Registered Users
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by dropbear

  1. Wth potthead 1 2 3 or whatever we are up too...how dare you humanise yourself with that self serving bloody AWESOME video! Next you will be telling us that you are a vegan! Dropbear Ps awesome video from a proud Qlder that STILL hasn't seen snow.
  2. I'm sure we could use the sheep as quasi war dogs..reskin ftw!
  3. I have subbed to the starter account this campaign until the land based subs become available, so I have a vester interest in the available numbers.
  4. Engineers are at a premium usually..they are my primary targets especially at the beginning of an AO. That and the addition of engies to starter accounts (and possibly wasted earlier??) would sway me to keeping them where they are for this campaign. The fact that there are more guys having them ava8ble for use also means more chances of getting them killed.
  5. I wholeheartedly support these ideas, but of course without subs nothing can be done.
  6. QFT...everything else that CRS does is gilding the lily.
  7. Is the game audio system so broken that truck audio can not be heard clearly in town from the fbs? THIS is why fms go down so quickly...simply put the overpop side has the opportunity and the numbers to spawn multiple trucks and placing out of ews range before the previous ao is finished. Placing one inf in each mission is easy when u have the numbers. EVERYTHING is easy when u have the numbers..but hc based ums that can be set anywhere could be game breaking. I look forward to seeing how it goes..at least CRS is trying to keep battles going, but any side that is currently OP is going to be exponentially harder to stop now.
  8. The playerbase naturally gravitates to units that have a longer TOM- tanks and aircraft. Being killed over n over an over again, by enemy you don't even see due to vis limits, frustrum culling, and simple god awful cqb lag, gets any side down.
  9. Make them able to "support" armor by fixing tracks/engines as well?
  10. I for one LOVE the scale of the map..BUT, are we designing the gameplay for people with hours of available uninterrupted gameplay, every day, or players with an hour or two every few days maybe. In the time poor days I would think most possible subscribers don't see the value in a sub when it can take 20-30 mins to get a tank in a good spot sometimes. Fast infantry gameplay is great but the cqb gameplay does not give the overall scope of the game. Imagine if you are a new player for a moment - spawn in an advertised fms to either die immediately , or wander around looking for enemy, or finally get to town and get inside a building with an enemy flag.. The disparity between what we advertise and what the common player gets to play is huge, and I feel is a major reason behind the low subsciption rates. The new lower price starter account should alleviate this...gives the new guys a taste of all the available forces.
  11. to anyone who knows you need two sides to have a game..
  12. The high command MS is a huge feature now it has smgs - expect the overpop side to seriously flood ao's now, from all directions.
  13. Is it at all possible to tie the proportions of supplied equipment to the game population? Has anyone actually tried playing allied armour in tz3 with 5+ shreks waiting in the vehicle spawns to get their kills? No seriously, there are more shreks in some attacks than smgs, especially in the early stages. I certainly don't blame the axis - the devs have deemed it AOK to give them the tools. Allies have them as well - it's just numbers = win, almost every time. I seriously would invite ALL the CRS devs to actually play on the underpop side for a full day cycle - I see them pop in and out, mostly doing map work or HC work if allies have no HC for the moment. We need them to log in and actually PLAY in the game for a day, and then give their feedback. I would also ask them to artificially increase their ping rates to simulate players from other countries (easily done), to see HOW the game is viewed from their customers point of view. It seems to me that the devs are only aware of the huge problems the game has abstractly, with little to no real experience in the game over time. We need objective testing of how the game plays in reality - not fiddling with numbers in a database, and then seeing the results. One way or another this sort of balancing alienates the player base from the developers. Players are generally too invested in their own side to be useful as objective testers - I would hope for the game's longevity that the developers can see past their preference for one side or another.
  14. ...then you are not using them correctly. SERIOUSLY, when one side that controls the battlefield, the air and ground warfare, has an overwhelming population in almost all timezones, and still cannot utilise paratroopers??? As has been said before, paras have satchels , access to lmgs, smgs. Promote them properly to your f2p. Bring some vets along to show the new guys how powerful they can be used if used as shocktroopers - taking remote cps, taking out that atg line on the hill, or simply landing directly in the open bunker farmhouse. If I had access to even a quarter of your population we could ruin your day.....
  15. I think we all understand the roadmap XOOM but there is nothing in it concerning the fundamental capping/spawning paradigm. Yes the UI is important, I would love real in-game comms (mostly because my brother plays a role in FAC in the Australian army), but I would give those up on a minute if we could address proximity aos and the capture mechanisms. @XOOMAny news on land based subs?
  16. Perhaps we should look towards artificially reducing the map size in low pop situations. Say 10 towns in tz3 which would simulate a division wide attack/defence. It would serve to concentrate the available forces on both sides. Combined with proximity ao's this could work...
  17. NO Kilemall, I am not subbed. I play f2p until I reach rage quit lvl then log off - so many times in disgust it's not funny. Sooo many times I find ems in the fields or ets incoming. I mark them, relay it to the target ao defence and get ignored 90% of the time. I am finding the lag exponentially worse in the last few weeks..is it CRS cutting costs on bandwidth and/or priority from their provider?. Not ALL the enemy can be using throttled connections surely. My ping is rock steady at 205-210 and when I experience any weirdness I always tab out and check it. It is the very best you can physically get from Australia. MY squad has been decimated - three or four players that are still subbed play very rarely and then for an hour or two at most, As has been intimated in posts above there is a real lack of vets that are playing allied atm. A few new players around asking questions and wandering about - they are little but target practice for the hordes playing axis atm.
  18. A further issue with gameplay is how just one or two ei can mole a target, and either pull a considerable amount of defenders (depending on the target value), or get ignored to the point that they can cap a spawnable(s). This is totally immersion breaking and frankly poor gameplay design. We all do it now tho as it is very effective when done correctly (throttle the fms to keep ews low etc) I think we should not be able to cap until we have double inf ews as well as a sliding scale of the double ews setting according to game pop. This means less multi accounts hiding in closets or bushes waiting to cap/suppress. There ARE things we can do NOW to fix gameplay..lets focus on what we can do to keep the hamster fed!
  19. You are in my thoughts..fight the good fight! my brother
  20. @Choad thats exactly my gameplay and is the reason why I generally set dfms and cut enemy ingress to town. Alas being f2p means I use a rifle mostly and in cps it is a virtual crap shoot who dies first or we both die.... 1.36 has generally been a success but the lag for me has increased, even with less enemy around since wbs finished. I will say tho, it seems just certain players are uber laggy - others seem to die when hit first time.
  21. Im liking where this is going..I am also in the same boat as tater. I want the game to succeed badly but a combination of high sub costs, God awful CQB gameplay, and the fact that the game becomes WORK is stopping me. My squad has mostly left or rarely log in at all now. Proximity aos and by extension proximity capping could alleviate 2 out 3 issues for me, and the inf only/land based subs would fix the last excuse.
  22. Hah thats bloody awesome!
  23. So you are saying a fully kitted out soldier jumping from the roof of a two-story building onto the roof of a cp below it and firing in one motion is good close quarter gameplay?
  24. Perhaps combined with more rank advancement? God knows we have to bring the new guys into the fold so they can see the tactical and strategic glory that our game CAN SHOW. Unfortunately, at the moment its ninja caps, followed by a flood.