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.

VICTARUS

Population Imbalance & Goals

Recommended Posts

frogdeth
On 12/25/2016 at 11:28 AM, Pittpete said:

Victarus isnt asking for ideas on how to balance.

He's asking what would you like to be able to still do while being outnumbered or overpop.:huh:

Supply raids.  Overpop side needs more supplies, right?  Make big, easy to spot crates appear around the overpop side's active (AO) FBs that can be killed by HE effects of all kinds and each crate destroyed costs them something from their supply pool.  The more the imbalance, the more crates appear.  Random number example: Side balance is 2 vs 1, five big crates appear.  Someone flies by and blows one up with a bomb.  Attacker loses 25 SMGs.  Crate respawns in 10 minutes or so.  Another crate my be worth a couple of tanks.  Pop balance climbs to 3 vs 1, now it's ten crates.  Good luck guarding them all at once.

Defenders can then do air raids against their FBs that can do damage even if they're defended, and if the attacker still leaves them undefended despite having overpop (and let's admit it, they often will) then it just becomes that much more damage the defenders can do when they go to blow it up.

The idea is that the overpop side will have to divert more & more manpower to defense, even when on the attack (especially when on the attack, actually).  Thus the number of attackers in town gets reduced to be more locally balanced overall.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
malvoc

Lol you guys are living in fantasy land I see. If you don't like defense play the side that's attacking if you want to help underpop side login there, trying to force people to play a side will just ruin the game period. Yes you have dedicated allies and dedicated axis both sides have times of high pop its how you use it and what your commanding officers are doing during that time that decides if you are attack or defending.....

 

Malvoc out....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vasduten1

Frogdeth, I like that idea a lot.

It also gives air another small job, which is always good.

 

Yeah Malvoc... I am with you on this one.

Lots of ideas and talk in this thread that are all trying to undermine reality -the reality of a war sim. You win some, you lose some. Sometimes one side has more players than the other, and they win. How else would they?

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
monsjoex
6 minutes ago, vasduten1 said:

Frogdeth, I like that idea a lot.

It also gives air another small job, which is always good.

 

Yeah Malvoc... I am with you on this one.

Lots of ideas and talk in this thread that are all trying to undermine reality -the reality of a war sim. You win some, you lose some. Sometimes one side has more players than the other, and they win. How else would they?

 

Bearing in mind that people have different thoughts but:
1. I didn't really mind being under pop for years in the same timezone (EU axis OP US allied OP)
2. I didn't mind being extremely under pop during certain squad ops (axis squad ops). 

What makes me log off is an enemy who is completely unorganized, without a chance to stop you. A.k.a the last 2 weeks of a campaign.
And continuous effortless roles in lowpop. A town like Namur never fell to an Andenne-only attack, unless you had 50 organized KGW guys doing it. Or Liege would take an organized triple bunker assault with 10+ guys per bunker. Not 15 guys capping the ab's 1 by 1 in < 1 hour. 

Fix lowpop (more players!) and there aren't that many issues anymore imo. And fixing it 'only' takes 30 players or so each day, so we talk about 300 new subscribers in tz3?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Elfin

Generally I am with Malvoc on this one. Imbalance is in a way neither here nor there.

As my mom would say, "If you are bored, it's because you are boring"...translation ...."If you can't have fun, it's because you are no fun".

Ok a bit harsh but that is the gist.

example: 

The other night DDZ was fighting the good under pop fight....Allies pushing Ath hard with their overlap.

After some fighting in the city...our squad, NOTICE the use of squad, agreed with our CO Loonie for some "operations" to have some fun and make a difference (we hoped).

1. We spawned engineers, took a flight for 8 min to the Ath fb, landed,..snuck in, squad coordination style, and nearly had it down, we fought it out at the fb as et and ei poured out to defend the fb...getting pulled off the attack to a degree.

