Free Play Account
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by muromachi

  1. Could we have them please? As a tank driver, I think this would be fantastic, and give me something to do when stationary other than look at a bush. This image also seems to depict a fixed mount for the driver... Seems to be a exceptionally rare, although the mounting point seems to exist on most examples.
  2. I'm in favour of doubling the resupply as well. Sometimes the FMS/Ammo box is quite a ways away. An extra 10 rounds would do a lot to keep the mortar firing while I'm making my way back.
  3. Triads should be type for type. The allies should get a heavy AA gun and the Axis should not be saddled with the 88 as an indirect fire weapon. (seriously?)
  4. Mortars are fantastic when you have someone running ammo for you. One of my favourite things to do is running ammo for mortars. Cause a lot of headaches for the enemy that way.
  5. So long as I die comfortable, there are no regrets.
  6. This. In particular, one of my biggest gripes is that there are still buildings without interiors. We can't sell on graphics, so we're going to have to sell on comprehensiveness.
  7. Aside from game mechanics, the Flak/Pak 88 isn't designed for indirect fire. It was originally intended for high altitude anti-aircraft work, if was found later on that the high velocities required for that task also made it a fantastic anti-tank gun. Those very same high velocities are what make it a bad choice for indirect fire. What you want is a LeFH 18.
  8. Missing something. I'm proposing a change to the mission interface, effectively forcing it's use. I've this sort of thing in action in Ro2. When a noob log on and as no idea what to do, he'll usually follow his squad leader around like a puppy dog simply because the game encourages it. And frankly, the biggest obstacle to teamwork in this game is the playerbase. I came in to this game expecting fire team based play. In two years of "on again off again" playing I've experienced it exactly twice. Once on the German side where the squad I was playing with packed twelve guys into an APC to cap Antwerp. And once on the allied side, when me and a friend tried to teach a handful of newbs we knew how to play the game. Any other time I tried to engage in that sort of thing with squads I've either been ignored completely, or expected to storm a CP by myself. Maybe the Axis does thing's differently, but the allies seem to have teamwork issues. It's gotten to the point where I only ever log on when my buddy does, as he seems to be the only one who wants a tank driver, ammunition carrier, bombardier, lookout, etc. Everyone else just wants Solid Snake it seems.
  9. Been thinking about this. Ro2 has a sort of command structure, with an officer in chief commanding lieutenants who are in command of a half section. This might be something we could use, as a sort of slot based command structure for every mission. Slots could be restricted based on rank. Mission Leader -- Overall command of the mission, appoints tasks for Sergeants. Sergeants -- The Cat herders, it's their job to get their squad to the objected laid out the the ML and achieve it. Privates -- Bodies, they do whatever the sergeant says, they don't need to worry about what the objective it, just stick with the sarge and follow orders. The question is, how to incentivize it? Ro2 did this by giving bonus points for sticking with your squad and by allowing you to spawn on your lieutenant. Would points be enough of an incentive? Do we need a big [censored] arrow constantly pointing to your officer?
  10. As a student of trench warfare, (Been a research hobby of mine for 14+ years) I will not have High command question my defences. Nor should they be required to. HC has more important things to do then inspecting sandbags and gun bunkers. In the real world inspections are handled by Captains and Colonels in charge of that sections. Not by Ferdinand bloody Foch himself! I would like to commend your innovative use of sandbags. I had not anticipated their use as improvised dragons teeth. You can be sure that the Panzer Corps will find a fair few more obstacles in their way going forward. There's always something new to learn in the art of fortification. I would like to reiterate my call for proper trenches. Breastworks of course due to engine limitations. Give us barbed wire and proper bunkers as well. And let us clip the ends into each other that we may remove gaps in the line. Give us straight sections, and corners interior and exterior. Make them tall, that we may run along the length without fear of enemy fire or observation. Give them firing steps, that we may fire over the parapet. Give us wire that we may keep the enemy from us and control his movements. Give us PROPER trenches.
  11. They hard-coded equipment lists? Even in 1999, who does that?
  12. Subscriptions are what have kept this game alive for 15 + years. No f2p money making model would have kept CRS alive through the "Dark Age". They didn't have the staff to keep cranking out special gear for the players to purchase, everyone was already top rank so they couldn't sell XP boosters, and pay to win is an abomination to gaming and CRS would have rather let the game die than resort to it. Subs work. And I would like to personally thank those that stayed subbed and playing through that period so that another generation could experience this Masterpiece of Online gaming.
