Free Play Account
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Green Tag

About carlz

  • Rank
    Free Play Account
  • Birthday
  1. The reason squads started pulling out of the game is because CRS at the time started an overt effort to diminish squad effectiveness in favor of catering to the instant action FPS market which they thought would draw in more players. As a consequence they lost the role playing and social aspect of the game that kept many individuals drawn to the relationships they had formed. Many subscribers would log in every night and perform seemingly mundane duties simply to reinforce their "team". Members of a squad would maintain memberships even though they could not justify paying for the actual time spent doing game play, and family members who did not enjoy or could not master FPS combat bought subscriptions because it supported the squads overall success. The trap became that those instant action FPS's were never satisfied with how quickly they could attain personal success and without the role playing aspect of the game to reinforce the lowered graphics, weapon development, and software development of newer games quickly moved on. Older players who were drawn to the original concept of strategic game play were dismayed and disgruntled. I am excited at many of the recent developments that the new management has put in place. I think they "get it". WWIIOL has enormous potential even without the latest graphics and weapons array. But, if the goal is to develop leaders, then providing the correct tools and objectives is paramount. Mission Leaders need a purpose and making more small objectives in which to utilize tactics towards the overall strategy goals in the game will be a great start. To be good leaders they need the organizational tools to organize groups of mission members towards those objectives. an enhanced UI that offers mission leaders an opportunity to brief members, detail maps, rally points, set communications, assign duties and ordinance, offer contingency plans before spawning would not be difficult to build and would be a great start in developing both leaders and long term players.
  2. Building an airfield should be so much more than just spawning from a single truck. Factors like the terrain and flight path should be taken into consideration. It would also be great to get transport planes involved to add some additional roles for them. I would love to see equipment paradrops added to the game. There should also be a risk factor. Let these forward fields get overstocked with the risk of losing any equipment placed there.
  3. Some great ideas....YET, what is really needed is a better UI for Mission Prep that allows Mission Leaders to prepare his team for the combat situation. It does no good to know you have an LMG or ATG nearby if there is no coordination. This is a must have to develop leadership and squad formation that leads to active memberships. Currently, missions operate like herding cats. Ready Room - A place where the mission leader can assemble the team before spawning: - Brief the mission purpose. - Get mission members familiars with the terrain, possible cover, AI placements, other threats, etc.. - Review the experience levels of his team. - Assign objectives. - Assign Ordnance. -Assign communication channels. - Communicate contingencies and rally points once the mission has been accomplished or compromised. Another Huge map improvement would be to let mission members remove old map icons. Every time a tank rolls by it looks like a platoon of tanks on the map. Mission members could color code Enemy icons when they have been killed so that other mission members are still aware of a threat in that area, but aren't lured on wild goose chases.
  4. So...for the sake of historical accuracy you want to introduce native troops. Does that mean the allies would be aggressors or would you keep them behind the Maginot Line? For that matter, the Italians didn't formally join the frey until after Hitler had captured Paris in June of 1940. But, just for the sake of argument let say that the winning side was able to turn the captured countries forces into a usable asset- What would it do for gameplay to add a force multiplier to the winning team? I think this idea needs a lot more thought.
  5. Isn't the idea of belonging to a squad to inspire teamwork? And...if you can overstock from a rear town, isn't that the definition of teamwork. I came from a huge squad but I think incentivizing larger squads at the expense of smaller squads and lone wolves will be problematic. Add more supply to rear towns and let squads use their social skills and resources.
  6. Let's get polycrewing to fill all the vehicles positions before we even think about getting out.
  7. One of the keys to increasing team play is to add a "Ready Room" option to the UI where Mission commanders can brief the team, coordinate ordinance and mission responsibilities, and work with HQ to coordinate with other missions on an overall strategy. This doesn't take anything away from those that want fast action. Yes, right now most players are fast action freaks because that's the way the game has been promoted for the last 6-7 years. But if CRS wants long term consistent membership, then building comradery and squad relationships is the way to go.
  8. Hmmm...Just like RL.
  9. If it were up to me they could get rid of all the tracking software and rely on kill reports and scouts to find out where the enemies strength was.
  10. Been out of the game for a while but with all the new activity and development going on it seems this may be the time to bring up a lot of the old ideas that were passed by. I'm an old fart who grew up on WWII TV and movies and it really seems like the "Band of Brothers" game play that builds comradery and game loyalty is really missing due to the emphasis on twitch game play and huge battles. But it need not be. We could have both with some tweaks to a separate mission spawning interface. First and foremost would be adding a new in mission organizing tool to the UI. This would require a Ready Room where teams (squads or any affiliated players) could organize before spawning. Mission Leaders could have communications control, access to mark-able maps to allocate member duties, ability to request ordinance load outs so the team was adequately prepared for the mission at hand, ability to link mission objectives with other mission leaders so too coordinate air, sea, or armored units, and change missions in the field so that a well oiled team could experience the fog of war and make attrition meaningful. (Members killed would need to re-spawn a separate mission to link up to the existing mission). This would involve a one time mass spawning of mission members as dictated by the mission commander. Another aspect of this is that it adds another tactical tool to High Command who could be involved in the approval of these missions. I'm sure others might have so great ideas to add.
  11. If I remember correctly, maintenance issues were a lot more prevalent during day 1. I love the idea of adding additional role play to the game for greater immersion and team play.
  12. By the look of the pic, only half the soldier needs to be modeled.
  13. 20,000 man battles are a little overblown as a goal of the game. Bigger isn't always better. Big battles destroy much of the intimacy and impact players enjoyment. Now, if AI platoons could replicate the opposing sides manpower balance and be introduced on a limited basis to level the playing field during peak periods of imbalance it might be worth all the huge amount of development time it would take to work the bugs out. Bingo! This adds a whole new level of game play and has been needed for a long time.
  14. Great Post! This kind of play offers a very needed aspect to the game that would help bond players to squads and offer some context that the other million FPS games don't have. But all this is mute until players have a way to organize before spawning. We need a UI with a Ready Room that allows squad leaders to organize team members, assign load-outs, tasks, transportation, etc.. - because doing it in the field is like herding cats.
  15. I have been away for a while and there seem to be a lot of positive developments taking place. Seems as if the developers are trying to roll back systems to reintroduce less FPS and more team oriented game play. Kudos! One of the biggest loses for the game was when CRS became adversarial with squads to accomplish the brigade system in order to place higher dependence on HC. Now that supply will be changing back to towns, it seems as if player organized missions and squad play will be more important than ever. We could really use some tools that will allow for more organization. These include a "Ready Room" style User Interface where Mission Leaders can pre-plan and communicate tactical sequencing, team member roles, ordinance load-outs, transportation logistics, rally points, comms, and many other tactical and logistical aspects that make game play successful and fun before spawning and being immersed in battle. This also includes better Mapping and Visual Communication Tools both during mission briefings and in the field. Do we have anything planned for this?