• Announcements

    • CHIMM

      Operation Burning Skies   09/17/2019

      All pilots scramble!  Strap yourself in for this months Community event - Operation Burning Skies! This Sunday, September 22, 11 am – 5 pm server time. In honor of XOOM and friends showcasing WWII Online at the Oregon International  Air Show – our forces too will battle for superiority in Operation Burning Skies. High Commands are on high alert to rally their forces to victory! Lift off, and see a whole new world of WWII Online… Fearless bomber pilots make the skies rain down fire – our daring fighter pilots are in pursuit of their prey- as western Europe erupts in war on the ground below! Rally your squads, rally your buddies - Combined arms are back!  …Under Burning Skies! SALUTE!
s2955

Prevent camping?

29 posts in this topic

Not sure if its possible, but is there anything that can be done to prevent camping?  It really, really takes the fun out of this game.  Ive been a customer off and on since way back and camping is one of the main reasons I leave every time.  I remember when CRS finally put barricades in place at the bunkers to keep the other side from blocking entrances etc.  This is just another form of griefing.  Nobody likes to be camped and theres little challenge in it for either side.... I might even suggest that its a form of cheating?  Anyhow, just needed to vent....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HC needs to start using the fallback option sooner.  I agree that being camped is not fun.  This almost always results from being outgunned, and that is not fun.  I differ from you, possibly, in that I think the problem lies in game balance.  Having played the Allied side for years, I do not believe the game is balanced, now that I play Axis.  Other then infantry, I find the Axis gear to be horrible.  I've even had my Tiger one shot killed by a lone M4A2 from the front at 900 meters.  And yes, it was an M4A2, not M4A3.  Even the M4A3 seems way to sturdy.  They were not very good against the 88.  The 88 was even the best performer against the Tiger 2 armor when the Russians tested different guns against it. On TS, a guy was talking about his brother, who plays Allied only, went Axis and tried the tanks, and told his brother, "I see what you mean...the Axis tanks blow up way too quickly."  Not to mention that the best gun in the Axis inventory is rarely used because it is way too easy to kill.  But, most of the problems begin with how ineffective AA is.

 

Bah...I could go on all day.  Time to leave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People do enjoy camping and they are catered to in this game, just instead of camping they call it "combined arms". Camping is easier now than it has been in the past because there are far fewer antitank infantry, FBs are much stronger, and FRUs went from infantry back to being placed by truck. So it's easier than ever to bottle up the defender and keep him there.

 

If they really wanted to reduce camping they would allow heavy ATGs and especially bofors to spawn from depots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Losing 12 towns a night during weekday, facing overhelming forces (3 or 4 against 1) is not helping the camped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Removing infantry FRUs made camping real again.. with infantry fru's it was much harder and if you can get of a town you had a fighting chance to break the camp.

The first thing I saw when Truck only frus where added was camping Fru's/MS was a thing again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

* Employ pop neutrality, so the underpopped can attack effectively and it is MUCH harder to get a camp on, or an overpop side that squanders their manpower on camps loses towns at a 2:1 ratio.

 

* Alter the game to get away from nodal spawn castle play to fighting in the fields and approaches to a town and the mphasis on force destruction in the field.  Towns still should be key from a logistics node/facility perspective, but something that is fought over not an attrition death trap.  This will also help with Axis tanking as it's tank on tank instead of infantry assault tanking, an Allied specialty.

 

* Destroy the mission leader/spawn point paradigm, go to persistent visible formation, where the ML or any invited or open players can take over an existing unit in place and maintain position and cohesion.  Among other salutory effects, this would minimize the overpop maneuver/firepower advantage, as the underpop could get to a superior position/approach just as readily rather then being bottled up in a known killzone.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, pbveteran said:

Removing infantry FRUs made camping real again.. with infantry fru's it was much harder and if you can get of a town you had a fighting chance to break the camp.

