Jump to content
Welcome to the virtual battlefield, Guest!

World War II Online is a Massively Multiplayer Online First Person Shooter based in Western Europe between 1939 and 1943. Through land, sea, and air combat using a ultra-realistic game engine, combined with a strategic layer, in the largest game world ever created - We offer the best WWII simulation experience around.

pbveteran

Flags removal already underdevelopment and no discussion or information?

Recommended Posts

PITTPETE

There is no way CRS can prepare this game for Steam in its current form. 

The HC flag moving system is a failure, no matter how many F2P know it alls come crawling out of the woodwork.

There are a handful of players complaining about town based supply because they will no longer be able to control the player base just because they filled out an online form.

You want to control, earn the respect of your playerbase.  Lead by example and players will follow and go where you need them. 

I think some of you guys are selfish and scared trying to hold on to this failed system

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Capco
32 minutes ago, XOOM said:

I am a staunch opponent of keeping the system the way it is now, due to the increasing negatives it is having on the game. And for that reason, I have probably come across as an opponent of moveable flags. We must do something and clamp this gaping hole in our campaign operation.

Victarus has done a good job illustrating our general concern at CRS and it gives you only a glimpse into the massive amount of discussion, planning and review of data and campaign trends that has led us to this point. 

R&U.  Awesome.

I'll more than likely stick around at least until we start hearing about 1.36.X developments.  I'm becoming more cautiously optimistic about the future thanks to the relative transparency you and your team provides.  

S!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
maxios
9 hours ago, capco said:

Don't take my post the wrong way guys.  I am 10000000% a proponent of movable brigades on the map and the strategic layer that it provides.  You have no idea how close I am to unsubbing myself.  

 

CRS decided to go a different route, so the negative tone in my post was only because the battle is already over; there is nothing we can do to change the loss of flags.  I'm giving CRS one month after 1.36, and then I will make my decision about staying subbed. 

 

My personal opinion is that medium sized garrisons across the map with supplemental, movable HC flags AND squad flags is the way to go.  I also think that there is no room for small squads in a future which involves squad-exclusive equipment, and I think putting everyone in a few mega squads would be great for the game.  But there are a lot of people who want to keep their small groups in tact.  One way around this would be to have sub-squads within the mega squads.

I'm not a HC player my self but i do like the feel the strategic layer gives the game, imo it is what stands it apart from the competition out there. Removing it, might be a costly mistake, I'm not sure either how 1.36 will be received, we'll have to wait and see i guess. The problem with no HC online is ofc very apparent and game breaking issue, which needs a remedy, but i think your suggestion might actually fix some of those problem.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
maxios

I just read Victarus replies to this thread, good read and i do know understand fully the reasons behind this decision.

Thank you for taking the time.

I do really want to see this game succeed :)!

 

S! 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rule303

The sole problem that I see being raised is simply that players complain that HC can't always be on - so rather than destroy the flag system, why not simply have it that individual premium players can propose attack and defense orders, which other players can vote on to approve or disprove, unless HC is on who can veto if necessary.

The problem is not flags. It's simply that there isn't enough players to have a sufficient High Command structure in place without the ability for people to be acting HC reliably in place.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
madrebel
12 minutes ago, rule303 said:

The sole problem that I see being raised is simply that players complain that HC can't always be on - so rather than destroy the flag system, why not simply have it that individual premium players can propose attack and defense orders, which other players can vote on to approve or disprove, unless HC is on who can veto if necessary.

The problem is not flags. It's simply that there isn't enough players to have a sufficient High Command structure in place without the ability for people to be acting HC reliably in place.

and if you do this the players online STILL WON'T WANT TO MOVE FLAGS! they're already online right? they could join HC or reserve HC if they wanted too right? they just don't want too.

the system IS the problem.

 

 

 

Share this post


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

and if you do this the players online STILL WON'T WANT TO MOVE FLAGS! they're already online right? they could join HC or reserve HC if they wanted too right? they just don't want too.

the system IS the problem.

 

 

 

Yup. 

We capped Sedan today, and 5 flags routed to a pocket instead of safely falling back.  Just a stupid system and it needs to be killed as quickly as they can do it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
david01

Pbveteran the the main reason flags are going away is because the company can't sustain the maintenance anymore. The current system was great for the old dev team because it gave all the game managers and nontechnical personnel excellent job security. Someone had to approve and discipline high commanders, get on the server and move flags when HC weren't on, constantly monitor and intervene when bugs occurred etc. From that perspective it was much better than town supply which ran by itself with minimal maintenance.

