Registered Users
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Green Tag

About kgwiking

  • Rank
  • Birthday
  1. Sorry Aismov but no . For the simplest and most universal reason why people don't play a game - it is not fun . I have been monitoring the player numbers since the day when CRS allowed to sample TOMs and I remember when the number per side dropped for the first time below 200 per side at peak - I think it was around 2006 . Back then I analysed a few Campaigns and posted that the WWIIOL concept would become unplayable if/when the number of players per side dropped below approximately 100 at peak . The reason was quite simple - approximately below 100 per side at peak is the moment where not more than 1 AO and 1 DO can be sustained over 24 hours (with TZ3 being already too low) while still having reasonable numbers in all 3 branches (air, infantery , Panzers) e.g approximately 60 players attacking and 40 players defending at peak . And there is a huge qualitative difference between a 1 AO/DO game and an N (N>1) AO/DO game . A 1 AO/DO game is just a 1st person shooter with no tactical and strategical component . But it was obvious since Day 1 in 2001 that the WWIIOL concept was anything but a 1st person shooter simply because the map was very large (so the player density was very low) and the boring downtime (driving , towing , FRU setting , FB and AB defending) was quite large too so that it only made sense when there were enough people to "sacrify" a few dozens of them for these boring tasks . Now what I experienced in 159 was that we were already far below this fateful 100 per side limit (I'd say there were 40-50 per side at peak) and I saw that my estimate from 10 years ago was indeed approximately right . Every gaming session was basically a 1st person shooter with a handful of solo infantery capping and recapping CPs for a few hours at town X followed by the same thing at town Y and then back to X or to Z . Even the infamous AQ was reduced to 1 - 2 lawn mowing Spits desperately looking for something to shoot at For the sake of the good old times I would have wished that it was not so but it was . Unfortunately I have not the magical solution to multiply the player numbers by at least 3 so that this game is no more for me .
  2. Well just for the record , I found Nothing wrong with the spawn lists . As most P1 AOs used 2 or 3 FBs, the OKW plans and the map OICs always had the intelligence to have at least 1 Pz brigade in attack . Consequence was that there was ALWAYS an almost full Panzer spawn list . If no Panzers were joining the fight, it was not because the spawn lists were empty but because there were no ETs to be fought and because a lonely Panzer generally didn't survive the drive to town (AQ, sappers, bazookas, ATGs) . The Panzers in an Inf brigade were also enough to provide an efficient anti tank force - 3 Stugs G covered by 2 or 3 232 are more than enough to suppress any ennemy attempt to use armor especially as the Allied were rarely using tanks for other purpose than ambush . Basically there were always Stugs and 232 available even in Inf brigades . In RL it would make sense to have Stugs in Inf brigades because they would give the necessary ATG support but in WWIIOL their lack of MG and the lack of ET concentrations makes them totally useless in town fights . Of course all Tigers were dead within minutes but that is Something that always happened since Day 1 of their introduction . I never understood the presence of Tigers in WWIIOL - a Tiger is an armor superiority tool but absolutely not an infantery support tool . The nature of the fights in WWIIOL being now exclusively small infantery skirmishes Inside and in immediate vicinity of towns makes Tigers useless because they have nowhere a Panzergelände with view over 1 k where they would shine against any ET concentrations . The Allied have a tank spawn list much better adapted to WWIIOL because Mats , Churchs , Chars and Shermans are excellent close infantery support Tools despite the fact that they are (with the exception of the T0 Mat) at best average ATG Tools .