The first thing I saw when Truck only frus where added was camping Fru's/MS was a thing again.

Worked the other way round, infantry camped up towns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Kilemall said:

Worked the other way round, infantry camped up towns.

Everyone camps this way including infantry.. first day I play with Truck-Placed Frus I got a 26 rifleman sortie something that I don't remember ever achieving with Infantry Frus because it would get moved or closed, here people will rather keep the FRU open than having to drive a new one.

Anyways for me truck only FRUs is a step backwards made worst by keeping the truck audio over 300m, still most players don't have time to gamble 20mins of their time and have their FRU destroyed the second it gets place and really generate no content for players or for them to enjoy, plus it's very hard to set up an attack you need more players to clear the terrain so it's safe to place it, something that with infantry FRUs if the defense was too spread from a town you would just walk and keep advancing your FRU along the terrain not only did this allow content to be generate content even in old AO's which is almost impossible today plus Ninja Attack were cool..

The only bad thing  with infantry FRUs was that one FRU could spawn the entire brigade supply and there was no incentive to drive a new one, so technically one player could maintain an attack for a long time and have the full RPAT List to attack a town.

But this could be simply fix by limiting the supply per FRU through code or just make more brigades with less supply something that CRS has the tech for and would probably take just a weeks to implement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

**** PERSONAL OPINION DISCLAIMER ****

Not sure there is a way to eliminate camping given how the current game is structured.  In most cases the spawn point is (generally) literally next to the capture point.  This makes the method of capture most likely to succeed being suppressing the spawn point immediately adjacent (aka camping).  Without moving the spawn away from the capture, or changing the way the capture happens (both of which would require major re-writes of the game as they are day 0 mechanics) not sure what can be done to discourage it.

**** END PERSONAL OPINION ****

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Play smarter; organize and prevent camps as a part of defense/offense. 

...IMO

Kill me once: I'm gonna get ya.  

Kill me a second time: Oh that's it buddy your dead.

Kill me a third time: bye! cya around, you win.

 

Unless its agave... then I adjust spawn point at first death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎8‎/‎24‎/‎2016 at 9:43 AM, david01 said:

People do enjoy camping and they are catered to in this game, just instead of camping they call it "combined arms". Camping is easier now than it has been in the past because there are far fewer antitank infantry, FBs are much stronger, and FRUs went from infantry back to being placed by truck. So it's easier than ever to bottle up the defender and keep him there.

 

If they really wanted to reduce camping they would allow heavy ATGs and especially bofors to spawn from depots.

I've said that heavy ATGs should be added to depots forever.  The last answer I got to the question on that was that it could ruin the tanking game. Apparently camping is what people want out of the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/27/2016 at 10:47 AM, saroninf2p said:

I've said that heavy ATGs should be added to depots forever.  The last answer I got to the question on that was that it could ruin the tanking game. Apparently camping is what people want out of the game.

As a dedicated AT gunner, I think that's the best way to lose all the heavy guns fast.

 

I'd rather all FBs supporting opened up and you could flank the attacking forces with your towed gun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Kilemall said:

As a dedicated AT gunner, I think that's the best way to lose all the heavy guns fast.

 

I'd rather all FBs supporting opened up and you could flank the attacking forces with your towed gun.

Just my opinion, but I think it would be just the opposite.  A lot of guns are lost trying to get out of the AB.  If I can spawn an 88 in a depot, that works wonders for me.  It also shaves many many minutes off trying to get a gun into the field.  But, I also see value in the defensive FB idea as well.  I will go one better.  Allow a very limited number of guns to spawn from a FRU, based on the truck that placed it.  But, this would require a new truck for the French, so that all of their FRUs would not spawn heavy guns.  Or, if need be, don't make it dependent on the truck type.  This would alleviate much of the frustration by 88 gunners getting bombed or strafed or shot while in transit.  That frustration is real and unhealthy for the game.  Gamers want to feel challenged, not frustrated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, imsneaky said:

