• Announcements

    • XOOM

      Volunteer PHP Developer wanted to revive the Gazette!   07/24/2019

      We're looking to properly revive the World@War Gazette and need a solid PHP developer to help take some work forward. If you have some skills with PHP and are looking for some experience and to bring important home page news / recognition for individual players back to WWII Online, I'd like to hear from you! Submit an inquiry to jobs@corneredrats.com with some details about your experience. You will need at least 10+ hours per week to contribute to the team. The Gazette's current status can be found here: https://www.wwiionline.com/resources#gazette
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
vasduten1

Remove the HC and ToEs Structures

23 posts in this topic

6. Ideas should be posted in detail

That's right; get rid of HC, or make officers split EQUALLY to staff both sides in an effort to keep "No HC on!!! No supply! No flags moving!!! No AOS!!!!" from happening. Have garrisoned supply in towns and no need for AOs at all. WWII free for all. They who cap the most win.

6a. How does the idea work?

Probably better than having crap HC on and getting reamed every day.

6b. How does it affect game mechanics?

Lets HC players focus on PLAYING the game instead of drooling while staring at the map and having bugged tools.

6c. What is the intended goal of your idea?

To give the game back to the players who don't want to spend the equivalent of a part-time job playing map officer.

This HC structure doesn't work for the populations we have now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your feedback.

Can you please provide more ideas on how it would work to remove the HC/TOEs?

We are looking for detailed input on ideas. So the more detail the better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A set amount of supply in each town.

No AOs necessary to capture.

No flags.

No HC.

Detailed enough?

How would it work?

Well, you could spawn anywhere you wanted, just like way back in the day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember how it was way back in 2005-2006...........like that! No flags to move around.......etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Remember how it was way back in 2005-2006...........like that! No flags to move around.......etc.

Bingo.

Instant fun for everyone.

If Jsilec, lipton and Lob12 want to complain about "ninja" attacks, then so be it.

I say, if you see a town being attacked, go there and defend. It would spread things out but hey... no HC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bingo.

Instant fun for everyone.

If Jsilec, lipton and Lob12 want to complain about "ninja" attacks, then so be it.

I say, if you see a town being attacked, go there and defend. It would spread things out but hey... no HC.

I dont think its so much the "ninja" attacks but the problem is TZ3 and the ability of the under pop side to squelch all the fires so to speak.

There would have to be compromises if the system ever went back to the way it was because TZ3 or over pop side would just have an advantage. Maybe go back to the old way but KEEP AO's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I dont think its so much the "ninja" attacks but the problem is TZ3 and the ability of the under pop side to squelch all the fires so to speak.

There would have to be compromises if the system ever went back to the way it was because TZ3 or over pop side would just have an advantage. Maybe go back to the old way but KEEP AO's

That's a good point. I retract the ninja remark.

TZ3 would have to have limitations, or AOs could be voted on.

Somethign could pop up in chat or there could be a screen you could go to to cast your votes for P1, P2 and P3. Maybe limit TZ3 to two AOs?

Three AOs max.

None of this four and five AO BS.

I'd like to hear more on this from everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That debate is older than ToEs itself.

Have fun beating a dead horse lol.

I don't care that much about brigades and stuff. But you definitely need something like AOs.

I saw you complain about how the 2nd or 3rd AOs screws you up when we are too overpop'd vasduten.

Think you gonna like a free-for-all kinda system when you're underpop? I know I wont; I experienced it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6. Ideas should be posted in detail

That's right; get rid of HC, or make officers split EQUALLY to staff both sides in an effort to keep "No HC on!!! No supply! No flags moving!!! No AOS!!!!" from happening. Have garrisoned supply in towns and no need for AOs at all. WWII free for all. They who cap the most win.

6a. How does the idea work?

Probably better than having crap HC on and getting reamed every day.

6b. How does it affect game mechanics?

Lets HC players focus on PLAYING the game instead of drooling while staring at the map and having bugged tools.

6c. What is the intended goal of your idea?

To give the game back to the players who don't want to spend the equivalent of a part-time job playing map officer.

This HC structure doesn't work for the populations we have now.

very good

I like!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That also means a endless supply of tanks etc.etc . no thanks, i like the supply/attrition aspect of the game. It just needs smaller changes and improvements that are not do HC dependent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That also means a endless supply of tanks etc.etc . no thanks' date=' i like the supply/attrition aspect of the game. It just needs smaller changes and improvements that are not do HC dependent.[/quote']

Not endless. Towns once had a certain number of stuff to spawn, and if you wanted to tank zerg, you had to get a bunch of people together and start tanks rolling from three towns back.

What we did was get a half track or two, and as many tanks as we could spawn, drive to the next town, meet up with more tanks, then move on to the front line town.