  3. For yet unknown reasons I logged into WWIIOL for the first time after 5 years and thought that it might be interesting for the new OKW to have the impression of a veteran returning after many years of absence - 2001-2009 I played at least 5 times every week , 2010 - 2012 playing 2 or 3 times per month and not playing at all after 2013 . In this 159 Campaign I played every day during the last 20 days . First the positive . I was pleasantly surprised by the quality and quantity of the OKW . Quality has nothing to envy to the great years 2001-2006 but even quantitatively there has always been an active map OIC and actually often OKW officers took the attack command on the front . Hats off for you , I would have thought that OKW was already ghost town . Unfortunately the positive stops already here and everything else was negative First and vastly most important is that there are no battles anymore . We (Euro time anywhere between 14:00 - 00:00) mostly had 1 AO and 1 DO . Very rarely 2 AO and 1 DO . I have not seen a single time more . Now for the P1 AOs I have counted the people in the missions . Most I have seen was around 30 and as the balance was even or slight overpop , that means that the Allied were also 30 or slightly less . This was a maximum because on an average AO it was around 15-20 rather than 30 . This had for consequence that over the 20 days , I have seen and killed some 3 ennemy tanks , a few ATGs and 2 dozens or so EI , mostly sappers and bazookas going after our heavies . Most of the time one is staring at bushes or buildings and seeing no ennemy . WWIIOL is no more combined arms combat . Panzer columns with 30-40 Panzers obliterating everything to finish off a town are apparently a thing of the past and it made me very sad . The 20-30 attacking Axis were up to 90 % infantery . When there were 2 or 3 Panzers joining the fight it was cause for celebration - mostly there were none or those who tried were bazooked , sapped , ATGed , bombed , ambushed already on the way to town . Massive Panzer support for infantery assaulting a spawnable is also a thing of the past . As for the Luftwaffe it doesn't exist anymore . Sometimes I saw 1 or 2 fighters coming to perturb a little the allied 3 or 4 EA on deck straffing what they could (this AQ part didn't change since 2001 :)) but mostly there was Nothing . I have not seen a single Stuka , Me110 or He 111 in 20 days . Ah yes , there is no towing service anymore either . No more calls "Tow available at FB" and no more trucks dragging behind them a chaotically jumping line of 10 or 15 Flaks/PAKs . Besides a snipe fest around CPs , Nothing else happens anywhere . This was especially striking for the FBs . In the past an attack would be over in 5 minutes because an undefended FB would have been immediately blown up . Here both Allied and Axis FBs were Eternal . Sometimes I spawned a Flak on FB to (mildly) annoy the deck straffing EA but I have not seen a single Allied attempt to blow an FB . Symmetrically at one point we had an Opportunity to pocket an Allied Division around Kortrijk but for that we needed to blow 2 ennemy FBs . Apparently despite the fact that the Allied didn't defend their FBs , there were not enough people to blow them and so the Allied Division was saved . Summary Perhaps the C159 was not a typical Campaign , I couldn't say . But if it was then WWIIOL is reduced to a close quarters infantery fight around one or 2 CPs . Tank combat is inexistent and what is left is basically of the type ambusher vs ambushed so that the killer waits for ages untill Something drives around and the killed never knows what killed him . Air combat is definitively dead - Luftwaffe doesn't fly and those few Allied who still fly have in 90 % the purpose of straffing (or Panzer bombing) on deck . The biggest fights are of the type 30 vs 30 what is at the level of a first person shooter (like WoT or CS) . For me the biggest interest in WWIIOL has always been team work , huge Squads , the command at strategical level (OKW) and at the tactical level (Squad) . As neither of these seems to have survived because of the lack of players , I do not think that I will retry to play WWIIOL after this C159 experience anymore . Good luck and vonik KGW CO (ret)
  4. Hello Khanut Wasn't it your ambushing tank that Tom77 always took a particular pleasure to kill during our SNs ? Not sure but it was a name like that . The answer is coming 2 years later but it's that I just only came by . Many former KGW play PS2 , some joined WHIPS and some log in from time to time just to spend a few hours doing what we do best - killing Allied But no , the KGW will no more be resurrected . Managing a Mega Squad is (almost) a full time job and after a certain time even the most dedicated officers finish by burning out and when that happens it is only a matter of time till the Squad slowly fades away . But yes , I have also fond memories of those huge battles during our SNs especially when we cooperated with Lagus , Czechoslovak Panzerbrigade and Hispano 250 - good old times vonik KGW founder and CO (ret)