Just my opinion, but I think it would be just the opposite.  A lot of guns are lost trying to get out of the AB.  If I can spawn an 88 in a depot, that works wonders for me.  It also shaves many many minutes off trying to get a gun into the field.  But, I also see value in the defensive FB idea as well.  I will go one better.  Allow a very limited number of guns to spawn from a FRU, based on the truck that placed it.  But, this would require a new truck for the French, so that all of their FRUs would not spawn heavy guns.  Or, if need be, don't make it dependent on the truck type.  This would alleviate much of the frustration by 88 gunners getting bombed or strafed or shot while in transit.  That frustration is real and unhealthy for the game.  Gamers want to feel challenged, not frustrated.

I dunno.  AT gunners are somehow better then tankers that have to drive it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Kilemall said:

I dunno.  AT gunners are somehow better then tankers that have to drive it?

Yes, because a tank moves much much faster than an 88 that has to be pushed, and an 88 can stop and defend himself nearly instantly while an 88 is vulnerable and takes time to set up.

I don't feel frustration in a tank as much as I do in an 88.  The 88 is pure frustration most times, which is why they rarely get used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, imsneaky said:

Yes, because a tank moves much much faster than an 88 that has to be pushed, and an 88 can stop and defend himself nearly instantly while an 88 is vulnerable and takes time to set up.

I don't feel frustration in a tank as much as I do in an 88.  The 88 is pure frustration most times, which is why they rarely get used.

88s get special attention like no other gun, because of what it can do, just like Tigers.

 

The Allies learned from early days on that there is no charging, outshooting or outdoing the 88 straight up except possibly surprise Bofors ridge clearing- otherwise, if there is proper inf coverage we HAVE to call in the planes.

 

Magic popping 88s would be something like magic popping S76s.

 

Allied ATGs get killed far more often by Axis infantry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kilemall said:

88s get special attention like no other gun, because of what it can do, just like Tigers.

 

The Allies learned from early days on that there is no charging, outshooting or outdoing the 88 straight up except possibly surprise Bofors ridge clearing- otherwise, if there is proper inf coverage we HAVE to call in the planes.

 

Magic popping 88s would be something like magic popping S76s.

 

Allied ATGs get killed far more often by Axis infantry.

To be sure, you make valid points.  Now consider this.  Over an entire campaign, from beginning to end, towns fall with full spawnlists of Chars and Matildas.  Problem?  Seriously...would that be a problem?  Of course it would.  When your best offensive and defensive weapon rarely gets used, and often is never used in the defense of your towns, allowing towns to fall with a full spawnlist of them, something is wrong.  Something is seriously wrong.

 

On a happy note, I did spawn an 88 at an FB yesterday and shot down a Hurricane that flew over the FB.  Luck and him making it easy on me, as well as low pop allowing me to get well outside of the FB before he dropped two bombs, had a lot to do with it.  I did get some high praise from the few people at the FB.   haha

 

I maintain that three things MUST be done to make the 88s reasonably effective in game.

 

  • put collision boxes in the bushes to keep infantry out of them.
  • put the MG shield on the 88, and give it a little buff in looks while you are at it.  Frankly, I think all old ATG crew and guns should get a graphical update.  They are horrid to look at.
  • Multibarrel AA from tier 0 and up.  SPAA in tire 2 or 3 with multi barreled guns.

 

That would make an 88 at least a little bit survivable.  The fist and 3rd option are a must.  If that doesn't get it to where it needs to be, add the MG shield.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, imsneaky said:

To be sure, you make valid points.  Now consider this.  Over an entire campaign, from beginning to end, towns fall with full spawnlists of Chars and Matildas.  Problem?  Seriously...would that be a problem?  Of course it would.  When your best offensive and defensive weapon rarely gets used, and often is never used in the defense of your towns, allowing towns to fall with a full spawnlist of them, something is wrong.  Something is seriously wrong.