 

For the new dev team (which seems to consist of Xoom and a handful of other employees with a bunch of volunteers) it's way too much work. No part-time employee or community volunteer wants to log on at 3:00 a.m. and watch a faction's flags for six hours in addition to their normal duties. Yet the strategic game not working is CRS's responsibility because they directly control HC and normal players have no ability to affect the strategic game.

 

2 hours ago, rule303 said:

The sole problem that I see being raised is simply that players complain that HC can't always be on - so rather than destroy the flag system, why not simply have it that individual premium players can propose attack and defense orders, which other players can vote on to approve or disprove, unless HC is on who can veto if necessary.

The problem is not flags. It's simply that there isn't enough players to have a sufficient High Command structure in place without the ability for people to be acting HC reliably in place.

 

A small amount of code, with the server literally counting players within a circle from town and flipping some conditions would be 10x better than a voting system. AO get set by population, players "vote" for AOs with their feet by going to towns. It has the added benefit of being able to be used 100% of the time not just when no HC are on.

 

HC has so much responsibility and oversight that it's equivalent to a paid position, but of course it's not paid. It's a incredibly failure-prone system. Anything that relies on it will fail when HC fails.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XOOM
49 minutes ago, david01 said:

Pbveteran the the main reason flags are going away is because the company can't sustain the maintenance anymore. The current system was great for the old dev team because it gave all the game managers and nontechnical personnel excellent job security. Someone had to approve and discipline high commanders, get on the server and move flags when HC weren't on, constantly monitor and intervene when bugs occurred etc. From that perspective it was much better than town supply which ran by itself with minimal maintenance.

XOOM: I don't think that's why they did it. They wanted to offer more strategic variety and it was a major goal that they wanted to achieve. Let's be careful not to speculate too much here, I wasn't at those design meetings but I've learned enough about things over the years to know that the old team wanted the very best for WWII Online and its players. They were responsible for getting us to this point and their decisions, good or bad in your opinion, are directly responsible for getting us from 2001-2012. Everything after that, is on us.

For the new dev team (which seems to consist of Xoom and a handful of other employees with a bunch of volunteers) it's way too much work. No part-time employee or community volunteer wants to log on at 3:00 a.m. and watch a faction's flags for six hours in addition to their normal duties. Yet the strategic game not working is CRS's responsibility because they directly control HC and normal players have no ability to affect the strategic game.

XOOM: We're pushing towards this for a few reasons, here's the quick bullets:

  1. The lack of HC personnel make it un-sustainable.
    1. When "Side A" has officers on, and "Side B" does not, the community of "Side B" suffers, and so does the whole game.
    2. This also means supply is not being rotated and makes attacks or defenses inadequate.
    3. This includes late night TZ3 routing, and destroys hundreds of player man-hours efforts.
    4. There are more tools to help guide the strategic layer that are not accessible by other players without HC representation.
  2. The user interface (brigade roster) navigation is entirely complicated to enter battle.
  3. Supply can be more readily available.
  4. Re-supply operations in WWII Online restored.
  5. Interdiction operations in WWII Online, restored.

There's probably more but it's late and those are the big ones.

I've responded to this from my perspective in yellow, as seen above.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
VICTARUS
24 minutes ago, david01 said:

A small amount of code, with the server literally counting players within a circle from town and flipping some conditions would be 10x better than a voting system. AO get set by population, players "vote" for AOs with their feet by going to towns. It has the added benefit of being able to be used 100% of the time not just when no HC are on.

I've been a big proponent of this for a while actually, but it's kind of been off the table until recently since it really doesn't work well with flags. ("Ok, you guys took the town. Too bad we can't move a brigade in without messing up the map, so it was a huge waste of time.")

While I definitely like the idea, there are also some very real concerns about how things will actually play out in practice. Could a side be permanently stuck on defensive mode because they can't pry enough people away from where there's obvious action (i.e., where the enemy-placed AOs are)? When the population is low will downtime between attacks cause a feedback loop where players just log in, see there are no AOs, then leave? Etc. We've discussed looking into throwing together a quick-and-dirty hack for an intermission to see what might happen, but because of the amount on our plates right now there's nothing firm planned yet.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
leanderj
4 hours ago, Mosizlak said:

Yup. 

We capped Sedan today, and 5 flags routed to a pocket instead of safely falling back.  Just a stupid system and it needs to be killed as quickly as they can do it. 

Well tbh.. its (for me at least) fun as HC as to find out what targets we should hit to make flags fallback into pockets..  so we can route them.  Same goes other way around, looking out after our flags that it doesnt happen to us as well. But im not against the removal of flags etc. since i agree that its a problem when no hc is on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rule303

Why not just have both a mixture of town based garrison supply, and then the moving standing army as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quincannon

CRS discussed the change for months before they started development. Nothing that they are doing will come as a surprise to anyone who has followed their announcements, forum posts and Rat Chats.