  13. For grenadiers yes, For riflemen no. I'd like to see France with three types of Riflemen; MAS36, Berthier, and Lebel. All three were used in the BoF. Berthier isn't terribly justifiable considering the dev time but the Lebel could be done in an hour tops.
  14. I'm mainly trying to think of truly French candidates. I joined WW2OL to play French, I was not amused to find that most of the French arsenal was the same American gear I had been using across various games since I was 5. Unfortunately i'm not terribly well versed on kit so I can't say what would be the best fit, but I'm of the opinion that a subpar native option is better than a superior foreign option. If I wanted to be American, I'd be American. Not an Assault rifle necessarily, just something similar to the BAR/FG42. Help the French and British keep up in the later tiers instead of being shuffled off to the rear like they are now. FN and BREN could do it if they make them shoulder fire as well. The day of the Vickers is never over. Even in tier 3 I see vets using them for FB defence. You don't need anything heaver than an MG to kill an engie after all.
  15. France needs a french air force. We have one, ONE french plane in the game. The U.S. can just use the current FAF minus the Dewo. "R35" IS the french light tank. " VBCP Lorraine 38L " French Tier 0 APC. No need for lend lease. It is completely unarmed however. If we want to give everyone an Automatic/Assault Rifle. The french have the Chauchat to fall back on. Horribly outdated and I don't even know if any were used by the french in ww2. But they existed. The british have a variety of ww1 projects and colonial creations if we want to stretch things. Might just be better to give them the BAR. U.S. Need an equivalent to the Vickers. I don't think the U.S. ever used the vickers in real life. Closest equivalent is the M2A2 "Mae West". Never used in combat. Allies need dive bombers. Breguet 690/Blackburn B-24 Skua/Douglas SBD Dauntless would work nicely. Allied Medium Bombers Vickers Wellington/B25 Mitchell/Lioré et Olivier LeO 45 Perhaps? That's all for now. I have things to do.
  16. No Berthier or Lebel riflemen? For shame! Also, a balance idea for the MG 34 would be to give the axis a different LMG to match the Allied ones. The ZB vs. 26, or MG 30 would both make idea candidates as they are quite similar to the MG 34. Thus both sides would have a light and a "medium" machine gun.
  17. Or maybe the game needs more than one bomber squad.
  18. I've held this game in quite high regard for the longest time, but have found little desire to play due to my own personal failing. Namely, lack of certainty on the proper course of action to pursue in the heat of combat. (I.E How do I approach a point? Is now the time to bolt for the CP? etc. etc.) I'm currently looking for a squad whose method of play might ameliorate and mitigate this issue. What I am searching for is a squad that operates as a more traditional infantry or armour team might. With members in close vicinity of each other, providing supporting fire and intelligence. I find myself quite satisfied running ammunition for mortars, driving multi-crew land vehicles, and operating machine guns.
  19. Invisible wall? Hell no! One of the great things about this game is there is effectively no borders on the playable area. I can flank through the friggen Alps if I have to! I've been killed far too often because I ran out of room to manuever because of some silly artificial border that's nigh impossible to see (far too often it's a red line on green grass). Rather than trying to dictate a play area for other players, have you tried talking to them? No doubt some of those "cats" came because they wanted to play a milsim. Give them commands, be a team leader for a infantry squad. You will find people who came to do that, I know because I came to do that. This game doesn't nee Invisible walls, it need low level leaders to lead and inspire the rookies. I tell you this, as a rookie.
  20. I like the idea of capturable FBs. Would take a lot of work though. Worth it in my opinion.
  21. I always wondered how that worked. And now I know!
  22. Could be done. Every town having it's own permanent channel would cause a lot of clutter though. Better to have Channels for active AOs.
  23. A lot isn't covered in the tutorial. A short list. * Grenadiers * Engineers * !!Anything related to anti tank warfare!! * Aircraft *Paratroopers *How to get on a truck * Basic Cover and Concealment * How to use anything related to the UI
  24. Kills are shared.