aismov

Registered Users
  • Content count

    4,705
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    22

Everything posted by aismov

  1. Yup thats the way I see it. What you consider fun/important isn't necessarily what the other guy considers fun or important. I think our goal would be to cater to the widest possible playerbase while keeping the historical feel and authenticity as much as possible. Essentially every persistent game has something like this because players simply need to switch off and do something else. You can only attack CPs and bomb targets so much before being exhausted by it. Well interestingly when you get enough players online you have a fair amount of redundancy and don't literally need every boot out in the field. If if things get desperate you can simple do a 911 call over side chat to get people to spawn in a pinch. I agree that the heart of the game is killing/capping, but at the end of the day this is a game and you sometimes need to take a break from the usual grind of it all. Some of my most memorable squad memories behind squad night operations was staging our Opel Races and other fun stuff like that. Its just something else to do ingame which adds to the depth of the gameplay experience. Yes, you can strongly argue that things like opel races detract from the historical/authentic nature of a WWII milsim, but IMHO, we can't forget this is a game for people to have fun. And if the RPG layer is designed thoughtfully (i.e. no red Formula 1 cars racing in the streets of Antwerp when you are trying to cap the AB bunker) this can make the game more appealing to a broader swath of players, and make for a deeper, more engaging player experience.
  2. To continue with the theme of increasing player immersion and making WWIIOL more than just a hardcore battlefield simulator, but at the same time decrease the pressure on CRS to have to keep making new content at a frantic pace, I came across this video regarding Ultima Online and some of their design challenges. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFNxJVTJleE One of the most important parts I noticed was when Richard Garriott said that early on in the development of UO they realized that they would quickly reach a point where players would consume (and grow bored of) new content faster than the devs had time to make it. Since with 1.36 we eliminated one of the three reasons I feel players left the game (ToE/Brigades/HC control), and are heading in the right direction with one of the reamining two main reasons (AO system), I think its time to start talking and thinking outside of the box regarding new content. Lack of content everyone agrees was also a big factor in the game where there weren't any new weapons/map expansions/UI/etc introduced to the game for a solid 10 years. But I think we really need to work more on player created content. The PPOs are a great start, but I think we need to do more. And if we start talking about a potential WWIIOL 2.0 for real, I think we should work on a solid RPG layer for the game complete with some sort of battle point/economy/swag system. Give players something to work for and earn, and then be able to display and brag to others, rather than just an abstract running tally of whether the Axis or Allies won Campaign #XYZ. Some crazy ideas: 1) minigames that players can get together ingame (not at map screen, but physically inagame). Something as simple as checkers/chess/cards/dice where 3-4 players standing next to each other sit down and a 2nd screen pops up to allow the game to be played. 2) Rank points are converted into virtual "rank point currency" (ratio to be determined); these can be gambled away in games like in #1, or spent in behind the lines towns (probably capital cities or other major towns) with designated "RPG areas" for virtual swag such as creating an AI-controlled victory parade going own the main street, launching off fireworks, gaining entry into virtual competitions such as a grand prix race, purchasing LoA cards so your character can go to these RPG areas without being flagged as AWOL (this way players are incentivized to RTB and continue to accumulate rank points), stores where you can purchase (with rank point currency) stuff to deck out your ingame house (this would be a microtransaction that I discussed in a prior thread)... the list goes on 3) Grand prix racing, air racing, virtual sniper competitions etc 4) Native fauna running around in behind the lines towns that players can hunt (and have trophies mounted on the wall of their home). 5) theater transfer requests (for when there would be a NA theater and a europe one) would use your currency to be transferred out of the european theater and say to north africa .... yes I know all crazy stuff. But RPG elements and player created content is very important. Just look at the success of Eve Online.
  3. Doc! Hang in there! Thinking about ya!!!
  4. Yup thats correct. If you cap the AB then the supply is still available at the CPs. The idea is that capping the AB doesn't "bounce" the "Garrison flag."
  5. My understanding was that if you lose the AB, all it does it shut down your ability to spawn tanks, but all the other CPs can still spawn the usual infantry/truck/ATG. Is this *always* the case and how do linked-CPs work? Example: today there was a long fight in Hastiere, lots of back and forth. But no matter what we did, there were still SMGs, sappers, etc spawning a solid 4+ hours into the battle. The ownership was thus: AB: axis City: axis Feschaux CP (axis spawnable): axis Givet CP (axis spawnable): axis Dinant CP: allied Flavion CP: allied In this situation does the supply first drain all of hastiere, and then when there is no supply left switch to the supply from the linked CP (in this case Dinant and Flavion)? If that is the case, its probably best to cap the AB last to not open up extra supply going into an otherwise exhausted town.