We'd end up with a big assault of tanks. Certainly not infinite.

Consider this:

We attack a Brit town that links to three other towns. In those three other towns, there are armored flags, infantry flags, etc. Theoretically, each town could have a lot of flags.

Supply is moved in , spent flags move out. It's already an endless supply of tanks, as far as the life of an AO goes. It's already too much.

I'm not proposing limitless supply in each town.

I'm proposing a standard infantry flag's worth of stuff in each town, and that's it.

If someone wants to bring tanks up from the rear, fine. We used to resupply all the time that way. It took work.

You wipe out a town's supply by attacking too far, and you will outrun the resupply timers.

Couple this with RDP and it'd be a fun game again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say no to town/AB based supply. I've played both versions and I prefer the brigade style system. Too many odd things can happen with the way the links are set up around most key towns (like Ciney changing hands 4 times a day).

And AOs are absolutely essential. You can debate AB supply but AOs are untouchable. Even with 100x the pop we have now, leaders are far too rare among the general population for such a system to function well. You need to funnel people on a map this big.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the removal of the HC takes me back in time to when many other problems were in the game.

I remember a time when the two sides had no HS in game or out of the game. The Axis actually had some organization and the allied side was not so much. There was little groups of people here and there that was organized, but no big picture. When the Axis organized their side, there was no stopping them. The found a side wide organization was the key. Both sides were set to get the Orbat but they were the faster ones to learn.

So first question from me would be with no HC how would you propose to organize a side as a whole?

The AO, we get many players complaining now there are too many AOs in the game. I have seen players complain on two AOs even when population is close to clicking the third AO. Their complaints is that they do not have enough players to cover those two. I remember before AO's and all the complaints in the forums about a side not able to cover the entire front. Also complaints of small to no battles to take towns.

So at this point this topic splits into two topics I think.

1 - Removal of the HC and find another solution to the big picture leadership

2- Removing the AOs and how to handle empty town captures and small battles.

Do not get me wrong, I like big battles, then at times I like the easy captures. To me it is like busting butt to get the big battle towns and fighting tooth and nail for it, but then sometimes I like to be able to just walk in and take a town with little fight sometimes. A mix of both.

While I also support the HC system 100% I am also seeing a need for change to help the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HC can still place AOs otherwise system will do it

no HC flag movement anymore

no flags at all

every town gets supply/TOE equal of 1 inf and 1 armoured flag

spawn list is "moving up" supply now => chain supply kinda

factories have "ticks" every 5mins (for example). they can be slightly increased via factory damage up to 10mins (eqaul 100% damage) and with every tick supply gets pushed from factory town towards frontline towns and those towns/airfields behind frontline. and ofc you dont get new big tanks every 5 mins :D

you can compare it a bit like the spawnable supply in an enemy town which gets refilled every 5mins afaik

units get a "weigh" in supply list. the modern tanks ofc come in a lot slower than simple units like riflemen

when you advance too fast into enemy land you have to face fresh towns with your slowly regaining supply in the town you just capped.

towns closer to the factory get resupplied first before frontline towns (thats why we have supply links ingame already)

maybe a distance related supply malus (to simulate the distance to factories). when 1 side is pushed to their factories the enemy has to face longer supply lines/ticks. and dont forget that the defending faction has to face constant factory bombardement. so it is most likely even

here comes the idea with railway stations acting as supply nodes. make them attackable by bombs to slightly reduce the supply timers again

cut off towns dont get resupplied

----------------------------

in order to keep HC in some way it would be good to able "to control" the factory output. changes to the factory production list apply after like 6 hours and can only be changed after this time. so HC can concentrate on leading on the battlefield and coordinate attacks

an example for this:

factory capacity is 100%

5% heavy tanks (Tiger for example)

10% medium tanks

10% anti tank guns

10% anti aircraft guns

10% tow vehicles

5% anti tank infantry

10% automatic weapons

20% semi auto rifles

20% bolt rifles

now the HC could change this production list to something different but remember that it will change in numbers

bolt rifles are cheapest units and can be kinda mass produced since the cost per unit is super low

Tigers are extremely expensive. so a change towards an increased Tiger production will drop the amount of produced other units a lot !

Bolt rifle = 1 pt

SMG = 2 pt

Tiger = 40 pts

so when you want to produce 1 more Tiger you kinda lost the ability to produce 20x SMGs instead

------------------------------------

each Tier has ofc the new equipment but also gets an increase of factory points in total. so more equipment in total can be produced

What do you think ? :)

Edited by undercova
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So at this point this topic splits into two topics I think.

1 - Removal of the HC and find another solution to the big picture leadership

2- Removing the AOs and how to handle empty town captures and small battles.