Personally, while I understand the reasoning that they have for going to town supply, I wish that they would  create a combination of town supply and brigades. There are a number of ways (in theory) that it could work. I'm not sure about the programming.

My concern was the idea that the HC would vanish, replaced by a ton of squads, all doing their own thing with no definitive coordination. Case in point: (Take my HC hat off for a moment here) If I am a player, and a big squad starts telling everyone what to do, and decides that they are going to be in charge and determine the strategy, nothing says that i  have to do what they say. To me, they are just players who want their own squad to rack up the stats and bragging rights, and there's absolutely no reason for me to listen to them. But the HC is not dedicated to one squad... They are dedicated to the entire Allied SIDE. In my mind, that's the difference. It seems to me that in many cases, people will put their squads first; before the side as a whole. That's not how I play and not how I want to play.

I understand that the strategic element to the game will change when we got o a solely town based supply. Hopefully, there will still be a way to create a unified direction/effort on each side, and not a hundred different uncoordinated actions that achieve little or nothing as aa side.

I trust CRS, even if I wish they were going in a slightly dofferent direction.

S!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XOOM

High Command existed for many years prior to how things are set up today, they'll continue to exist because we also want it to stick around. But we want it around for the right reasons, and that comes down to the HC serving with and for the player base. 

I suspect we will see more folks involved with HC due to the lessened burden on them and a potential culture shift due to how it'll be operating.

HC will be operation centric and working towards coordinating its side's events / battles.

All the effort that they apply just to maintain what is today will be redeployed to things that nurture better game play and community growth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Capco
11 hours ago, leanderj said:

Well tbh.. its (for me at least) fun as HC as to find out what targets we should hit to make flags fallback into pockets..  so we can route them.  Same goes other way around, looking out after our flags that it doesnt happen to us as well. But im not against the removal of flags etc. since i agree that its a problem when no hc is on.

I agree it's fun as well.  But the fallback system was never good for the game.  Brigades in real life would never fall back into a pocket when they had an avenue of retreat opened, as I'm sure was the case in Sedan the other night.  

That problem could have been easily fixed though.  Introducing a text command to set fallbacks would do wonders for the movable brigade system.  I mean I could log in 3 minutes at a time, twice a day, and be able to prevent the majority of cutoffs just by setting fallbacks with a few commands like .fallback 13edble LeChesne.  In the current system, it would take me hours to accomplish the same thing because each brigade has to be manually moved to set its fallback, not to mention it leaves weaknesses in the front. 

It wouldn't even get in the way of what the current MOIC is doing.  They could stack flags to their hearts content (bad for fallbacks/cutoffs but good if you want to be a lazy MOIC), and even at times with no HCs, the first layer of fallbacks would probably be enough to keep lowpop from snowballing into an avalanche each night.  

Oh well.  Let's see what the future brings.

Edited by capco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
csm308
7 hours ago, Quincannon said:

My concern was the idea that the HC would vanish, replaced by a ton of squads, all doing their own thing with no definitive coordination. Case in point: (Take my HC hat off for a moment here) If I am a player, and a big squad starts telling everyone what to do, and decides that they are going to be in charge and determine the strategy, nothing says that i  have to do what they say. To me, they are just players who want their own squad to rack up the stats and bragging rights, and there's absolutely no reason for me to listen to them. But the HC is not dedicated to one squad... They are dedicated to the entire Allied SIDE. In my mind, that's the difference. It seems to me that in many cases, people will put their squads first; before the side as a whole. That's not how I play and not how I want to play.

I understand that the strategic element to the game will change when we got o a solely town based supply. Hopefully, there will still be a way to create a unified direction/effort on each side, and not a hundred different uncoordinated actions that achieve little or nothing as aa side.

I trust CRS, even if I wish they were going in a slightly dofferent direction.

S!

That may be how the AHC worked prior to TO&E's ( I don't really know), but that is not how the GHC worked.  I was a GHC officer long before TO&E's and the OKW.  You didn't just "join" the GHC you had to apply and then be "invited" to join.  Your squad officers had to agree to become GHC officers and subordinate their squads to the needs and direction of the GHC and the CINC.  Your squad was assigned to a Kampfgruppe within a Division, which were part of an Armeekorps/Panzerkorps, which were part of an Armee, which were a part of a Heersgruppe/Armeegruppe.  Divisions were assigned frontages on the frontline and your were expected/required to defend that area whenever it was attacked.  The GHC assigned avenues of attack and your squad was expected/required to support those attacks, always looking to changed to defense if your assigned divisional frontline was attacked by the Allies. 

