Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
vasduten1

CRS: We Need a Fix for This

72 posts in this topic

Guys, this affects both sides equally.

When there aren't any HC on, the game suffers miserably.

Holes open up, flags don't move.

Attacks succeed, and no flags move in afterward.

Efforts of a lot of people get wasted because of this nonsense, so I want to know if there is a plan of some kind to manage the flags/AOs/DOs if there aren't poor unfortunate souls on to manage the map?

What about a petition system where if a number of players made a .request then an AO or DO could be placed for bridges?

What about flag movements?

I still don't think having an HC structure dependent on a handful of people works for this game, since nobody ever wants to join or do the work necessary.

It is ruining the gayman experience for a lot of players that are still hanging on.

Could all of HC officers be put in a labor pool to be used by either side for a campaign at a time?

I'd support that over side locking for general players.

Something needs to be done to remove or fix this variable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree. But probably they dont want to allocate resources to this right now and get 1.35 finished quicker.

Then with 1.35 and maybe increased pop it might not be needed anymore?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I still don't think having an HC structure dependent on a handful of people works for this game' date=' since nobody ever wants to join or do the work necessary.[/quote']

Key word being "WORK"

Definitely needs an overhaul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on vasduten. It is no different then when Stauffenberg blew up hitlers planning room and they were out of communication for a few hours. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't think having an HC structure dependent on a handful of people works for this game, since nobody ever wants to join or do the work necessary.

We have openly acknowledged that the High Command system and its incredible demand to be filled is a set back to our in game operations. More work needs to be done to lessen the burden, and with the lack of HC these days it only makes it harder.

The future will likely be side based voting systems, or worst case scenario, system / scripts managing things.

I'd be aiming for the former, my thoughts go around something like this:

If High Command are online...

1) They have the ability to propose three AO options.

2) Community has 4 Votes available, AO 1/2/3/ Request New List.

3) Majority wins.

If High Command is offline...

1) System provides three AO options.

2) Community has 4 Votes available, AO 1/2/3/ Request New List.

3) Majority wins.

The truth is we need a serious overhaul of the HC system, and our game mechanics / reliance on brigades and their movements. This would be a massive project but should be seriously considered.

And now to go back to the drawing board of juggling all the priorities we have to choose in the correct order for us to make the mission successful. Le sigh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We have openly acknowledged that the High Command system and its incredible demand to be filled is a set back to our in game operations. More work needs to be done to lessen the burden, and with the lack of HC these days it only makes it harder.

The future will likely be side based voting systems, or worst case scenario, system / scripts managing things.

I'd be aiming for the former, my thoughts go around something like this:

If High Command are online...

1) They have the ability to propose three AO options.

2) Community has 4 Votes available, AO 1/2/3/ Request New List.

3) Majority wins.

If High Command is offline...

1) System provides three AO options.

2) Community has 4 Votes available, AO 1/2/3/ Request New List.

3) Majority wins.

The truth is we need a serious overhaul of the HC system, and our game mechanics / reliance on brigades and their movements. This would be a massive project but should be seriously considered.

And now to go back to the drawing board of juggling all the priorities we have to choose in the correct order for us to make the mission successful. Le sigh.

but...who moves flags if no HC is on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
but...who moves flags if no HC is on?

Yeah that's the big problem. Either it will be system (which will be a nightmare) or we'll have to come up with a way for people to volunteer to command a brigade and then have some sort of check / balance system to reduce issues, but it's not at all bullet proof.

Immediate solution: Join HC, even as a reservist to help buy us time. This is a big one on my plate and will affect the campaign greatly as you know it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd seriously consider having a roster of players who are able to hop over and make moves when absolutely necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd seriously consider having a roster of players who are able to hop over and make moves when absolutely necessary.

Conscription? :D hehe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd seriously consider having a roster of players who are able to hop over and make moves when absolutely necessary.

I've suggested this before as well, and the usual push back is that who could you trust to handle this responsibility. I still think it's something that should be considered though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I repeat: Allow players to nominate themselves as OICs, once per hour.

If no actual HC vetoes their nomination within 5 minutes then it is automatically approved.

Thus if no HC are online, anyone could step up to OIC and move a brigade that is needing to be moved.

There is no commitment, no paperwork, you are not joining the HC and are not bound to their book of silly rules. You are just someone who stepped up to the plate, did the job, and then went back to what they were doing before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I repeat: Allow players to nominate themselves as OICs, once per hour.

If no actual HC vetoes their nomination within 5 minutes then it is automatically approved.

Thus if no HC are online, anyone could step up to OIC and move a brigade that is needing to be moved.

There is no commitment, no paperwork, you are not joining the HC and are not bound to their book of silly rules. You are just someone who stepped up to the plate, did the job, and then went back to what they were doing before.