 

On a happy note, I did spawn an 88 at an FB yesterday and shot down a Hurricane that flew over the FB.  Luck and him making it easy on me, as well as low pop allowing me to get well outside of the FB before he dropped two bombs, had a lot to do with it.  I did get some high praise from the few people at the FB.   haha

 

I maintain that three things MUST be done to make the 88s reasonably effective in game.

 

  • put collision boxes in the bushes to keep infantry out of them.
  • put the MG shield on the 88, and give it a little buff in looks while you are at it.  Frankly, I think all old ATG crew and guns should get a graphical update.  They are horrid to look at.
  • Multibarrel AA from tier 0 and up.  SPAA in tire 2 or 3 with multi barreled guns.

 

That would make an 88 at least a little bit survivable.  The fist and 3rd option are a must.  If that doesn't get it to where it needs to be, add the MG shield.

Won't argue with you on all three points, just not magic ATG beans or forts.

The SPAA though, while useful for what we really need, forcing air to stay up and not get laser bomb accuracy, will I predict be used more for heavy anti-inf work.

I should mention that most Allies are PRAYING for the MG shield.  Might help with inf or bofors, but tanks will more readily kill those crews and guns.

 

I always thought the way to go with the shield was hold them out for an 88 higher tier model, the one with absolute killer ammo rounds.  T3 weapon, especially if we get around to T4 tanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Kilemall said:

Won't argue with you on all three points, just not magic ATG beans or forts.

The SPAA though, while useful for what we really need, forcing air to stay up and not get laser bomb accuracy, will I predict be used more for heavy anti-inf work.

I should mention that most Allies are PRAYING for the MG shield.  Might help with inf or bofors, but tanks will more readily kill those crews and guns.

That's fine if the Allies pray for it.  For it to work, the gun has to be facing them.  If it s facing them, it might be shooting at them.  Best shot wins.  No problem with that.

 

As for fortifications.  You need to rethink that.  I have never asked that these be made such to make the guns invulnerable, but at present, the AA guns and 88 are beyond vulnerable.  And, there are trade-offs.  For the 88, you would not have 360° FoF.  You might have less than 90° FoF.  That's significant.  But, it is a trade-off.  You are less vulnerable to strafing and bombs, though maybe not 100% safe.  And snipers would not be able to attack you from any direction.  People's worries about this remind me of how some in the community feared LMGs, snipers, mortars, the Tiger, etc...  Always fearing it would break the game.  It never happened, and this would not break it either.

 

Now, what the fortifications for the AA guns do is gives them some protection against snipers, and protection against bombs, but would inhibit them from shooting at ground targets.

 

People need to stop looking at these as game breaking.  That is chicken little thinking.  What they do is solve long standing problems.  How stupid is it that an amateur in a DB7 can dive on an AB and kill practically every gun in the AB, and then fly off unscathed?  Same at an FB.  The guns are slow to push, especially the bofors, and people are often responding to calls for help, so 15 years later, we still have most guns in the AB, or 50 feet in front of the vehicle spawn at the FB.  That is not likely to change.  Allowing some guns to survive, and thus move further out when the bombers leave, will go a long way to solving that issue.  This is another area of frustration that needs to be fixed.  Frustration is bad in a game and when some units cannot respond to calls for help because you just get bombed every time you try to spawn and set up..that's a problem.  I can show you youtube videos of a single bomb making as many as 10 guns despawn at the same time, and then you see the new guns pushing out, only to be bombed again right in front of the vehicle spawn.  So I am also very much in favor of heavy guns in the depots.  That is a no-brainer.  You should see an increase in guns available, not a decrease, because far fewer will be air-camp killed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, imsneaky said:

