king4t

Free Play Account
  • Content count

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Green Tag

About king4t

  • Rank
    Junior Member
  • Birthday
  1. I know it's never easy to find stuff around here, but this has already been announced here. UE4 does seem a good fit for the game, with the added bonus of having some very easy to work with components. This might just mean that they can open up for some kind of community work/contributions.
  2. Q. How many flags will there be? Q. Will the volunteer oic function be enabled? Will there be an override function for HC to kick an oic who goes afk? Q. Will the current bounce/route mechanics remain? Q. Will there still be a differing back/front movement timers? Q. Will there be any stacking limits? Q. Will there be any new risks/rewards associated with flags being frontline? Q. Will routed flags still be able to reappear anywhere on the map with no warning? Q. Will garrisons contain the full spectrum of available supply? Q. Is there going to be any ability to make the garrison or flag supply automatically scaleable to population numbers? (I think I just had a good idea - make flags single use only. ie, when they are empty they are removed from the map, the new flags only enter when pop level triggers it. Number of flags based on enemy pop over x period.... Needs more thought but could be interesting.) Q. Will there still be armoured flags? Any other differences? Especially interesting wrt to whether allies have integrated supply. Q. Could there be a variety of garrison types to choose from? Set by HC, a defensive or attacking line up perhaps?
  3. Mobile FBs. Placed by players in a limited risk vs reward system. To put it briefly, fight your way toward the town, force the enemy to vacate the town when you can own a dominant position. Population neutrality. Without this we'll continue to have weeks of uncompetetive gameplay at a time. I have so many more, with garrisons and U.I. being close behind. But these 2 changes would give the biggest bang for the buck in terms of overhauling gameplay.
  4. I know for a fact that loads of supply was driven from back or adjoining towns last campaign(post steam), by both sides. But if we want to eliminate any phantom movement of supply completely, then we are left with 3 options: 1. Lots of tedious driving which many will not enjoy doing. 2. A level of supply in each town sufficient to sustain/withstand a heavy attack lasting at least an hour. Basically full town supply, because we can't have magic flags that move.(btw if I get you correctly, you are picturing being able to amass a load of supply, then prevent your opponent from moving in enough to match it because you placed an AO. This would be a really bad idea) 3. A complete rewrite involving visible moving convoys, mobile FBs and meaningful movement through all that space between towns. ie 2.0 I do basically agree with your objection to magically appearing brigades. I suspect we'd all rather there was a more realistic system in place. I suggested many years ago that we have a resupply truck... Something big and noisy, but armored. It could represent say 10% of a flag if you can move it into it's new AB. It would be worth trying to stop or protect them. But it's coding time. As much as I'd love to see plans for and discuss major mechanics changes, I still get the impression we're firmly in the band aid stage. So for me, a SMALL garrison to lessen the boredom of softcapping seems like a realistic change while the other things you list like UI and squad/organisational tools are given priority to improve gameplay in the short term.
  5. I think this is mainly due to how we actually use the system. At least as far back as I can remember on allied side the MOIC is everything. If he gets someone to cover air flags then that's a bonus. While this may not be true when morale is high and more are willing to join in, it almost inveriably is when morale is low and many heads go down. THIS, I would suggest, is what causes the biggest burnout of HCs. One person can easily move the flags and check all supply, but not so easily if they are trying to be squad liaison, FB buster, MS setter, and general communicator. Even the best get tired doing all of that for 10 hours a day.
  6. I didn't say negate, I said improved. But if you really see no improvement at all then fair enough. But it doesn't. You have to factor in the amount of supply that the enemy can bring to bear. As I said, with a greater number of players and AOs, it is much more possible to chose your AOs selectively so that the enemy cannot keep rotating in flags for hours. Your tactics must involve the overall stategy or else what improvement is offered over a shoebox shooter? Fair enough, it is a problem. Hopefully that too will lessen as new players get up to speed enough to help out in HC.
  7. If any squad or organised group doesn't get an AO when they request it, then something is wrong. Like you say though, someone has to sit at the top of the decision tree. Whether that person be labelled HC or squad leader makes little difference, except that only one has pledged to be accountable to the whole side and not just a select group. Now that we seem to be having between 6-12 flashing boxes on the map to choose from, surely every group can find their niche.