The big picture was always there it's just that some chose not to participate in it and wanted it given to them instead. I think it's pretty obvious that many players still care about "the map" and if you put them on a side they will organize themselves at their discretion. If one side does it better then oh well, that's how a game is played and a roll will be because of a faction-wide effort rather than due to 1-3 people making a mistake or simply not logging on.

AOs could stay but be triggered by player presence near a town, say 40 players. Small squads won't be able to get their own AOs without coordinating, sucks but so what that's how it is now. Player presence scales much better with population and gives players command. If every town had a set spawn list then there would be no empty towns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AOs by population would be a huge mistake

I believe passionately that the design of the game elements MUST align to a common vision, a set of coherent principles

As long as we have ToES, AOs are essential on order to orientate the ToES. And as long as we have AOs, we need a person or persons steering them in line with the ToES set up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So at this point this topic splits into two topics I think.

1 - Removal of the HC and find another solution to the big picture leadership

No, keep the HC structure like is was say back in 2006. Keeps AO's but remove the brigade flag nonsense.

2- Removing the AOs and how to handle empty town captures and small battles.

No keep AO's. We dont have the pop we used to have for an "open" map

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People wanting no HC is just a failure to predict what will happen. As HC we have the obligation to remind folks what's going on. Too often a town will be undefendeded even after spawnables fall. Not that it's up to HC, per-say, but we need a big voice on both sides letting folks know what's going on. Spawnable in, say, Ciney falls. I check the town, no missions. In my big voice(read: .allied) I let them know the situation. CRS has a history of keeping to historical aspects as much as possible, and like it or not HC is both historical and very valuable. You can't trust the playerbase to come together in a non-HC environment. It'll happen, but it won't be a consistent occurrence. I don't want to log into this game when gameplay resembles small undirected random raiding parties. Granted we need tweaks to the game, in both HC and AO's. I won't pretend to know the answer, but I will say removing them is not the way to go. Too many times have the vocal minority gotten their way and impacted the game in a negative way.

Instead of hollering for instant and vast changes to the game, why don't you outline your issues with AOs and HCs. Makes for better discussion rather than sounding like my two year old nephew....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AOs by population would be a huge mistake

I believe passionately that the design of the game elements MUST align to a common vision, a set of coherent principles

As long as we have ToES, AOs are essential on order to orientate the ToES. And as long as we have AOs, we need a person or persons steering them in line with the ToES set up

Setting AOs by population and having fixed spawn lists in each town would eliminate the need for HC(and thus HC shortages). Along with that it would:

-scale well with high and low population

-result in more attrition on the frontline

-always permit players to spawn the equipment they want(though not close)

-end soft captures

-dampen rolls(new supply in the next town instead of a drained brigade)

-halt extreme low pop town captures

-guarantee fighting over the entire map

And a bunch of other stuff like creating resupply and interdiction. I think that all the employees that came up with HC/ToEs concepts are no longer employed, the current system is obviously failing so I don't see why they can't try something different. These aren't complicated rules, they could fit on a page which you certainly can't say about the thousand HC/AO/ToE regulations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-scale well with high and low population

-result in more attrition on the frontline

-always permit players to spawn the equipment they want(though not close)

-end soft captures

-dampen rolls(new supply in the next town instead of a drained brigade)

-halt extreme low pop town captures

-guarantee fighting over the entire map.

We already see a ton of attrition, it won't dampen rolls seeing how your system ensures new supply in each town. The attrition we see does a good job of stopping long breakthroughs. And it won't stop extreme low pop roll as supply isn't an issue during low pop, it's sheer numbers..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setting AOs by population and having fixed spawn lists in each town would eliminate the need for HC(and thus HC shortages). Along with that it would:

-scale well with high and low population

-result in more attrition on the frontline

-always permit players to spawn the equipment they want(though not close)

-end soft captures

-dampen rolls(new supply in the next town instead of a drained brigade)

-halt extreme low pop town captures

-guarantee fighting over the entire map

And a bunch of other stuff like creating resupply and interdiction. I think that all the employees that came up with HC/ToEs concepts are no longer employed, the current system is obviously failing so I don't see why they can't try something different. These aren't complicated rules, they could fit on a page which you certainly can't say about the thousand HC/AO/ToE regulations.

I recognise that this type of game would be free of some of the problems that ToES, AO and HC bring.

But personally, I find the game you're proposing less sophisticated and less appealing that the game with ToES, AO and HC.

I'd rather see Dev time spent making the most of the ToES game by fleshing out all the supporting functions necessary to make it work, as opposed to reinstating past mechanics which decrease the complexity of the game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I recognise that this type of game would be free of some of the problems that ToES, AO and HC bring.