Annnnnnnd......

How do you stop someone from the opposite side using a second account to take that position, move brigades to make a win easier?

Or someone who is not a griefer but ignores everyone else because as you say they never signed up for the Articles of Conduct and makes crazy moves that damages their side worse then no one there?

HAS to be a vetting/failsafe component, one way or another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The functionality is already built in.

Make .oicvolunteer possible again for non-hc players.

The HC move system has a failsafe already in it: any oic/hc can veto any move.

Additionally HC can request to remove a person from an oic position ánd you have mods who can remove a player who becomes abusive ( nominating himself constantly to do bad things).

Seriously this is like the "we dont allow drawing tools because everyone would draw penisses" discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Give HC a free tow account. They contribute more to the game than builders do.

And give them back uniforms.

There must be some CRS incentives

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally you may know of my vision to slow down brigade movements and increase AO/Brigade cool down timers. The lack of HC has kind of emulated that as there has been less movement and lasting AO commitment. A more stable battlefield. Voting would always be the best system from my point of view as it hinders a single non-vetted player from exerting too much influence. Such a system also places the weight of decisions across the player base when HC presence may be lacking.

One vote per IP would be ideal if possible or one vote per multiple accounts owned. Much preferable than allowing a single non-vetted individual move brigades around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the voting option it might make more sense to have votes for temporary HC powers.

Allow a player to be voted into HC if none are online. This would probably help guarantee the person isn't a troll or unknowledgeable on what to do. It would be as simple as someone saying on side chat, "Hey guys, no HC are on right now. If you want flags moved and AOs being placed you need to vote me in." If some random guy wants to be temporary OIC, then obviously he's not likely to get the votes.

There would probably need to be an "impeach" function as well for temporary HC in case a troll or something gets voted in.

Then, when an HC finally logs on, it removes that person's HC abilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how bout all towns without flags have a garrison supply ok if no hc are online to move flags u may have enough to defend and buy time with...i dunno just a thought

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply, XOOM.

Those look like good ideas, but certainly the flag movement issue has to be addressed.

Sheeeeeet, if someone's in HC, then they can be assigned a side at the start of a campaign and play there til the end.

If they cheat, then their account can be charged $500 for screwing the game up for everyone hahaha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I ended up joining HC reserve more than a year ago because of this ****.

Was either join up or get used to see what you describe in your OP more and more often.

I think nearly everybody agrees that there needs to be some changes to the HC system.

But its also pretty much a fact that if there's going to be any changes at all, its gonna take a while.

In the meantime, theres not many other choice but to join HC if you're tired of noticing a lack of coverage during your hours.

This is especially true for any veteran player.

Edited by Lob12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope, the few dedicated Axis players that are left won't join HC, (again,).

It's just no fun. Personally, I have not a ton of time to play.

When I play I want to play, not mess with brigade movements or AOs.

I don't think anyone should have to do this either.

We should go back to garrisoned forces in each town, with no AOs necessary.

Try this for an extended intermission and see what happens.

I bet squads will have more effect, and squad to squad coop play will increase naturally.

No ToES. No Flags. No AOs, No HC.

Just players.

All player driven fun and finger banging. That would at least be interesting, compared to:

"Oh man, they've been attacking this town for an hour and there is no supply... Is Hc on?!? No? Who has map? NOBODY?!? Who can move a flag in? Oh, too late, the AB is gone now."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then you will have to accept the consequences of your choice.

Its that simple really.

Had the same reasoning than you 2 years ago. But I got sick to lose at some point...

I fooking had to do the starting deployment this map... Something I never did before. That was way too much pressure for a damn game haha.

No AOs?

Ninja-weak-ass fights all over map?

Non merci. Been there, done that.

Minimum garrison in every town is something I would actually support. But AOs serve a vital function.

The people who don't want to join HC and who don't already conduct squad operations won't be transformed into super-leaders overnight because TOEs are gone...

This game has always been hard on leaders.

Edited by Lob12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, maybe a compromise.

Keep AOs, let there be minimal supply in a town. Enough to move it to the DO town next door, maybe.

Yeah, having an opel of cappers zip along the countryside capping up little towns is sort of lame, but having an underpop side try and defend against three AOs is just ridic.

Having to find HC and staff those positions sucks.

I certainly won't go back to HC.

I did it for a while and aside from making sure supply was there for fights, (and comms about moving flags,) it stunk to see one group of officers get a push going and then as they log it falls apart and WORSE, another group of HC gets on later and takes flags in a different direction, weakening the line.

Hole opens and bam. Breakthrough.

Big losses.

Ugh, this is giving me a headache hahaha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HAS to be a vetting/failsafe component' date=' one way or another.[/quote']

The current vetting system is one of the main reasons why we lack HC.

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.