2. Knowing the fb would be guarded better if we tried again, we loaded up another flight but with panzerfaust's and rifle man suppliers and interdicted tanks coming to Ath. After killing several et's, blowing up an EFMS  and killing some ei...we returned to our original intent to get the fb

3. With people calling out "ATH 911!" repeatedly, we loaded up another flight to the fb and as the %'s of damage were diminishing and we needed to sneak in/get in position/ hoping we had enough satchels....we blew up the fb with the very last satchel. BIG WHOOPS from our squad.

All this was FUN !!!!!!!!

Our squad had FUN !!!!!

We hope we pissed the allies off and if we didn't, it didn't matter as we BELIEVED they were pissed off. :)

 

I had to log so I don't know if allies got ATH but we had  a lot of fun.

Operative word  FUN !!!!!  Balance or no Balance, overpop or no overpop....this is what the game is about. FUN!  Make some maybe!!

S!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PITTPETE

What Elfin said.......x100

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kilemall

No, NOT what elfin said.

 

If you have a squad on that can do good stuff, great.

 

But you can't assume that situation for players 24x7, nor can the game continue to sustain the cycle of suck either driving new players off when their first hour experiences are consistently camps and there are no other options, or entire TZs doomed to weeks months and/or years underpop.

 

Squads are greatness and inherently both tactically more effective AND a retention tool, but they are not the be-all end-all for all players, or the business.

 

Malvoc, I am certainly aware of what a dynamic leader can do, but golly gee they aren't ON 24x7, whether in HC or squad exclusive.  And if you aren't in that squad, fair chance that lone wolf or even squad player who's squad isn't on is left in the org cold.

 

I also know we lost Karallean over exactly this pop issue, exactly the guy that kept the lights on for years.  The two issues are not separate nor is a fix for one automatic for the other- but if you have people being able to fight 24x7 and not be blown out just cause more of the other guys showed up, you ARE more likely to retain and/or generate those leaders then if you drive them off.

 

 

Pop damn well does matter to the business as a whole, that's the part you squad-only don't GET, or the people that are driven off by OJ play.  I presume Victarus is seeing or the Rats are getting feedback that it's an issue that triggered the genesis of this thread.

 

It's a real issue and just 'letting it roll' has driven off IMO at LEAST as many people as the various 'Golden Era' squaddies.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kilemall
On 1/6/2017 at 8:41 PM, jwilly said:

So the overpop side almost always should win every battle? Nah. Much better to make winning a given battle a 50/50 thing for each side in a 2:1 pop ratio environment.

The game is much less marketable when one side can only defend...and because psychologically many potential customers prefer attacking and prefer winning battles, that's a positive feedback loop i.e. the underpop side has to defend, loses battles, derives less aggregate game-enjoyment, loses more population. Rinse and repeat.

This man GETS IT.

 

The game needs to be a GAME, not a pickup street fight with whoever shows up with the most wins.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
david01

Some kind of lame consolation prize for the underpop isn't going to motivate people, no one is going to feel better about a loser's trophy. Demanding PvE in what's supposed to be a PvP game is absurd especially with the limited dev resources. And yet more crutches to help the defender aren't going to encourage closer cooperation or make the time spent enjoyable. I don't know how people haven't noticed that as it was made easier to defend a town it became harder for momentum to switch from side to side and thus harder for a team that was lacking organization or numbers to turn things around.

 

1 hour ago, Kilemall said:

No, NOT what elfin said.

 

If you have a squad on that can do good stuff, great.

 

People wanting to play with their friends is a very strong motivator to log on, their groups will also set goals by themselves regardless of the game rules (hold the squad hometown, top TOM/kills, 0 deaths etc.). This is all proven and it is one of the only consistent ways for a player to enjoy their game time regardless of any imbalance. So the best way to improve the enjoyment of the underpop team is to encourage the guild/squad associations and the general community scene. It's also something fairly simple to do.