  8. Of course the problem is about supply. If each flag had 2 infantry in it then I wouldn't mind if the other HC moved in 100 flags. If each flag contained 100 heavy tanks, then it would likely be attack over if they moved 1 flag in. You get this concept, right? Now, when there are only a couple of active AOs on the map this means that with very little risk, a HC can rotate in and out several divisions of supply every couple of hours. With enough AOs, it is possible to achieve targeted attrition of a whole area, to use AOs to pin enemy flags in place and force a situation whereby the local advantages of multiple links or a supply stack can be exploited. With the greater numbers recently has come a boost to supply per flag. Yet not enough to prevent large areas from being heavily depleted for many hours at a time. This I would call a success. If the defender moves too many flags into a town under heavy attack then they risk losing a whole sector of the map. This risk vs reward simply wasn't the case with a lower population because CRS felt unable to reduce the supply enough due(in part) to the already low ratios of certain equipment. You keep insisting that those that feel TOEs should stay, need to come up with ideas to save them. Well I see several good suggestions above, so I ask you again: Do you not feel that some of the main issues have already been improved by a greater number of players? Given the serious needs across this game for modernisation/fixes etc that removal of TOEs should really be top of the list considering the extensive work involved? As I said before, I like the idea of a small garrison supply to give variety to play, and most importantly, end pure softcaps as a thing. I'd also like to see an end to the map edge cuts, or at least make flanking moves viable. The HC interface needs to be more user friendly. And communication and organisational tools need to be introduced, in game. I could go on. There ARE multiple things that can be improved.
  9. Magic brigade warping was, to me at least, always more a problem of too much supply across the front. There was little risk in moving supply from any area as by the time the enemy has responded, even more supply could be moved over. With 4/5/6 AOs this seemed, last map at least, to be much less of an issue. The shorter back line timer also seemed to me to work well. I'd be interested to hear how the HCs found it, but from the outside it appears that there was less risk of a serious mistake and more possibility to cover any mistakes. Break throughs being a little harder really helped both sides when they were being forced back as well. So I am interested to find out what the current main problems are, as people see them? Anyway, I'd MUCH rather see the flags stay. A small garrison in each town though would be a great addition.
  10. Against the french M10 it's 2.35. Against the US M10 it's 2.06. Linky
  11. I deliberately didn't mention any historical aspect. I have played against and alongside dm many times, as well as many other great tankers in this game for most of the last 11 years. All I was trying to point out is the mismatch in the spawnlists. Sorry if I wasn't clear. For further clarity, the tiger is currently sitting at a 1.63 historical(not that it goes back very far) k/d against the US S76. It's even higher @ 1.71 against the french S76(same model, I know). Against the C7 the k/d ratio is 2.46. So 11 tigers against 11 S76 is not 'parity in lethality'. Against 9 in the French flags is worse, even if less of any issue due to fewer French divisions. Against 13 C7s is not even close.
  12. I thought something was wrong. Then I was told in game today that axis were getting an equal number of tigers as allied get S76s. I thought that surely can't be right and it wasn't. They get more! In tier 4+ axis get 11 tigers per division. US forces get the same 11 S76s but France only get 9 and the UK flag gets 13 C7s. I doubt that anyone thinks this is an equal match. For comparison in tier 0, the 4d gets a 5-1 ratio over the Matty while the 3b gets a 2-1 numbers advantage(though BEGM might not be correct here). It seems to me that allies should get between 1.5 and 2 times the number of tigers. I get that the change was made when axis were in a slump. This game has always needed such equipment tweaks for the sake of balance. I hope the fact that those numbers remain is an oversight. Obviously the numbers of a single unit can't be looked at in isolation, so I checked a bit further down the list. Axis again get more 3Gs than allies get M10/C3. 37 per division against 34/30/32. 4G against S75 is roughly equal(#s). The rest is less relevant in late tiers. Unfortunately, there is a similar issue with infantry supply. This time, axis gets an extra 10% total number of infantry per division than US forces(882 vs 800). UK and French divisions get about 6% more than axis, but given we only have 1 division of each, it hardly compensates. Total numbers aren't the whole story, but concentrating on US vs German infantry flags, which makes up the majority of battles, both get 200 vanilla rifles. It's a bit difficult to compare the rest of the infantry spawn list due to the differences and I'm not about to start talking about which is better. But are we saying that the US spawn list is worth 80 fewer units than it's axis counterpart? Is that the rationale? ATG numbers, at a quick glance, appear slightly in axis favour too. I have had a long break until the last couple of weeks, so if axis were on a long losing streak then this is totally understandable. With steam numbers now though, it doesn't feel like a reasonable match-up to me and probably should have been reset. Is anyone monitoring this? *disclaimer Some of these numbers have been pulled from BEGM, which appears to have some omissions(notably 4g and 3g + 3b missing from armour flag list). I have double checked in game for all armor but please correct any mistakes that you find. **double disclaimer Yes, I have been getting my [censored] handed to me by dm79 and my saltiness probably lead me to look into this. But I haven't even mentioned how many m5 rounds his tiger can swallow, so I'm not really trying to nerf him
  13. Given how much there is to learn in this game, I have to question whether the grief caused by making the tutorial compulsory is actually worth while.
  14. Was 3 AOs and lots of fun about 4 hours ago. Hoping it will be a real blast tonight!