Registered Users
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Green Tag

About Di11on

  • Rank
  • Birthday August 27
  1. Hi folks, So I've been playing the game relatively trouble free since 2005. This forced despawn issue has impacted me only a few times, but my God it is very frustrating and I feel it's fundamentally wrong. For example, you spend 30 minutes flanking around town and then just get despawned? Do we have more information about how this works technically that would at least help me feel better about it? For example: - Are there basic checks for once-off lag issues. It would be unfair if this kicks in just because someone in the house decided to open a youtube video, or for doing something else that causes a temporary lag on the network. I presume you wouldn't be despawned for a once off issue and there has to be some repeat or pattern to trigger it... and if so, perhaps this can be tuned down. - Are there checks for the materiality of the lag? For example, if my connection lags and I'm 30 miles from anyone, who cares? - Are there specific situations in which this check is performed. I.e. I can understand if the server is trying to send you a "you're dead" message and it isn't received, then it's totally fair that you get force-despawned. - Are the checks different depending on the vehicle? I.e. if you are an inf, you probably spent less time getting to where you are than if you are in a boat or a tank, and the chances are lag has less of an impact on you because you can't maneuver as quickly Any addition information would be appreciated that would reassure me that getting force despawned from a game I pay to pay and have paid to play continuously for 13 years, is necessary!
  2. I've come back to playing after a while away - I heard over in the One Fix, One Feature thread that CRS are planning to revert to infantry placed FRUs? Is this true? Please no... It's basically the same as allowing you to create a save point in an MMOG. It's ridiculous! I feel that the fortified mobile spawn has been a huge positive development for the game and really allows territory to be held but is more difficult to set up. It creates a need for more infantry-armour cooperation and creates a new role for armour and a greater need for it during an attack.
  3. The FMS has changed the game and ushered in a new ERA of tank-infantry co-dependence. I think this is good... that it is very difficult to hold territory with inf only. Now that the MS has been fortified, instead of being destroyed, it gets camped. So the fundamental problem is that A FMS is deployed but the territory isn't held. Our tactics need to change. P1 when an FMS is deployed must be to hold the ground. ATGs should be amongst the first to spawn. But I agree that green tags dying in their hundreds is EXTREMELY bad for the game and action NEEDS to be taken. Another cause of this is the dynamics of the active battles tab. Players want to spawn into a mission with an FMS.. who wants to walk for miles? So if there are few missions with FMSs, then the ones that have them are propelled to the top of the list. When they start spawning in and dying instantly, it has the effect of keeping that mission at the top of the list and this sustains the vicious cycle. Very often the vets move elsewhere without deleting the FMS leaving the green tags to their fate. So, when an FMS is camped, an FMS is dead and the player base needs to take responsibility for that and delete the FMS. Another phenomenon I've seen is players headed to a town with no AO because there are already players in the mission, it's at the top of the active battles tab. And because it's at the top of the active battles tab, more players spawn in and you have lost more than half the logged in players to some un-AOd town! A simple solution is to give MLs the option to hide their mission from the Active Battles tab. Another thing that will help is to allow the ML to close their mission and prevent further spawning in. I think these are essential. Notwithstanding all that , I like the FMS... it helps create zones of control and a front line... but we have to know when the game is up and the ground is lost.
  4. I would say that it takes some sort of manual action by CRS to remove it during intermission and they just don't bother. I think everyone would prefer not having SL during intermission
  5. I think that much of the solution to this would be to shake up the Armour brigades and have different types. Heavy armour brigades for example. This would definitely help avoid WWI style stagnant warfare. I definitely think that we should have town garrison supply in addition to moveable brigades, but the movement of brigades should be tweaked and move timers should be more realistic and based on type and distance. I.e. light armour faster than heavy armour... mechanized inf faster than regular inf etc. etc. So, you would have fewer Tigers overall (for example) ... but you could concentrate them... and, with realistic move timers, you can't teleport them all over the map... it would be a real strategic decision. Finally, key to this would be no visibility of brigade deployments behind the front line... so you would have some real manoeuvre warfare without the soft caps. Edit: my opinion on garrison supply is that is should be more like a depot supply with no tanks at all... perhaps just armoured cars. After all, you should be penalized for making strategic errors... but you should also be able to put up a fight if there is no HC on. I think we would also need to ramp up efforts to have reserve HCs or even a fallback type arrangement where highest ranking guy online gets HC powers.
  6. That's really cool. I have a lot of Tanker ace ribbons :-)
  7. Some really really easy features that will make us all happier men when we go back to our wives: FEATURE 1: - Make $miss result a clickable link FEATURE 2: - Personal map waypoints
  8. I think this thread has supported my view that the single biggest problem with the game at the moment is the helplessness of the low-pop side with no HC on. It's a really dismal situation... CRS should stay up late and just observe it some day... to see the despair of the players is really something. Anywho... Fix: Hq or depot type garrison supply for towns plus armoured cars (perhaps). Very reduced supply in towns behind. Plus increased, realistic move time for brigades based on distance. Attacking brigades should be able to move in immediately (or close to). Feature: JEEPS
  9. As a tanker - the worst part about losing your commander is you lose audio and it's way more difficult to pick up and track ets
  10. It really doesn't have to be black and white. Take a particular brigade deployment at map start and add deployment/movement timers based on distance. Make the deployment/travel time infinite - now you have town supply. Make the timers anything less than that and you effectively have something in between the two extremes. A balance would have to be found. The system should be complimented by town garrison supplies. This solves your soft-cap problem. Have a reserve HC system where the highest ranking online player can assume a limited set of HC functions... and they must complete a tutorial before being able to do anything. Different types of brigade would also be nice. Heavy tank brigades etc. Don't have Tigers and Sherman 76s everywhere.
  11. If you guys get medic - I want a magic spanner for my tank... and I want to fly low over a certain area so my plane is resupplied... I.e. it is just redundant and completely at odds with the fundamental concept behind the game.
  12. The tone of the OP is misjudged. I think what the OP wanted to say is that with voice comms and playing as a team, they were mega-effective and kicked posterior. There is no single prescription for playing the game. Not everyone has the environment or time that allows them to play in this way.
  13. Some more points to make: 1. Let's put this issue in perspective - imbalance is not all bad. If we had perfect balance we'd have WWI and a static front line. We only want to address this issue to the extent we think it is a real problem and not just a perceived one. 2. Balance can be the enemy of variety - any long time player has played through campaigns they won and campaigns they lost - it's par for the course. If we exaggerate this issue too much then it creates an unrealistic expectation and a lower tolerance for slogging it through when the odds are stacked against you. New players will read all this discussion and think the game is broken when they are losing. We can't all be winners all the time. 3. By far the biggest impact on balance is when some squads switch sides. A small coordinated group of people can have a huge impact on this game - so to a large extent, we are the cause of and solution to this problem. 4. More players will mitigate the issue significantly.
  14. Don't let the best be the enemy of the good. I think this solution is not perfect but better than many of the other suggestions. Incentivising F2P to play underpop by giving access to a reserve SMG for example, gets around many of the problems. You are right, most MMOs have a free to play option - but everyone who games understands that there is no such thing as a free lunch and people generally accept that if you are playing a game for free, then 1. you have some restrictions and/or 2. paying players will have access to more than you. Sure, there is a risk of putting people off, but ask yourself if the risks associated with some of the other solutions being thrown around aren't worse?