS battles aren't fun because the attacker is naked with no good units to spawn. If it were fun then you'd see everyone making a FMS themselves and not HC begging for someone to set them. A depot capture is just a tiny foothold and shouldn't be hard. The real battle for a town doesn't even begin until some depots get captured. By making depot captures hard you keep the server activity low. A defender isn't going to drain all their units assaulting a FMS because a FMS can't spawn medium ATGs or real AA let alone tanks. What drains a defender's units are badly-placed defensive FMS; that should be an indication of how bad FMS are. The defender also isn't some weak little baby they can spawn the most powerful units in the game to 50m in front of their bunker, and literally teleport more in if they run low. The defender is so advantaged that trying to set up a stand-up fight anymore is a waste of everyone's time. You guys have a mature product that brings in money every month. All you have to do is stop messing it up with bad decisions and learn some basic FPS stuff.
  13. The gameplay in WW2online doesn't support long range armor combat, so adding in these late war units won't affect much. The average engagement outside of town is <600m and a lot of vehicle kills are <100m as tanks camp or attempt to storm the AB entrances. To add to that the game engine itself doesn't support long range combat, I mean you guys are arguing over late-war vehicles that have effective ranges of 3km or greater when projectiles stop showing at 2km-ish and kills are almost impossible past that range. I think the longest kill I ever made was 2.4km and that was years ago before engine tweaks. Also simply adding more units in to the game isn't the right path to sub increases. Other games have a huge advantage in "content creation" and you're never going to catch up with them. For example War Thunder added an entire French ground tech tree in November of last year. Here it's been over a year and some variants of existing aircraft still aren't in game. The first ground units this game added in a decade, the SPAA units, haven't resulted in big sub or game activity increases. Much of the current spawnlist isn't used except as a last resort, and this gets worse as tiers advance when a side has literally 2-3 worthwhile units and the rest of the list is trash (p38ts and cruisers against S76s and Tigers). This is just sober analysis. The best thing for the roadmap would be for someone to acknowledge that the current gameplay is bad, and that the average experience ranges from "boring" to "miserable". There has got to be a plan to fix that. Right now either nothing is happening and map is boring, or someone messed up and one side is forced to fight rifles vs tanks for a week until intermission and a new campaign. Like the lead dev is still wondering if the FMS has problems months after the Steam release bombed and I posted video all all his potential customers getting camped merciclessly. Nothing about the FMS is in the roadmap. A tactical FPS is on the roadmap though when they can't get spawning or other basic FPS mechanics right.
  14. Unfortunately it takes a matter of minutes to make a new account and get back in the game. It's always been like this, but the effectiveness of spying/cheating is a function of how fast the game moves. It wasn't as effective when there were four AOs per side and multiple ops going each with multiple spawns. Although it sucked sometimes there was simply too much going on. Now that the game has 2-AO prime times and 1-2 FMS for a "P1" AO taking out a single FMS, or stopping a single depot cap could easily mean that the battle is over. If a few defenders show up before the AO starts then it will be nearly impossible to even set a FMS due to the retarded build time and loud trucks.
  15. Why is that interesting? Players aren't caught in the middle they've always hated the artificial strategic layer that CRS put in this game. The appeal was the large-scale FPS combat. It follows that as the FPS experience gets worse here and other niche games come out more players get peeled off. Just look at how excited players were not for new content but for the removal of the brigade system and HC duties. You're also underestimating how difficult a good FPS military simulation is to make, especially when the one here has seen many bad decisions. I mean you guys still refuse on principle to allow private missions (another thing not in the roadmap), so anyone that wants cohesive team-based FPS combat is unsupported in this game.