gassault

Map 130 must read

19 posts in this topic

Map 130

Wow 130 campaigns

130 say it aloud 130, 16 years and still going, now that says a lot not necessarily for the game but for the community, you the players. Out of all of the games I have never found one that we just get so passionate about, nothing that boils your [censored] more or makes you laugh with your friends about something daft or crazy that just happened in game. That’s the point, the game it is a game, it is meant to be fun.

 

Now it has had its ups and downs and is on the verge of something that may sink or swim, we just don’t know yet. The one thing it needs is more players. The map is too large the supply too much for the current population, so with that in mind and not to dwell on any negatives here is what we propose.

 

What we need is more players logging in, pure and simple. I hope this idea will help do just that.

 

Map 130 is not going to be the norm, we want FUN, and that means using everything available to us in game, now I have spoken to the Axis CINC and as the Allied CINC we agree this could be fun, I have mentioned it to the Rats and with their help and a little spin……maybe a little WBS nothing confirmed as yet.

 

The next map 130 deployment is not going to be the usual from either side. We will both have divisions in and around the zees. Why, well instead of rushing to soft cap Longwy or Etain or Leuven or Jodo we want to avoid soft caps from the offset. We want to see a swarm of paras, bombers, fighters, and trucks, transport ships, tanks, Fairmiles and DD's from the words Server unlocked spawning available.

 

Now there will either be an agreement were as “We the Allies” will not cap north of Antwerp for the cut, killing any fun by cutting off the zees, or BOTH sides will just have no divisions south of x town and agree not to go soft capping or move back to a norm line .. UNTILL the zees are won or day x of map 130 is reached and we move back to a somewhat normal line. The details are still to be finalised and agreed but this is what we are thinking of and yes we need you to agree or disagree, the floor is open.

 

It may need to be pushed to Map 131, Map 129 going faster than anticipated but it all depends if you the players want it and how the 2 Sides can agree on the Div deployment with as little enforcement or babysitting as possible

 

Gassault Allied CINC

Edited by gassault

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure how well itll work but I applaud trying anything different to try to get more players in game!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the area of the map north west of Antwerp which are usually ignored these days are called the Zealands or Zees for the lazy

never knew why as its the Netherlands

Zealand is a large island that’s part of Denmark. It’s home to the capital, Copenhagen, and the city of Roskilde. Small towns and villages occupy the north, south and west coasts, which are popular holiday areas with sandy beaches and fjords. In the south, the towering white Møn’s Klint and Stevns Klint are fossil-rich cliffs with views of the Baltic Sea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zeeland is an area of the Netherlands which consists of the islands/peninsulas north of Belgium and west of mainland Netherlands

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I think if the allies agree to give Antwerp to the Axis for one campaign at start of the campaign, then the axis can agree to put infantry flags in the zees at campaign setup :)

Seriously though its a not a great startup situation for the axis... Even if the allies promise not to cut the north, the allies will still have advantage due shorter interior supply lines And air superiority in the Zees.  The axis line will be over-extended and we will suffer on the main battle line due to that fact.

its a nice idea, but I don't want to see the axis get into a bad situation right at the startup of the campaign either.  Therefore, we should not rush into this.  At a minimum the concept needs more thought.  seriously the campaign startup lines probably need to be different somehow for it to be fair so no one is over extended.  

Moreover, another word of caution: -  "gentleman hc agreements" between the sides about  "not cutting" or pulling flags off frontlines etc... have never worked in the past.   Someone always ends up violating the spirit of the agreement because it can't be monitored 24/7.   And we usually end up  needing the "Rats"  to police it, and people get upset with hc.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. 

1.  Lack of Axis HC during Timezone 3 and overall lack of Axis HC numbers in general.

2.  Never, ever trust "gentleman's agreements."  Axis have been burned so many times over this in the past its laughable.

3.  Zee's are generally not fun to fight in due to the lack of heavy equipment and, as krazydog pointed out, overwhelming Allied air superiority in the area.

4.  A large Axis is squad is going Allied (WHIPS).  We're going to be horribly outnumbered any way.

VR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea of some new fresh wind into the game by changing tactics...the only other choice would be to fight on as usual.

But if you want to make it really realistic, let the Brits move their Equipment from England (at least some of them). That would give a boost to naval Actions.

And let british Bombers start only from England too, so the airsuperiority wouldnt be that hard. They would have other duties then, like covering own Transport ships, airrecon or hunting destroyers.

This would be realistic at least until Tier 1.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That may be realistic but not practical, we cannot afford to have 2 divs off the map when the line is longer than divs can cover normally, we want to try and have fun without crippling 1 side or the other. There is lots to discuss and agree on, as I said it may be more for map 130 as map 129 has moved soon fast. What we need to do is play around with the deployments till both sides are happy an we can do this without too much policing and any rat intervention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hrm... I like the idea of placing an army division in the zees, but don't like the gentlemen's agreement aspect.

 

I don't like the way Allied bombers are able to dive bomb on the deck and carry 8 bombs while the HE111 can't really compete.

That needs to be addressed before anything like this can get off the ground.

 

Also, if this somehow involves freighters running trucks in to set frus, FORGET IT.

We've seen how that works time and again with trying to "invade" England. I'll spare you the pain of reading up on this topic in the forums -it DOESN'T.

 

I say, instead of trying to channel action to the Zees, just remove a division or two from each side to see how it affects gameplay.

I'm betting it helps immensely given the lack of population lately.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

removing divs in my opinion would just encourage softcaps, that doesn't help the game but promote more avoid the fight and go around no fun in capping empty towns, which is why I came up with this concept of trying to get more logging in and more having fun when logged in.

 

ok going to push the idea to map 131 as there is still not enough response from the players and gives us more time to nail deployment down for both sides to be happy with

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the Idea, and it would be something different, but as has been said gentlemen agreements never work, because of the Human element.

 

The problem with the Zees is the Allies control of Twerp, till that is negated, Zees will always bee neglected, ( Maybe when flags are gone it will get new lease of life )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup agreements have never worked in the past, hence it is all down to the deployment to prevent anything or at least movements in 1 direction or another will show up, working on it

However we can discuss this throughout map 130 and hopefully we can agree on something for map 131

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just meant in terms of supply and the lower populations. Maybe spread the divisions out more but remove an armored flag from a couple of brigades. 

There is too much armor.

 

Supply would be unfair to the Axis if the above plan is implemented.

 

I apologize for any disparaging comments I've made toward HC -that was a little extreme. 

I should have said that HC on both sides needs to really consider how their decisions affect the PB at large before moving forward with plans to change the beginning placements at the start of a map in such a way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.