If your squad didn't cooperate, your squad and its officers could be booted out of the GHC (and some were).  There were very few squads that weren't in the GHC.  One of the notable exceptions was Sturmgrenadier but even they eventually joined the GHC.  I was their Divisional CO at the time they did join the GHC.

The GHC was highly organized and had highly motivated squads as its members.  GHC officers spent virtually all of their time organizing attacks, organizing defenses, and organizing resupply.  Strategic thinking was left up to the Heersgruppe and higher types.

VR

Edited by csm308
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stankyus
34 minutes ago, csm308 said:

That may be how the AHC worked prior to TO&E's ( I don't really know), but that is not how the GHC worked.  I was a GHC officer long before TO&E's and the OKW.  You didn't just "join" the GHC you had to apply and then be "invited" to join.  Your squad officers had to agree to become GHC officers and subordinate their squads to the needs and direction of the GHC and the CINC.  Your squad was assigned to a Kampfgruppe within a Division, which were part of an Armeekorps/Panzerkorps, which were part of an Armee, which were a part of a Heersgruppe/Armeegruppe.  Divisions were assigned frontages on the frontline and your were expected/required to defend that area whenever it was attacked.  The GHC assigned avenues of attack and your squad was expected/required to support those attacks, always looking to changed to defense if your assigned divisional frontline was attacked by the Allies. 

If your squad didn't cooperate, your squad and its officers could be booted out of the GHC (and some were).  There were very few squads that weren't in the GHC.  One of the notable exceptions was Sturmgrenadier but even they eventually joined the GHC.  I was their Divisional CO at the time they did join the GHC.

The GHC was highly organized and had highly motivated squads as its members.  GHC officers spent virtually all of their time organizing attacks, organizing defenses, and organizing resupply.  Strategic thinking was left up to the Heersgruppe and higher types.

VR

Yup that's what I pretty much remember also. Our squad CO would get orders and planned operations from the CINC via email which included primary towns we would be expected to defend if attacked. The exceptions where made if we where tasked with a certain role on an attack.  IIRC like overstocking, setting up a flak trap, interdiction responsibilities, FB defense etc.. Sometimes we where asked to leave that task and go defend. We usually did, not always though. When I was in IIRC it was N2Deeps squad.. we flew stuka missions and HE111 support mission to target.  The old system really did give large squads and the pb a sense of ownership and playing your part. Overstocking orders often where issued days prior to the attack and at times we would just log in on squad night and spend an hour overstocking a town of our choice - usually a key choke point prior to opperations. 

 

HOWEVER

 

My first squad was called Sango Roto, we had 8 members on the Axis side but we all played together. My only gripe about GHC during that time was the near total exclusion of operations. WE would ask how we could help and where often not responded to. Our squad would spend hours busting fbs only some nights, during attacks we took up the mantle of doing our own thing like setting up interdiction or bringing up supply for our use on attacks and unfortunately would get yelled at because we drove our PZHs that WE supplied because we where not tasked for the armor column and the other guys who brought up supply thought we where stealing it to boot. The fact is that we had been cut out of the loop and unanswered to how we could help. We wanted our spot in the attack so we chose how we where going to participate.  I can also remember that on several  attacks we would get a message from the MOIC/GHC... "Hey you wanna help? We need more tanks from X town - they got a full supply of PZHs. After you bring those up we will need more 88s. Can you resupply us?" Well X town was 3 links away and a 40 minute drive in a tank. The expectation for our help was to supply the larger squads with toys. You know what? We actually did those missions for a while till we basically told the GHC to STFU because we thought we would earn our respect and start getting intel and a spot in the attacks with front line supply.  Sango Roto did dissolve due to this monkey business by members unsubbing.

 

That's the pros and cons about the old style GHC/Large squad vrs small squad interaction.

 

I don't know how it was for the allies simply because when I joined the allied side, I joined a squad with okill and we flew most of the time - cant remember if that was the air wing of the 23rd or not at the time. However when I joined the ground operations with the 23rd it was a large and had a few AHC members.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
csm308

Stankyus;

Definitely one of the drawbacks of the GHC system was that it could and did foster a GOB atmosphere at times.  My squad (Panzer Lehr) wasn't as effected by it as much becuase we were a large squad.  We were however in the 6.Armee which was treated like a bastage stepchild by the 12.Armee prior to 1.27, but then two large squads in the 12.Armee self destructed in a contre tete with each other and 12.Armee suffered accordingly.  I liked GHC better when we had four Armee's and two Armeegruppes.  It spread it around a lot better than just two Armee's.  In fact, I believe that reorganization from two Armeegruppes and four Armee's to just two Armee's resulted in a dust up with your old squad 23rd Panzer Division and the leadership in 12.Armee and 23rd went Allied as a result.  I could have the sequence of events wrong on that one though.