 

You obviously resent people that can organize and motivate others to log on and play a game. You think that it's easy, so easy in fact that the people that hold organized ops and outnumber the other people are being unsportsmanlike. You also disregard the numerous factors already existing in this game that allow a smaller team to hold off a larger team and that require an attacker to have more people than the defender. I don't agree but even if you were correct the fact is that people in squads are enjoying their time, they used to play in much larger numbers, they played relatively independent of the map. This isn't happening right now with disassociated players playing with usually minimal guidance from an arbitrary leader. Fix those things and the problem Victarus mentioned will be much better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kilemall
1 hour ago, david01 said:

You obviously resent people that can organize and motivate others to log on and play a game. You think that it's easy, so easy in fact that the people that hold organized ops and outnumber the other people are being unsportsmanlike. You also disregard the numerous factors already existing in this game that allow a smaller team to hold off a larger team and that require an attacker to have more people than the defender. I don't agree but even if you were correct the fact is that people in squads are enjoying their time, they used to play in much larger numbers, they played relatively independent of the map. This isn't happening right now with disassociated players playing with usually minimal guidance from an arbitrary leader. Fix those things and the problem Victarus mentioned will be much better.

You and Pittpete have projected what you IMAGINE I think about squads, what happened to asking for clarification?  Or is fact checking out of fashion in these dark days?

Squads are absolutely a critical element of the game and game experience.  I would always recommend any new player to go shopping for and become a member of a squad.  I do not NEED HC powers or command, except as a means to make this game a war and not Tribal Raiders of France.  I did the Map Coordinator role months before any HCs existed and did it well for what we had at the time, so unlike most of you I have interacted with the total freeform game from the start.

I have suggested squad supply in the context of the brigades years ago, squad brigade emblems that are purchasable, consistently counsel Allied CinCs to be solicitous of squads and build relationships (as have all my particular clique of past AHC officers) because that is how you forge victory.  The concept that I am anti-squad marks you, Pittpete and others as entirely ignorant of the principles i have always followed.

Here is one of my sayings that I have promulgated for years behind closed doors to AHC leadership-

 

"I would rather lose a campaign then lose a squad."

 

And the follow-up-

 

"I would rather lose a squad then lose several squads to pleasing just one squad."

 

Those words came from very painful episodes in which we lost squad orgs through bad HC relations, and one squad's interests catered to over others.  Hard lessons about the interactions of HC and squads, and not letting winning ruin play OR one squad dictate to everyone else.

 

My coworker and frankly superior officer in AHC matters, HG, had these sayings-

 

"This is a game of relationships"

 

and

 

  "If you have to give an order, you have already screwed up."

 

By relationships, he meant trust of squads and HC officers in each other, how to go about keeping everyone happy in a resource constrained game, and the ultimately volunteer/militia nature of this game.

 

I was there at the start of the game, with a squad, and no effective HC, in fact I would say AHC lagged behind GHC development by six months to a year with unfortunate long term consequences to the game (along with unaddressed equipment preferences/locked in country roles to specific land areas that only ToEs 'fixed').

I would agree that there are plenty of defense friendly mechanisms, if pop neutrality was fully implemented attacks should then be made easier, and I am also suggesting the NAO which would yield freeform regional battle and much easier attacks and open play, while still making it a war.

 

Ironically, you start out your latest post with exactly my point re: consolation prizes for the underpop.  I want the underpop to not only be able to stop the overpop, but also attack, and to be able to do it even if their squad is not one.  It's not stop KGW or SG with mechanics, it's enable whatever underpop to execute attacks successfully, including the larger towns.  VERY doable.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PITTPETE

Squads will create action and fun for their squadmates to keep them logging on. Some squad leaders are great at this and thats why those squads have lasted. Those squadleaders are respected because they worked hard to build up their squad and their reputations. 

You constantly repeat the "tribal raiders of France" comparison. You totally despise large organized squads because they can move a map. You constantly use SG and OJ as examples of this. They created content for the people that chose to follow them because of their coordination and communication.  Large squads that are capping towns gather steam and players want to follow them. It forces the other side to log off in disgust. Go build up your squad and have people choose to follow you. Earn it...

