Registered Users
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by dropbear

  1. Rats have said the lmgs are being looked at. I look forward to what they cone with, in particular the issues with deploying in windows and broken rubble without sticking out like dogs balls.
  2. This can be quite simply explained in that the matty spawns into the ab or fb and is immediately available and mobile. The 88 requires a tow, hopefully to a good position, and with infantry support at very least. A properly used 88 can decimate allied armor, but when left in the spawn pool is as useless as tits on a bull.
  3. Yet you still allow the highest kd ratio weapon to flood one side....read what you typed and ask yourself why play allied atm. Vets can normally deal with them..most of the playerbase just log.
  4. Numbers are irrelevant if the playerbase on one side doesn't log in. In Rethel today I logged in to see axis fms setup within plain sight of allied cps and still they managed to swamp the allies. It was simply a grey tsunami. I am noticing mostly f2p allies and lots were dying without ever firing a shot. Very few vets able to spawn atgs, armor or engies to kill the fms. Grats to the axis but in a even pop attack they eould have been decimated, even with the pak38s vs r35s.
  5. I personally like the new setups. Its a challenge! BUT, the tiers are clearly designed with the assumption of even pop. As the current campaign shows, the playerbase has refused to show up, or worse, swap sides. I feel that not enough warning was given to allow the playerbase enough time to change tactics to suit the new reality.
  6. THX for the info Zeke!
  7. yup big tick C:\WINDOWS\system32>tracert secure.wwiionline.com Tracing route to secure.wwiionline.com [] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 4 ms 1 ms 1 ms mygateway.gateway [] 2 * * * Request timed out. 3 6 ms 6 ms 5 ms 4 6 ms 5 ms 6 ms bundle-ether6.woo-core1.brisbane.telstra.net [] 5 15 ms 18 ms 16 ms bundle-ether20.chw-core10.sydney.telstra.net [] 6 19 ms 19 ms 19 ms bundle-ether1.oxf-gw11.sydney.telstra.net [] 7 19 ms 16 ms 19 ms bundle-ether1.sydo-core03.sydney.reach.com [] 8 206 ms 206 ms 205 ms i-73.paix-core02.telstraglobal.net [] 9 204 ms 205 ms 204 ms i-92.paix02.telstraglobal.net [] 10 205 ms 206 ms 206 ms gtt-peer.paix02.pr.telstraglobal.net [] 11 199 ms 198 ms 199 ms xe-7-2-1.cr0-dal2.ip4.gtt.net [] 12 201 ms 200 ms 200 ms ip4.gtt.net [] 13 200 ms 202 ms 200 ms secure.playnet.com [] Trace complete.
  8. How about pop balancing by giving players who chose the low pop side access to the tier 0 weapon set, with a possible exception of sappers to reduce the tanker anguish?
  9. sorry to report...checked and still have exact same error..Native client works fine.
  10. Many thanks. FAST SERVICE!
  11. Perhaps a ui to show players popping into the queue to spawn in? Gives instant feedback on how many players are available. Nothing worse than capping a co and no-one else comes to support.
  12. Properly placed satchels brought down whole bridges...but I agree with the thoughts on this thread. Bring back those epic combined arms fb attacks/defences. Bring the fight to the countryside to earn the right to attack the town.
  13. I have no problem at all with f2p players having targeted ads in the mission screens. There are many open source projects on github that can provide ideas on html5 designs. Will the updated UI support this?
  14. How about giving the mission leader tools that enable him or her to mark possible positions for assets, such as atgs, aa, inf support, armor, resupply positions. THEN allow the playerbase to fill these positions with the assets..all while giving them rank points for fulfilling orders. It gives attacks/defences a plan and coordination. You should be able at a glance see whats needed.
  15. From my own personal pov I feel that CRS is still designing the game and spawnlists with the assumption of high population on both sides. This is clearly not happening for the vast majority of the campaigns, for various reasons. The only way I personally see a way out is to reduce the subscription costs and provide a more inviting f2p experience. We all understand the need for a steady income via subs to run the game, don't get me wrong. The game is crying for more players..they are NOT subscribing in sufficient numbers to make the game shine. The question is WHY? TOES are fluff compared to this..icing on the cake, albeit a stale carrot cake left in the cupboard a week too long.
  16. Careful i got a tos for stating this exact same thing in a .report
  17. I like this concept. Anything that encourages group play should be looked at. Maybe the mission leader can pop up orders that flash up on an overlay stating the objective, and with waypoints automatically placed.
  18. Awesome..more kitties to declaw! Thanks for the update.
  19. ...and I thought the 33 kills at the enemy fms in Duren last night was ok. I was amazed they kept spawning...
  20. This sounds like a win win..extended intermission using the open beta, followed by a campaign. This would allow for plenty of time to fix issues and polish it. Open betas need time to find the issues.
  21. Its the 2lbr and matty vs the panny in tier 0... But SERIOUSLY, the dev decision to put put ONE Brit Armoured bde on the map smacks of incompeteance at best and clear bias at worst. All the posts about Fireflys and they end up as rare as rocking horse proverbial ARTIFICIALLY by game management decisions. I applaud BMBM bringing it to the management but it should never have got to this point. Perception is EVERYTHING CRS!
  22. Is it possible to investigate the DAC and 232 regarding tipping over? I lose 5x as many dacs to enemy berms than enemy fire. The DACs in particular due to their short wheelbases. Are the suspensions not working?
  23. It is heartening to see effort being put into fixing these often very old bugs.