  5. As a founder and CO (ret) of KGW, I have seen this game rise and fall with Squads . Everybody (after climbing the very steep experience curve) can be a lone wolf in a 1st person shooter . However large Squads gave to WWIIOL from Day 1 an additionnal dimension which lone wolves can never add - organised teamwork towards a common goal . They also provided (for free !) the welcome and the training for new players . Last but not least they were the place where people created friendships, achievements and common memories . In short, large Squads are (well, were) what made WWIIOL different from any other generic 1st person shooter where people log in from time to time just to kill a few things and then log off . For that to work, Bierbaer said it . Leaders are necessary . And I mean real leaders . People like Vasquez, Shilling, Dinker and yes Deadlock People who play every day and have the common fun of the members in their Squad (by extension of their side) in mind . And I am well placed to know that this is a damn hard work on line but also off line . For instance KGW started to decrease in numbers and motivation when nobody wanted to do the officer work anymore - the old leaders were burnt out or left and there were no more any new . I am convinced that this process happened in all other large Squads identically . The change from the system based on KGs/Divisions with Squads attached to each of them allowing Squad missions to the system with AOs only made things worse because it removed the freedom of Squads to organize operations which was one of their main motivations in the game . Merging small Squads without having several good leaders who organise, command and manage wouldn't certainly do a great Squad . Now unfortunately I have no magical solution how to ressuscitate dozens of great leaders . They are all gone and won't come back - they did their time . Perhaps if Steam is a success, then there will be 1 or 5 % of people who could be great leaders . But if it is the case then it'd be mandatory to give them Squad Tools and recognition that is necessary . Squad missions should be promoted and communicated . In my opinion the organisation system with KGs and Divisions was also superior to the AO system but I would agree if somebody said that it only works with many people OL - the threshold is probably somewhere by 300-400 players per side . Below 100 players per side (e.g that's what the KGW alone had in the past) no Squads are necessary and WWIIOL becomes basically just a solo shooter game .
  6. Amen to that Igor . WWIIOL was never about graphics, skins or sub prices . It has been about all those great officers in the past who made the game what it was . Being a Day 1 2001 veteran, I can still remember a few dozens of those great names even should I forget everything else. Sure, big population was a factor too but without those leaders who organized, communicated and lead on the front, those Dinkers, Vasquez, Shillings or Deadlocks to just name a few, the game would have died many years ago . The problem is that all the great names disappeared gradually after 2010 and with all the respect to the work of the present HQs, some years ago EVERY single KG let alone Division had more active and 24/24 OL officers in their rosters than a whole HQ today . God, I remember that only in my KG we had a Japanese Squad with 3 officers attached to cover the TZ3 :) Battles going on small and large on the whole front and every single one with a field officer in command and not merely 2 or 3 AOs that we got now used to . This is imho the principal reason why WWIIOL struggles . It has never been a mere PvP shooter but without front officers and large Squads backing all that organisational and command infrastructure it is what is left .
  7. x1300 is not good for ww2ol and 6800xt also, I would take 6800gt as last choice, I recommend you take 7600gt or 7900gs as budget cards that will perform really well in ww2ol. As for you asumption that it will work with your onboard x200 (will not ) and that is easy to use :roll: they are all the same, as for nvidia - ati dilema, nvidia work better with openGl rendering (this is what ww2ol use) so my choice is Nvidia. Hassel
  8. Thank you. That was all I needed to know.
  9. Maybe not the correct forum to ask, but I thought it better than in the Barracks. When changeing name, does this have any impact on your rank or statistics per chance? Would like to know as I plan on doing it. Thanks!
  10. Ok, thanks for the help Merlin.
  11. Hi! I'm thinking of buying a new monitor, and much lean towards Dell's 24" 2405FPW TFT. Now I belive the ratio for CRT monitors are 4:3 which the game also run at, but for the widescreen monitor from Dell its 16:10. The question is if the game support widesreen monitors and the 16:10 ratio? If not, it would be nice to hear if anyone that have TFT monitors, solved this problem in any way, as I'm afraid simply drawing the screen vertically and horisontally would destroy the aspect ratio, but I could be wrong there. Thanks!