I can't wait to get back in game once the Brigade crap is gone. Hopefully AEF gets some numbers back and Jsilec has grown tired of changing diapers!!!LOL:D

Share this post


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

Squads will create action and fun for their squadmates to keep them logging on. Some squad leaders are great at this and thats why those squads have lasted. Those squadleaders are respected because they worked hard to build up their squad and their reputations. 

You constantly repeat the "tribal raiders of France" comparison. You totally despise large organized squads because they can move a map. You constantly use SG and OJ as examples of this. They created content for the people that chose to follow them because of their coordination and communication.  Large squads that are capping towns gather steam and players want to follow them. It forces the other side to log off in disgust. Go build up your squad and have people choose to follow you. Earn it...

I can't wait to get back in game once the Brigade crap is gone. Hopefully AEF gets some numbers back and Jsilec has grown tired of changing diapers!!!LOL:D

OJ is a fine tactician for what he does, but it requires Pearl Harbor surprise and defenders spawning into a virtual camp.  Happens occasionally, fine.  Happens all the time or the only way to win, instead of options for ninja, straight up hard fight, strategically or superior play, then yes there is a content and gameplay problem.

The game is 24x7.  Squads are not on 24x7 so there needs to be provision for that.

Again, I'm not against squads, just this idea that the game should cater exclusively to the OJ style, or make no attempt for any underpop to have attack fun just because people apparently want an overpop Iwin button, or that this should be just a tactical arena generator and not a war.

And you are not qualified to say what I despise or do not despise.  You have no idea and have shown a consistent inability to read my emotions or get much out of what I post, other then I speak against your apparent preferred laissez-faire approach rather then an actual sporting chance game.

 

I'd say Victarus Gets It re: underpop suckage, even as I expect he doesn't buy into all my POV.  You can argue me down all you like, but you best be paying attention to the people making the game and when they say they have a content problem for underpop people, best you take it seriously and think about solutions not putdowns.

 

Edited by Kilemall
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PITTPETE

So now its just the OJ style...Nothing stopped defenders from spawning in to check EWS.

Perhaps its you that is playing the wrong game?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mosizlak
On 12/26/2016 at 0:00 PM, Pittpete said:

Did you actually read what he had to say?

Your pop neutrality thread is how many years old?

You remind me of one of those snake oil salesman that has the cure for everything.

 

Forget it, you aren't going to make any headway with that guy.   I've tried and it's hopeless no matter what you bring to the table. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

So now its just the OJ style...Nothing stopped defenders from spawning in to check EWS.

Perhaps its you that is playing the wrong game?

Perhaps you don't understand (or care) what it is like to be underpop, with one helluva time well on a town that is contested and other people trying to get an attack underway, to get people free to do the checking.

 

A lot of times vets like me who reflexively do so because checking now prevents a whole lot worse situation, but given the cap rules, spawning and other mechanisms, an attack is often a bridge too far to underpop to undertake.

 

That takes away the attack half of the game for the underpop guys, on a continuous basis.

 

I have also executed deep night lone attacks as time distractions, IN TZ3, so I have done those and in that case how futile it is because of the overpop friendly enviornment.

 

I'm not even talking about 'stopping OJ', you HAVE to have local superiority and towns taken and the war won for there to be the sort of meaning this game delivers.

 

I am talking about what the OP is trying to get to- underpop sucks, and being able to defend AND attack as though it's evenpop should be the goal.  

 

Nice sleight of hand, attacking me.  Perhaps you can get yet another thread deep sixed that threatens the squad uber alles show up and win with numbers not superior org philosophy- but the Rats still see the problem and it needs solutions, even if they are not mine specifically.

 

The cycle of suck drains subs long term, needs to be a game and not punching dummies cause of the game mechanics.

 

If you put half the energy into figuring out how to solve the problem without saying 'there is no problem' or messing with me, we'd be a lot further along with the game as a whole.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
malvoc

Has anyone in here been watching the map we are having a slug fest right now and you guys in forums  whining this could be the best map ever both sides fighting hard no one giving up get in the game guys!!!!

Malvoc out....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PITTPETE

I've played lowpop in the past and know that it can suck...It is possible to change things instead of coming to the forums and looking for a magic wand to make it all better.