People need to stop looking at these as game breaking.  That is chicken little thinking.  What they do is solve long standing problems.  How stupid is it that an amateur in a DB7 can dive on an AB and kill practically every gun in the AB, and then fly off unscathed?  Same at an FB.  The guns are slow to push, especially the bofors, and people are often responding to calls for help, so 15 years later, we still have most guns in the AB, or 50 feet in front of the vehicle spawn at the FB.  That is not likely to change.  Allowing some guns to survive, and thus move further out when the bombers leave, will go a long way to solving that issue.  This is another area of frustration that needs to be fixed.  Frustration is bad in a game and when some units cannot respond to calls for help because you just get bombed every time you try to spawn and set up..that's a problem.  I can show you youtube videos of a single bomb making as many as 10 guns despawn at the same time, and then you see the new guns pushing out, only to be bombed again right in front of the vehicle spawn.  So I am also very much in favor of heavy guns in the depots.  That is a no-brainer.  You should see an increase in guns available, not a decrease, because far fewer will be air-camp killed.

I think this is one of those Axis/Allied things- the 88s are more likely to be worked over by Allied air, Allied big guns in depots are more likely to be worked over by inf or camping 232s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kilemall said:

I think this is one of those Axis/Allied things- the 88s are more likely to be worked over by Allied air, Allied big guns in depots are more likely to be worked over by inf or camping 232s.

And surely you can see the imbalance there, right?  Guns have an advantage against the 232.  an 88 has very little chance against an aircraft.  As for infantry, I get shot in the head so much by an infantryman with a pistol it's beyond retarded.  I can be 20 feet outside of the AB, in a town full of friendlies, and the advance scouts run through bush tunnels, avoiding being spotted, and pop out 20 feet away, run up to me, stand there, pull out a pistol, and shoot me in the head as I sit there, helpless to do anything.  Now ask yourself Kilemall, do 2pdrs get used a lot?  Does the French 75mm tier 0 ATG get used?  How many towns fall with a full spawnlist of those guns?  Allied players are just going to have to suck it up and allow the imbalances to be corrected, or continue to watch the game dies as more and more Axis players stop logging in.  This is an imbalance that has gone on for years and it needs to be addressed.

 

The proof is also in how the tankers act.  I see Allied tankers being very aggressive about approaching town compared to Axis tankers.  I cant even remember the last time I took an Axis tank into an Allied AB, let alone early in a fight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, imsneaky said:

And surely you can see the imbalance there, right?  Guns have an advantage against the 232.  an 88 has very little chance against an aircraft.  As for infantry, I get shot in the head so much by an infantryman with a pistol it's beyond retarded.  I can be 20 feet outside of the AB, in a town full of friendlies, and the advance scouts run through bush tunnels, avoiding being spotted, and pop out 20 feet away, run up to me, stand there, pull out a pistol, and shoot me in the head as I sit there, helpless to do anything.  Now ask yourself Kilemall, do 2pdrs get used a lot?  Does the French 75mm tier 0 ATG get used?  How many towns fall with a full spawnlist of those guns?  Allied players are just going to have to suck it up and allow the imbalances to be corrected, or continue to watch the game dies as more and more Axis players stop logging in.  This is an imbalance that has gone on for years and it needs to be addressed.

 

The proof is also in how the tankers act.  I see Allied tankers being very aggressive about approaching town compared to Axis tankers.  I cant even remember the last time I took an Axis tank into an Allied AB, let alone early in a fight.

Er, there IS no Allied 75mm ATG, anywhere.  Closest is the French 3" tier 2 gun, which most Allies hate due to it's tendency to tip in a light breeze.  So the answer is no it isn't, and I expect very little increases with it in depots, especially after the first few rounds of inf hero with no battle lines.

 

If you mean the French 47, it's the first thing used  in T0, almost no one uses the 25mm except in desperation like the baby Pak (although I often do because I can get nearly as good results and it is much more nimble rolling over rubble).

 

British 2lber is by far the most popular gun, except when the 6lber becomes available, and people then prefer it over the 17lber, for the same reasons Axis have issues with 88s.

