aismov

Free Play Account
  • Content count

    4,832
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    26

Everything posted by aismov

  1. Yup agree. I think its a smart moving taken care of the FB bug and the supply/mission bug since those are the only two real major ones. The rest can be fixed and have pretty minimal impact on gameplay.
  2. Garrison supply stays with the garrison even if AB is captured. Capturing the AB does only one thing... shut down tank and heavy ATG spawning. The supply does not disappear and you can spawn at all friendly depots. Recapping the AB simply gives you access to the supply that is restricted from spawning at depots. Now, one thing I will mention that is a big thing to consider if you do want to capture the AB early, is that by doing that you open up the defenders rear FBs, which means they can spawn from both the Garrison supply AND linked CPs from the rear town. So this is a risky move... you shut down tank spawning, but you potentially give the defenders access to linked-CP supply on top of what they already have in the Garrison. But overall I agree, I like the change to where capping the AB doesn't mean the town is doomed to fall. Much better this way.
  3. Ty for fast reply!!!
  4. Back in they day (2001) there was no way to join a squad other than going through a web interface. A few years later on we added ingame recruiting which was a godsend, but along the way we lost the ability to bring new players into a squad outside of the game. The current squad tools allow you to promote/demote/kick players that are already in the squad, but not bring new squad members in. Could this feature be returned? Would help squads when there doesn't happen to be a recruiter ingame at that very moment.
  5. Would try to hit "detect controller" and see if that helps. As long as the hatswitch physically works it should pick it up. Also make sure that it doesn't conflict with the general views since those are routinely mapped to the hat switch on default.
  6. The one problem I see with that system if you can very easily unbalance the game by having a couple guys who love doing nothing but running trucks all day. Its similar to what we saw back in the day with RDP where a small handful of guys were able to decide the gameplay of thousands by running a very particular type of RDP bombing tactic. By allowing AI trucking you create a huge multiplier where one person, be it out of true enjoyment or simply a near-pathologic desire to "win" (usually the latter case), will spend hours upon hours grinding this out and ruining gameplay in the process. Forcing players to physically transported creates real tradeoffs with benefits and consequences that acts as a natural check to prevent the system from spiraling out of control into a complete parody of what was originally intended. We saw exactly this happen with RDP before we had any good EWS and a small group of players would skirt the map edges and decimate factory production which resulted in an arms race of players coming with every more elaborate ways to avoid the fight, and the eventual victory going to the side with the greater number of fanatics who were willing to spend hours staring at featureless terrain on their way to their 180th bombing run. Some things need to be worked for and earned. If you want to attack other players with a 2:1 supply advantage you better have to work damn hard for it. Even 15-20 SMGs in a town down to Rifles will make a huge difference. That is a 10 minute ride x2 for a squad with solid numbers on in a night.
  7. Its a little more subtle than that. If you capture an enemy town you slowly get supply as part of just capturing a town. Now there is a bug where if you capture a town that is in a pocket it will still give you the newly captured supply. BUT after all that supply comes in you will never get resupplied again in that town. This is likely because newly captured towns don't check to see if they have a active link to the factories, but any other situation it does. But RDP affects garrisons and brigades equally.
  8. Fair point regarding the supply numbers. WIth the WBS I would make it clear to all players that numbers are a work in progress and this is just to try things out. Since you know there will be a million experts who are going to be more than happy to jump to conclusions about what they see in the spawnlists. And for those who are worried that 1.36 is somehow eliminating HC you are wrong. There is still a strong role for the organization, just that the role is different. Yes, if your concept of fun is moving around every brigade flag on the map and knowing the minutia of brigade movement rules then yes, with 1.36 you have less control (I think thats a good thing). We have already seen the first several successful encirclements of both Axis and Allied divisions in the beta campaign so far... with the main difference being that it wasn't because HC was asleep at the switch and didn't move a flag out of danger in time. Effectively with garrisons/TBS it allows the attacking side to still talk and think strategy (as well as the defending side for that matter), while at the same time avoiding all the finger pointing and recrimination on the losing side. When the Axis had the North cutoff prior to the server reset we could only blame ourselves for not defending towns better. It was actually interesting seeing over chat things like "we just gave them Breda because we didn't spawn in" versus the usual "we lost the town because the HC officer didn't do X." It may sound subtle, but from a gameplay and player psychology perspective this is actually a big deal since we are making a system where the player is held accountable, rather than the old system where it was easier for players to whine and make excuses (often for their own tactical failures) by using the HC as a convenient scapegoat. "If only HC had done this, things would have been different..."
  9. Completely agree. But that's human nature and present in every game. Players will buy gold in MMOs rather than grind it. Players will camp spawns in FPS games. Players will hide in Battle Royale games hoping to make top 10 by avoiding fighting. In every game you are going to have players that take the easy way out. It's human nature like you said to find the path of least resistance. Some degree of "ninja" I think is healthy. Historically there were lots of great "ninja" operations done in RL WWII. It's certainly historical... Up to a point. So we should have a system where we have small objectives that are amenable to small-man teams using stealth/infiltration tactics, but should also make sure that larger objectives like cities don't fall to these tactics. One game changer from the get go is supply/attrition because it opens up more ways to capture a town other than banzai charging or ninja'ing a bunker. Another would be to limit the 360 degree FMS that Zebbeee mentioned, and look at warping as well. Both are major factors of fight avoidance. One might say that will only make the situation worse by making the job of defending easier. But these are really just