Without question the 23rd Panzer Division was one of the best squads (and best overall team player squads) in the GHC at the time.  The 23rd's innovations and efforts towards resupply was one of the key reasons we were as successful as we were at the time.

VR

Edited by csm308

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Capco

That's one of my concerns going forward with 1.36.  How will the little squads be affected?

I said earlier that I think everyone being in a few mega-squads would help the game, but I also see there being resistance to it among the smaller, close knit groups.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
csm308
8 minutes ago, capco said:

That's one of my concerns going forward with 1.36.  How will the little squads be affected?

I said earlier that I think everyone being in a few mega-squads would help the game, but I also see there being resistance to it among the smaller, close knit groups.

Virtually every squad is a "little squad" compared to the squads of those pre-TO&E days.  There will definitely have to be some careful planning and thought given to how the respective HC's will look and act prior to 1.36 being put out.

What should be emphasized is that players should not be afraid of applying to the HC's after 1.36 comes in.  The stress of moving units and flags will no longer be an issue.  Other concerns will become more important, like overstocking and resupply.  HC officers will once again have to become an expert at leading attacks and defenses at the tactical level.  Attacks will become more than just "flood the CP's."

VR

Edited by csm308

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Capco
3 minutes ago, csm308 said:

Virtually every squad is a "little squad" compared to the squads of those pre-TO&E days.  There will definitely have to be some careful planning and thought given to how the respective HC's will look and act prior to 1.36 being put out.

VR

Lol, yeah even the big squads today are nothing close to that era.  

I'm looking forward to the panning stages you speak of though.  It will be especially interesting to see if the two HCs try to go different routes, or if CRS has something in mind already.  I hope people like us can play a part.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
csm308
16 minutes ago, capco said:

That's one of my concerns going forward with 1.36.  How will the little squads be affected?

I said earlier that I think everyone being in a few mega-squads would help the game, but I also see there being resistance to it among the smaller, close knit groups.

I do want to add though that the GHC was very careful and never so strictly disciplined when it came to "Squad Nights."  Squad Nights were inviolable by the GHC and made sure never to order a squad away from their Squad Night.  In fact Squad Nights were made a part of the planning process, a la KG Wiking and such.

VR

Edited by csm308

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Capco
6 minutes ago, csm308 said:

I do want to add though that the GHC was very careful and never so strictly disciplined when it came to "Squad Nights."  Squad Nights were inviolable by the GHC and made sure never to order a squad away from their Squad Night.  In fact Squad Nights were made a part of the planning process, a la KG Wiking and such.

VR

Absolutely.  Honestly, planning around big squad nights helps the entire planning process a great deal.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stankyus
34 minutes ago, csm308 said:

Virtually every squad is a "little squad" compared to the squads of those pre-TO&E days.  There will definitely have to be some careful planning and thought given to how the respective HC's will look and act prior to 1.36 being put out.

What should be emphasized is that players should not be afraid of applying to the HC's after 1.36 comes in.  The stress of moving units and flags will no longer be an issue.  Other concerns will become more important, like overstocking and resupply.  HC officers will once again have to become an expert at leading attacks and defenses at the tactical level.  Attacks will become more than just "flood the CP's."

VR

TBH I really do not care if we are town centric or TO&E. Both systems have their issues but If I had a preference its the town centric supply system. Supply in a town at the time was never really enough which I thought was a good thing. The overstocking supply side added so much to the game. The social aspect on TS and chat grabbing up supply over hours and at times days while joking around and talking about how we are going to own the enemy. The fact that we felt we where playing a real part of the outcome of any particular battle - the ownership factor. The anticipation of the attack brought excitement because of the effort put in. The mass tank columns and support lines that flowed prior to the attack - let alone flying over and discovering a enemy tank column advancing with the rush of defenders to the location.  Then the chance meeting of huge armor columns meeting in no mans land with a sharp but epic battle that lasted mb 10 minutes that made you want to put more effort with more supply next time. 

 

TO&Es stripped that from the PB and put the pressure on a few ppl who liked to play chess.  I think if the overstock restrictions during TO&E had been lifted or with some restrictions on items like RPATs, Sappers and T3 tanks there might have been some of it retained but the HQ resupply only route would leave your researve supply empty for 12-18 hours which could have meant the difference between a route or a win.

 

All and all, I think this move will help build squad numbers again and is a positive direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...