  6. So we have towns changing hands multiple times over the course of a day with dynamic fights and desperate defenses and successeful counter-attack occuring? Sounds like fun gameplay to me compared to the old system of mindlessly zerging the AB Bunker until you finally capture it. Now I can hang back and snipe high value infantry if thats my thing. Knowing I'm making a difference. Now I can interdict ETs trying to resupply/support a town. Knowing I'm making a difference. Now I can set up firezones and wear down the defenders. Knowing I'm making a difference. Now I can STILL zerg the AB Bunker if thats my thing. Knowing I'm making a difference. Now I can do logistics/trucking work if thats what I enjoy doing. Knowing I'm making a difference. Yes, with supply/attirtion you may not always find your favorite weapon. But it expands gameplay roles and makes for more dynamic fights. Its the give-and-take. Have infinite supply via brigades and all you can hope to do is rush the bunker... anything else is a waste of time. Now we actually cater to more than one gameplay style. EDIT: which is why I also think we need to move on to proximity AOs, that way players who for example really like one weapon system or type of combat role can create their own action and not hope that HC puts down the right type of AO. At the end of the day it's a game that people play for fun, and we can't forget that. But I also think from a gameplay design perspective having limitless or effectively-near limitless supply is very corrosive for gameplay. Yes, there will be times you can't get your favorite weapon and that sucks, but the flip side is limited supply/attrition creates far more gameplay opportunities than it takes away. Yes I know I'm biased since im a pure all-around player. One mission im bombing bridges in a He111, next I'm fighting with a Stug, followed by rushing a bunker with an SMG, followed by an 88 sortie. Supply never was a big deal for me since I play pretty much every unit in all the branches. So I u de stand where say a dedicated Tiger driver or SMG man is coming from. But I think my basic premise on gameplay design still stands.
  7. It does. Let's say you cap the city CP and then cap the AB. It will cause the FBs of the defending backline towns to open up and enable spawning in the linked CPs using the spawn pool of the backline towns. AND you canst I'll spawn from all the CPs of the home towns garrison, but can't spawn tanks u til you recap the AB. Best to cap the AB last IMHO.
  8. Claw and welcome to WWIIOL! If interested in a combined arms squad recommend checking out the 31st. We're combined arms so have roles to fill all the way from a simple rifle to a Navy Destroyer! www.31stwreckingcrew.com
  9. BETA Just have fun, and try to break things to test for bugs
  10. BETA Just have fun, and try to break things to test for bugs
  11. LOL yeah I remember the HAAC firehose. Beyond silly.
  12. Interesting, I'm the opposite I like the dots compared to having a forest of flags everywhere. Makes the division's stand out more too.
  13. Personally as a builder these options don't affect me, but a fair amount of players will likely be interested in the ground option and the air option. I think it may help out the pilots the most.
  14. Are you guys aware of the FMS-overstock loophole? I'll cross post it in the 1.36 beta forums and big reporting as well.
  15. /\ Yup infinite supply. Crash away
  16. Which I agree with from a historical standpoint but I don't agree with from a faneplay/sales perspective. Deep down we are all peacocks. Everyone wants to show off, whether it is via stats or squad affiliation or rank. I think that from a business and gameplay standpoint doing away with things that offer bragging rights, even though it may be more historical, is to the detriment of the game experience since as I said part of the gameplay experience is a little bit about showing off.
  17. Players will adapt. It won't take ppl long to figure out that a airfield PPO is a quick drive for a scout car to go and camp if it's too close to the front. Not to mention that you can also now easily drive SPAA to the approach vectors and shoot them down as they are lifting off. Good luck trying to hunt down a fast mobile SPAA in 25 km2 of terrain outside of your PPO airfield. This will naturally send PPO airfields farthur back behind the lines. Which in turn will promote para operations to take them out. Which will promote action to help defend them. Overall this creates a virtuous cycle. I'm 100% in support because this gives players more gameplay options. It's the big tent theory of WWIIOL where you want to cater to many gameplay types and not just the aggressive infantry player who wants to capture bunkers. There is a lot of money to be made in catering to builder-type players and defensively minded players who prefer this kind of stuff. Just imagine all the cool stuff players could build with an expanded PPO toolset.
  18. Oh ok, I see what you mean. Yeah the .fallback I agree with. I thought you were referring to letting the enemy cap your town in a "controlled" fashion which is a different kettle of fish. IIRC the .fallback command could be done even if only one CP was controlled by the enemy, so you .fallback, but still have all the linking CPs available to spawn, quickly recap the AB (usually already had AB pre-stacked with defenders before the fallback) and liberate town. Now I don't remember but I think you had to do a .HAAC before you could activate .fallback, but my memory escapes me.
  19. Yup great example. Staring at a spreadsheet with numbers as far as your eyes can see can make you crazy. Its like the time in high school you wrote the essay, checked and re-checked it a dozen times, had a friend read it, yet someone missed the and and typo in the 8th paragraph.
  20. Theoretically that is certainly possible, but does anyone currently in the game have the operational skill and organization to pull something like that off. Even back in the day I can't think of an example of that being successfully done. I remember times when you either lost the town or simply threw in the towel knowing the writing was on the wall with 20 rifles left in the spawn pool, and then happened to stage a successful counter-attack, but those were pretty rare IMHO, and certainly not pre-planned as a greater strategy. I remember that slogging through an attritional meat grinder would leave me exhausted and happy that the battle was simply over, even if we happened to be on the losing side. I guess guys on the other side felt the same way. Ironically in a way WWIIOL does a pretty good job of semi-simulating the war!
  21. Yeah thinking that in the situation of exhausted garrison save the AB for last otherwise the FBs go up and new supply comes from linked CPs. Interesting trade off since you weigh the benefits of shutting down tank spawning with benefits of limiting linked CP supply.
  22. So if I am getting you correctly both sides have PPO FBs, but neither side can leapfrog one another... you have to steadily push it back towards the enemy's town and advance your own. That may you can have the French attacking Gedinne with their PPO FB while the Axis attack Haybes with their own PPO FB, with supply warping past each other. Thats not a bad idea, my one major concern here would be how much would this slow down the map? Campaigns already can take months. What are the unintended consequences of such a FB system?
  23. Not a bad idea actually. Should get some serious looking into. Not sure if that is technically possible without someone manually having to flip a switch at 1 AM eastern time though.