the other side of the supply/attrition coin, which is important because with infinite supply the other system breaks down since you can't break through a line that has effectively limitless infantry and tank supply. But with 1.36 we can work to actually having REAL front lines by geographically limiting the FMS and allow players to decide how to attack and capture a town (surprise/overwhelming force/attrition/combination). This will create more combined arms action and fun battles. Yes it will be harder to cap CPs, but that's assuming that "fun" is exclusively the domain of CP capping. Or that by not capping CPs, and not moving the map, you are therefore not having fun (which I think is a dubious statement when you look at the majority of players who simply like to snipe from windows to the eternal consternation of veteran players and self-titled map movers). And this brings me to expanding gameplay modes and roles. The above needs to be tempered with small achievable objectives that give players something to do, since few people can log hours to see a big battle through to the finish. That is why PPOs is good because it gives players something else to do and a immediate sense of accomplishment. Same can go with supply and trucking. We've discussed tons of other things for players to do outside of rushing a bunker which is important for gameplay variety and ultimately player retention. Especially for the casual player for whom the whole WWII simulation idea isn't as big of a hook as for the WWII history junkie (which is what most veteran players are). This is a topic for its own post, but to boil it down it involves stats, top10 lists, VISIBLE achievements, alternate gameplay roles/modes, RPG elements, and player directed action and generated content. Essentially we need to expand gameplay from the single-role focus we've had now which is either rush the bunker and cap the town, or go play a different game.
  10. If I take a honest look at 1.36 now tha we've been testing it for what 2 weeks now, I'm still happy and think it's a good direction. The battles feel a bit more dynamic, and I like that towns change hands more frequently and you have successful counter attacks. Players are already adapting by being more careful with supply, and there is less of an emphasis of banzai charging the bunker, and more emphasis on CP control. With supply being an issue there is certainly an incentive to camp an FMS, but I've also noticed that FMS that are effectively lost get pulled much more quickly now. Similarly, you can now also take a town by NOT capping a CP. Hirson effectively fell last night from Allied push that took out most high value infantry with the CPs abd AB quickly falling when we were down to rifles. Need some tweaks (tank numbers), bug fixes (FB flip bug, no supply selection bug, dFMS loophole), but overall I like it. In the HC were also having good discussion about strategy as what towns we need to attack and what towns need strong defense.
  11. I personally like the mix of having both the old tight cities as well as the spread out ones. It takes a different approach to capture those cities.
  12. Another clutch FB bust by the 31st Halle was under severe pressure with two exposed western CPs held by the Allies. Crack air assault team swooped in and took out both FBs and then liberated the town! w00t
  13. I was always under the impression that sounds wasn't instantaneous in this game. At least that is the impression I have when I see a plane drop a bomb (or crash)... it takes a second or two to actually hear the sound. And yes, shockwaves returning would be AWESOME!
  14. Not sure if you have downloaded the latest patch, but there are no more flags for Garrisons. Active frontline/rearline garrison towns have the name/miniflag, Brigades have the old school flags, and non-active towns on the map are greyed-out.
  15. I think that is actually a good option. Create a 3rd FMS option where there is a roof, back wall, and two zig-zag'd side walls so that when you spawn you are protected. And then leave it up to the players to decide the level of security they want for players spawning vs. the drawback of it being larger and easier to spot.
  16. Oh I agree completely. But I think it becomes an issue during very low server populations where one hyper-organized group runs circles around another because they have extra numbers. I don't mind players setting up the next AO and getting FMS as the first town is falling; thats smart gameplay. I think its an issue if you have a numbers advantage and the other side can't spare the resources to even give a token defense to the town that you just AO'd. I don't think there should be any mandatory cool down periods. I'm actually probably more extreme than most players in that I think that AO's should be eliminated completely and map movement should rather be controlled by variables like cap timers, AB timers, and the number of troops in a certain area to prevent moling and solo-caps. But letting one side decide the fate of the map in a single-server persistent world game that has hard victories/defeats (unlike say Planetside where each faction has an un-capturable territory they can always sally forth from) is also not good for the game. I think we all play this game for the tactical battles. But I also don't think anyone can honestly say that winning or losing the map doesn't matter to them outside of maybe a very small minority of players. This is a competitive game, and winning the campaign is the ultimate competition.
  17. Sorta have to agree with the one AO, especially if one side is overpop AND organized since you are attacking one town and as the AB is falling you AO the 2nd town and get opels running so that right when the AB is capped you already have a FMS set to go and players spawning to cap the town. It creates essentially an uncontrolled domino cascade of towns falling. I saw it happen last night and that was during US prime time where Allies traditionally have the population advantage.
  18. We all gotta find a way to play together on the playground. Kicking someone out of the playground or taking away their toys may be the easy solution, but it's not the real solution. It's just educating fellow players.
  19. Personally I love it... killing enemy actually means something; would say fewer tanks and fix the dFMS/resupply/overstock loophole but otherwise very good! I would tell a returning player that there are lots of new gameplay styles that you can enjoy but now actually make a difference in the battle due to supply/attrition.
  20. Submit a support ticket and they will get you sorted out in no time. The towing accounts need to be activated manually unfortunately.
  21. What!? More like it should be DOUBLE the premium subscription when you consider all the excess bandwidth they consume from all the hot air that is generated on those forums. /runs
  22. 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.
  23. 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.
  24. Doc! Hang in there! Thinking about ya!!!
  25. 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."