Instead of keeping things simple you want to overcomplicate game mechanics,rules,give handouts, punish organization.

Organize your low pop players into a coordinated squad and before you know it you'll be able to shut down the cycle of suck as you describe it.

Make it interesting for people to log on, even if you don't succeed..

I bring up OJ because he ran his OPs with Der Tiger during high pop US timezone. 9 out of 10 times we didnt cap the town, but we sure had fun on TS doing it. 

Im not attacking you but you continue to post like you are superior to everyone and you have the fix but no one will listen to you.

Now that brigades are going bye bye, put your $$$$ where your mouth is and get in game and lead.S!

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

Im not attacking you but you continue to post like you are superior to everyone and you have the fix but no one will listen to you.

 

 

Winner, winner, chicken dinner...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jwilly

My guess is that interpersonal arguments here decrease the attention paid to those CRS customers' opinions in Victarus's design-questions process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
david01
8 hours ago, Pittpete said:

Squads will create action and fun for their squadmates to keep them logging on. Some squad leaders are great at this and thats why those squads have lasted. Those squadleaders are respected because they worked hard to build up their squad and their reputations.

 

Yeah the underpop problem got as bad as it is because players are almost completely detached from each other and the game, there is no one to create variety or offer alternative goals to "fight somewhere in this flashing box" and so when the box fight isn't fair understandably the people participating in it don't enjoy themselves very much. To retain a player that doesn't have any other investment in a FPS there needs to be a strong system of balances to include local population caps, equipment limits, matchmaking for skill, even forced team autobalancing in most cases. When that can't happen games have to throw buffs and benefits to the weaker team like XP gain and currency bonuses. Even if CRS wanted to implement all of this I think it's far too much work for the current crew.

 

So I don't think that CRS has any other choice to improve imbalanced periods except to ensure that players start building associations and some other greater connection to the game and community. Victarus can add in a "Hold this depot for 10 minutes!" or "Capture 1/2 ABs!" with a nice "mission accomplished" and maybe some kind of gold star as a reward but it's not going to mean as much as pulling off a clutch play or even just trolling ingame with people you know. I've sapped a tank at a critical moment and cleared another squad member of EA and what gave those events so much worth was the response from the other people I was playing with, which makes sense as this is a MMO. The intent is good but I don't see how a similar response from "system" is going to have nearly the same value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quincannon
9 hours ago, Pittpete said:

I've played lowpop in the past and know that it can suck...It is possible to change things instead of coming to the forums and looking for a magic wand to make it all better.

Instead of keeping things simple you want to overcomplicate game mechanics,rules,give handouts, punish organization.

Organize your low pop players into a coordinated squad and before you know it you'll be able to shut down the cycle of suck as you describe it.

Make it interesting for people to log on, even if you don't succeed..

I bring up OJ because he ran his OPs with Der Tiger during high pop US timezone. 9 out of 10 times we didnt cap the town, but we sure had fun on TS doing it. 

Im not attacking you but you continue to post like you are superior to everyone and you have the fix but no one will listen to you.

Now that brigades are going bye bye, put your $$$$ where your mouth is and get in game and lead.S!

 

You can NOT force people during the lowpop TZs to quit their normal squads and form a new Squad. One major problem is that there are almost no dedicated TZ3 players. Most play during other TZs, but either start early or play late to try to help, But they still belong to the Squads that play in non-lowpop time zones.

It's NOT a matter of recruitment. Are YOU going to tell people that they have to quit the very Squads that you are espousing? I can say for a fact that TZ3 Allies are not capable of forming even a medium sized squad for that TZ, because almost all of those players belong to Squads already. In addition, a couple of the few small squads switch between sides for different campaigns, and when they go Axis, it gets even worse. The fact is that there aren't any players TO recruit for an Allied TZ3 Squad of any size. In addition, the players in that TZ work with their own squadmated first, so there are several groups of 2 and maybe 3 active players at any time. No matter what you do, unless those players quit their squads to combine and form a new one, you will never be able to have the cohesion and coordination required to even TRY to beat groups like 250 and 91st. At best we can try to hold them off, but it never works very well or for very long. Most players like to attack, and in lowpop you are almost always forced to defend. Once that happens half of the players who would play log off, making the imbalance even bigger.

