• Announcements

    • HEAVY265

      Attention Soldiers Operation Fury Needs you!   02/20/2020

      Attention All Soldiers, Operation Fury needs you.  You need to choose a side and sign up.  
      For more intel on Operation Fury Please click HERE Please go to Special Event Forum (here), And sign up for allied or axis.
      This will be a CRS Lead event on both sides.  Xoom will be heading up the axis side and Heavy265 will be heading up the Allied side. This will be for bragging rights.
      Why are we asking players to sign up you ask. We are trying for a role play experience.   We want this to be a true realistic event.  
      So get up and sign up and let's make this the best event ever!!!!!!!!!!
      Give me your war cry, grrrrrrrrrrrrr
      Heavy265 **out**
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
katonka

Old School Tactics

34 posts in this topic

Perhaps the solution is to have players lock themselves in for the campaign. You could' date=' [b']eventually, have squads side lock themselves for the campaign making anyone in their squad locked for the duration. You could then have lone wolves select either side lock or side switch for the campaign. HC and squad lock would of course be ineligible to select side switch. You would end up with a majority side locked for the campaign with some limited side switching allowed. You would then have a good accurate picture of the playerbase's side loyalty and side switching composition.

Players that leave a squad during a campaign would still be side-locked for the campaign. Squads should have to chose one side or the other. They should not be able to select side switching at campaign beginning. Squads could even have a default side lock setting for all campaigns that they would have to change between campaigns if they want to play the other side as a squad.

Alternatively, you could allow side switching for the first week or two and then everyone becomes side locked on where they are at the end of the one to two weeks. Plenty of notification leading up to side-lock would be required. This gives payers that like to switch some time to play both sides but would prevent massive side switching near the end of campaigns. You could extend that time to beyond two weeks if that seems reasonable, I only use the one to two weeks to set the example.

This type of decision might be one eligible for a PB survey. You would want a solid majority on board with this type of change which directly affects access to the paid for content of the game.

I fail to see how this is any sort of serious solution to pop imbalance.

Very few side switch.

Most effects are the 'demoralized' side stops playing.

The target should be to get people to play even if their side is down, either map or population, and reduce the effect of population as content decider.

You shouldn't be punished for signing onto a side that is underpop, and likely will be for months or years.

Pop neutrality is the second biggest retention tool the Rats could put in (the first is addressing the 'lone soldier' effect of being thrown into the shark tank with no readily looked up info, no knowledge of channels, no voice comms, and no idea of squads or how to find battles).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I fail to see how this is any sort of serious solution to pop imbalance.

Very few side switch.

Most effects are the 'demoralized' side stops playing.

The target should be to get people to play even if their side is down, either map or population, and reduce the effect of population as content decider.

You shouldn't be punished for signing onto a side that is underpop, and likely will be for months or years.

Pop neutrality is the second biggest retention tool the Rats could put in (the first is addressing the 'lone soldier' effect of being thrown into the shark tank with no readily looked up info, no knowledge of channels, no voice comms, and no idea of squads or how to find battles).

Meh, it was an idea thrown out there. I'd agree that nothing prevents players from logging when their side is losing. Or for whatever reason really. The idea has the potential to address massive side shifting near the end of campaigns. I'd probably have to concede the idea has small merit and most players would be against any such self restriction by selection. I do not see how it is much of a punishment. You could change it every campaign and you do have a choice. Don't really see it happening though.

I'd also agree that taking new players under our wing for now is the best way to retain players. The wiki can come in very useful here if someone with the computer knowledge, game knowledge and time put something together covering those major issues that new players encounter.

Edited by stonecomet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Couldn't agree more!!

The years past of slowly ripping the roots that the former player base grew do to game changes, has reared its head. Theres a whole new player base brought about by insta action changes and or lack of any change at all. Inf placed fru's is just one...omfg skulls (havent had them on since day one). Moving supply. WTF is that? Hitting FB's (which are a bit tougher now) and might I add has had a huge impact on sustaining an attack. And that was almost screwed up when they were suggesting making the fb industructable thank god they didn't go that route. Now we have peeps wanting to make a box that spawns a whole dam armies worth of supply either indistructable or ***cough*** tougher. CHange the look, give them some camo....hey heres an idea, PPO's that PLAYERS could place that could HELP fortify the fru......how about a multitude of units (besides infantry) placing frus' with different types of spawn lists. All keeping natural barriers in play. Self towing? Allowing ATG coverage for the fru.

Some of the ideas getting kicked around from what im hearing are just crazy. Its time to roll back a bit to what worked....adding new stuff that fits that mold.

As for my Axis comrades who are bailing out....due to some sort of OMFG the RATS ****ed us...suk it up! and dig in. And fyi they didn't. This is an awesome change.......lets get back to what we were once really good at.

Peace.

Most changes in this game from DAY 1, has been (by my observations) motivated by the Axis side (from my perspective). It usually stemmed from

moaning and complaining and crying on their part.

Now we get something into the game that all sides can work with, again the moaning, etc.

This new FRU requires some planning, cooperation, comms, etc. That to me is a GOOD THING.

We need more teamwork and making squads more valuable again.

Stop the whining, complaining, moaning, biatching, etc. etc. etc.

And work with it. Make it useful to your side. Then if you have a legitimate

complaint, post it.

All I see is biatching.

As for the FRU, I don't see it as a realist way of getting troops to the front.

A teleport pad that can spawn a WHOLE BRIGADE from it?! I personally

would like to see the old MSP come back, put some boxes in the

cargo area and we would have to go back to the old bush layouts and size increase.

Also the supply levels for either FRU or MSP should be at CP/DEPOT supply quantities.

Here's a thought. The FRU would be at CP/DEPOT supply level and the MSP would have BRIGADE level supplies and the MSP can spawn up to TIER 1 level

ATG/AAA (no bofor) at the CP/DEPOT supply quantities.

And to help hide the MSP, an engineer could put up some camo netting around it and maybe the FRU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Most changes in this game from DAY 1, has been (by my observations) motivated by the Axis side (from my perspective). It usually stemmed from

moaning and complaining and crying on their part.

Nope (2001 -2006)

Does anyone have Top Opel? That one was my favorite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Today's homework assignment: Learn the difference between "tactics" and "strategy."

Bonus points for where "operations" fits into that spectrum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We need to remind ourselves of past successes. We have to forget the instant action scenarios and start using back towns to run frus and armor columns. FBs need to be taken down regularly.

HC needs to go back to spawning into each brigade and checking for missions and frus before they move brigades and communicate more with player base. Numerous Defence frus have been lost this weekend due to brigades moving with no warning.

Hey Kat!

Hope you are doing well.

Say hello to Loonie and the squad.

Hope to be back in a few months.

Resubbed to help out with the heros stuff but won't be back till July or so.

!S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as tactics and comms go well there is some truth to that, once you get a serious squad attacking a bunker for instance you can see even from a defenders perspective that they are working as a team, if the defenders are not as organized as in real life it gets ugly quick, i dont play allied ever but they do at times have their poop together, throwing smoke for cover and not going in one on one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.