 

But as an Allied strategist, I fear the last depot camp and the destruction of ANY way to stop Tigers if players do what they do and insist on playing Alamo to supply list destruction.

 

I gotta tell you, hate your suggestions re: field bunkers.  Major bleh.  I would much rather have a mini crew with the AT so the truck, crew and gun are one thing and I have dedicated inf I can switch back and forth for, and an engineer for building up  light field protection.

 

As for Axis tanks, I've already been on for some time about the nature of the game vs. historical German tank design.  Putting 17lbers and M5s in the depots isn't going to help that, and 88s rolling out will be meat (except possibly to Matty drivers, who have similar problems to many Tiger drivers).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Kilemall said:

Er, there IS no Allied 75mm ATG, anywhere.  Closest is the French 3" tier 2 gun, which most Allies hate due to it's tendency to tip in a light breeze.  So the answer is no it isn't, and I expect very little increases with it in depots, especially after the first few rounds of inf hero with no battle lines.

 

If you mean the French 47, it's the first thing used  in T0, almost no one uses the 25mm except in desperation like the baby Pak (although I often do because I can get nearly as good results and it is much more nimble rolling over rubble).

 

British 2lber is by far the most popular gun, except when the 6lber becomes available, and people then prefer it over the 17lber, for the same reasons Axis have issues with 88s.

 

But as an Allied strategist, I fear the last depot camp and the destruction of ANY way to stop Tigers if players do what they do and insist on playing Alamo to supply list destruction.

 

I gotta tell you, hate your suggestions re: field bunkers.  Major bleh.  I would much rather have a mini crew with the AT so the truck, crew and gun are one thing and I have dedicated inf I can switch back and forth for, and an engineer for building up  light field protection.

 

As for Axis tanks, I've already been on for some time about the nature of the game vs. historical German tank design.  Putting 17lbers and M5s in the depots isn't going to help that, and 88s rolling out will be meat (except possibly to Matty drivers, who have similar problems to many Tiger drivers).

 

With a Star Citizen style persistent vehicle, infantry could rive trucks, tow an ATG, get out, set up the ATG, man the ATG, get off the gun and shoot an EI who is approaching and run for cover when an aicraft approaches.  But we don't have that and likely never will.

 

Until something is down about the aircraft, field bunkers are a long overdue necessity.  But again, these do not have to make the gun invulnerable.  It would make the bomber have try to place the bomb right near the back of the fortification, and in the case of AA guns, he would need to place it in the circle of sandbags, which would end one newb in a DB7  killing several guns in one drop.  Not gonna lie.  The fact that these were air sim guys (original rats) who wanted targets on the ground to kill, really shows in this aspect of the game.  Aircraft have been given a free pas to rape ground units at their leisure for way too long.  It's time to make it a bit more challenging.

 

Frankly, I think that because the HE111 rarely gets used for anything but strategic bombing has made Allied players unaware of just how bad of a problem this is.  Axis players, on the other hand, suffer from shell shock thanks to the Havoc/DB7 and all of the cool fighter bombers the Allies have.

 

By actually playing both sides through the cycle of suck, the blinders have been removed from my eyes.  This game is anything but balanced, and Allied players can be in denial all they want to be.  Life is easier as Allied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to make it more difficult to camp a town with tanks, then you allow heavy ATGs to spawn from depots, simple as that. If you want to make it harder to aircamp a town then let bofors spawn from the depots. These are simple solutions. The depots can already spawn trucks and guns without any issues it's not like a remodel or the addition of a new feature is required. If it's not being done it's because people don't want it done.

 

The axis would see a bigger benefit than the allies because they actually rely on their heavy ATGs and their light AA is garbage compared to the allied 25mm. Big deal, I'd say that the gameplay is very lopsided to the point that the US prime time armor zergs aren't going to have opponents soon. The devs made the armor game much easier and there wasn't any real buff to the ATGs, yet people here expect them to be a hard counter to tanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.