biggles4

Free Play Account
  • Content count

    177
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by biggles4


  1. Was going to write up something similar. The existence of brigades and garrisons at one and the same time means the brigades needn't be connected directly to the towns any longer. If the towns are defended by the garrisons, why not cut the brigades loose, though they may still need a less direct connection to towns for supply purposes.

    With roving armies the old idea of a secondary road network would really offer some interesting game play potential, of spearheads and cutoffs and such.


  2. Thats nothing! A long, long time ago, I was lifting from a rear airfield, way back from the front, where one would think it was safe; I had 19 kills and no deaths in a p39 and was playing to survive. Well, long story short, an elmg nailed me on the af. He'd been out over a thousand minutes (might have been over eleven hundred) going from base to base, camping, deeper and deeper into allied territory. Just my damn luck. :mad:


  3. 2 hours ago, jwilly said:

    I think Merlin recently, and Old CRS folks in prior days, have said that much of the world...not all object types, but most, except for those we currently call PPOs...are placed using Creator-related tools and compiled into the game world. If that's a correct understanding, then some fundamental changes might be needed to make those types of objects into PPOs with the same functionality.

    And, it's similarly been said over the years that there are game-functionality limits to a given locale's polygon density and object density, related to server memory and processing power. Those limits are managed by the CRS world creators. If that's a correct understanding, presumably the Super Engineers/Farmers/whatever they'd be called would have to learn the applicable constraints and obey them. 

    With great power comes great responsibility. Fwiw Mr. Henning's work seems to imply that the object threshold is fairly high.

     


  4. Ok, I looked it up (not really a big gamer here). Yes to repeating the same action over and over, but no to the goal being more experience or finding an important item. Goal is to offer novel amusement for benefit of community. Guess that means communist farmer. :lol:


  5. This is a unit designed for squad challenges and special events. The super engineer constructs the environments for such battles.

    The super engineer can place as PPOs most in game objects -  grass, trees, buildings, you name it. The placement and reload timer is instantaneous. He is available on the training server. He can act as an ML spawn point. He is perhaps only available upon request so his super powers will not be abused.

    You see, if folks want to hold a particular Battle recreation, they spawn super engineers, construct the battlefield, act as the Spawn for their side, hold the combat, then these objects disappear after a couple hours. The idea is to allow players to create a temporary custom environment for a friendly bloodletting.


  6. 7 hours ago, matamor said:

    Instead of whining from above your free account, maybe you should contribute for these lack of resources?

    Apologies for my other post. Was just meant to be the sort of razzing I would say to my friends or brothers. Since you are neither I probably should have forebore, or at least attached a smiley. Anyway, S!, god bless, and may your hunting bag be ever full of prey!


  7. 20 hours ago, Kilemall said:

    One concept I just realized about the front line thing would be for FMS to perform a check against 'closest enemy facility'.  If that facility is closer to your point of origin (typically FB, sometimes AB or depot) then the FMS cannot be laid, only an LMS.

    I think this would result in having to clear facilities in a broad band fighting forward, but there could be weirdnesses especially in big cities.  The surrounding FMS could still be laid, but they would have to be more distant and carefully laid to be allowed.

     

    Would love to see things like this tried during intermission to see how it plays, but I reckon they've not got the resources.


  8. FB acts as both target and flag in regards to MSP placement. Defensive MSP can be placed right at the FB, but attacking MSP is limited to same distances as flag, though it measures from the FB mark on the map, not the actual objects. When an FB is not there, however, the MSP can be placed anywhere.


  9. MSPs have to be set within 3000m of the target, whether offensive or defensive, and more than 300m or so from an nme flag. They can be placed right next to nme MSPs.

    The sort of system you suggest is ideal. I was just speculating more along the lines of what is shorter term possible. I do think that the area between cities that have no linking FBs is proper ground for experimentation with persistent mobile spawns ala what you suggest. In fact I was going to make a post (not my first) regarding what I see as the most practical first step in that direction - persistent defensive missions. Since missions can have MSPs attached, persistent missions could have persistent defensive positions in the field. Then you could jigger the placement and spawn rules to make for something of a moving front between the towns. Often times in this game, even a good fight can become dull when its simply an endless running battle between spawnables. Having the fight move across the countryside, with more limited spawning as you suggest, would provide much more variety to the fight. Would be much more tactically interesting.

     


  10. 11 hours ago, Kilemall said:

    They have a town marker to key player unit count to.  Not the same as an object they can proximity far 10000x across the map.

    You could incorporate the idea of ZOCs into current gameplay using the flag positions with suggested mechanics - proximity of numbers turns off or limits spawning from local facility, balance of friendly vs nme troops in area count toward capture/ownership. Would be a bunch of circular ZOCs around capture points.