But personally, I find the game you're proposing less sophisticated and less appealing that the game with ToES, AO and HC.

I'd rather see Dev time spent making the most of the ToES game by fleshing out all the supporting functions necessary to make it work, as opposed to reinstating past mechanics which decrease the complexity of the game

What makes a multiplayer game complex is playing against other players, the "metagame". Chess is a game with simple rules and simple moves, the complexity comes from trying to counter the opponent. All successful multiplayer games at their core have simple fundamentals. Even EVE online is simple enough to log in, fly somewhere and mine/shoot something.

HC, ToE and AO systems put in a lot of artificial complexity, but there's no metagame so at it's highest level it's simple and bland. For whatever reason the devs decided to partly emulate singleplayer grand strategy games and partly tabletop war games. It was a big mistake because singleplayer grand strategy games have complex rules because there is no human opponent, and old-school tabletop war games have complex rules but they have a game master with final authority that can keep the game from becoming bogged down or too tedious. So the game is left with this bizarre system that has a high barrier to entry but has so little appeal among people that enjoy multiplayer games that it can't even keep it's high command staffed.

ToE has had probably thousands of man hours put in to over the years changing it and it still doesn't work so I don't know how you can think that it can be fixed. It's been a massive waste of resources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think TOE and a brigade system is inherit to most war games but I do think it needs tweaking.

5. Please do not duplicate ideas, instead post your support in the current thread.

I support a modification of this idea.

6. Ideas should be posted in detail

Hexagon based movement. So X time per terrain, quicker following a road, slower for infantry based units.

Brigades can occupy towns or open ground. If town, traditional AB, no stacking unless more than one AB (posted elsewhere). If they occupy open ground they create their own FB with supply tents. If blown they get bounced back to previous location or town. It would make for interesting FB fights. If parked by a river, bridge creation by engineers and trucks present. Once formation across, bridge removed. Bridge bombed normally or sapped. If crossing open water, trucks and engineers create "bridge FB" or bridgehead allowing formation to be deployed. Of course it can be sapped/bombed/repaired. Air formations could move the same way maybe allowing airfields much closer to the action or at their peri? That would be labour intensive for air/naval units if you wanted it that way or movement remained in "auto" mode in the traditional sense. Allow brigades to move by train, server controlled on a schedule. This would allow movement all over the map, make it fluid and flexible. HC would be even more important and instead of drooling over the map the movement rules would be more interactive.

6a. How does the idea work?

Time based movement on terrain type or method of movement. Mechanized/armoured plus roads faster. Trains farther. Engineers and trucks for crossings, air bases or jetties for naval units. No stacking of brigades unless AB = brigades. Supply traced to HQ, HQ to factory as tradition is. To choke a brigade it would have to be completely surrounded. The Germans moved quite a bit of stuff through the Falaise Gap.

6b. How does it affect game mechanics?

AOs would still be needed to occupy ground already occupied by another enemy brigade. I would contend that a limited garrison would be present from the HQ to the formations source factory. This would be to keep law and order, guard against partisans, enemy paradrops, and just the general lag of logistics vs movement of a formation.

6c. What is the intended goal of your idea?

Simply movement, eliminate soft capping where there would always be a formation. Would you think that the Germans would ever leave Verdun empty after occupying it?

People may frown at such old school hex based ideas. It's worked for so many paper based and large computer games (War in the Pacific, Gary Grigsbys War In The East). A hexagon is a versatile shape and allows great movement. More fluid and easier to understand movement of brigades is important.

Hope this is the right way to put it forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What concerns me about the concept of removing AOs and HC completely, is that, as far as I can tell, there will be NO real organization. As was stated, a "free for all" of epic proportions.

This might work fantastically well for big squads, but for tiny ones, or for individuals, many will simply be completely lost.

Imagine what it would be like if we implemented this and then went to Steam.

Hundreds of people would log in to check things out, and have no idea of where to go or what to do. Imagine different people from different squads yelling for support in a half-dozen different towns. The new player asks where they should go and there is not one direct answer. Unless it is spelled out very directly when they log in, they are not likely to understand the 'instant battles' tabs, especially if there are a number of small fights going on.

Now I know the normal reaction from many..."Join a squad and get with the program." Unfortunately a LOT fo folks won't even consider what they will consider a time investment into joining what they will see as a 'guild' unless they like the game FIRST.

So with no clear organization, how do we provide a clear and understandable first experience for first time players? We have to take them into consideration when we look at such changes. We can't design everything just for the vets and leave every new player to sink or swim. We need to herd the cats somehow.

Heck, without AOs or HC, when I log in I know that I would have a hard time figuring out where I should go under those circumstances, and I've played since 2012.

Edited by Quincannon

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.