I'm actually firmly convinced that there IS no solution to this. Town supply isn't going to really change things. All it will mean is that no supply will be lost and no brigades will get cut off as the OP side rolls over the lowpop side. Despite the numbers online at any one time, the majority of players will always choose to play Axis unless they are bored or tired of not being challenged. The ONLY fix is to change the attitudes of players...and that is NOT going to happen.

And new players are not the answer unless somehow a DROVE of Allied dediicated players who just happen to be available in the middle of TZ3 join the game, while at the same time, no one new joins the Axis for a period of several months or longer. Why? Because people try to get their friends to play. Ther are more Axis players who have more friends than the Allied players. Mathematically speaking, it is statistically impossible (for all practical purposes that the Allied players would ever be able to recruit enough new players to equal the Axis players, simply because there is such a  significant player population difference.

The only mechanics that I have ever seen that could potentially offset this issue would be having a ton of small pop instances for battles instead of large ones (16vs16 or 32 vs 32) which would essentially render Squads and sides pretty much unimportant, because if there were only 10 allied players and 30 Axis, tthen 14 of the Axis players would have no opponents unless they switched sides and fought each other...  OR... Add AI bots to even out population imbalances, something that, even if it were accepted by the player base, would be nearly impossible to institute on a mapwide basis across the entirety of the map we use. Neither of these options would retain the uniqueness of this game, and the power gamers in the game would revolt if they had to fight AI opponents.

Again... I don't believe that there is a really practical solution, short of bribing players to plat a side they don't like, which would likely cause them to seek other forms of entertainment elsewhere. We can debate it endlessly. We can suggest forced temporary solutions but as long as people find unbalanced gameplay acceptable, they are very unlikely to consider changing their play preference.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
monsjoex

I think you are right Quincannon.

Lowpop is like a desert, it spreads because its less fun and people do not log in during that time.
The only way to fix lowpop is how you fix a desert. By digging trenches at the ends and slowly reclaiming it.
This means making TZ2 and TZ1 more fun and getting more people to play those timezones. Then lowpop will follow as people stay online longer/log in earlier.

Its easier to appeal to the larger playerbase in TZ1/2 and have them play more than trying to get the smaller group of players log into TZ3 more.

Share this post


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

I've played lowpop in the past and know that it can suck...It is possible to change things instead of coming to the forums and looking for a magic wand to make it all better.

Instead of keeping things simple you want to overcomplicate game mechanics,rules,give handouts, punish organization.

Organize your low pop players into a coordinated squad and before you know it you'll be able to shut down the cycle of suck as you describe it.

Make it interesting for people to log on, even if you don't succeed..

I bring up OJ because he ran his OPs with Der Tiger during high pop US timezone. 9 out of 10 times we didnt cap the town, but we sure had fun on TS doing it. 

Im not attacking you but you continue to post like you are superior to everyone and you have the fix but no one will listen to you.

Now that brigades are going bye bye, put your $$$$ where your mouth is and get in game and lead.S!

 

The cycle of suck is not just a TZ3 thing, it's a direct consequence of what Victarus is on about.

 

Signing on when one side or the other is in full demoralization mode is an utterly miserable experience, for both vets and noobs.  Even if you don't have the gripes or 'Rats have forsaken/hate us' or 'HC/such and such are idiots' chat business, the overpop/underpop mechanics means being up against the wall for the entire time on, for days or weeks on end.  And if it is a permanent zeropop, years.

 

We lose subs to that, not to mention subs for other TZs that see their effort is consistently meaningless with easymode takes. 

 

Then, when the pendulum swings, and the other side gets the overpop advantage, then the cycle of suck hits the underpop side and we lose more of those subs long term.

 

The Cycle of Suck cuts like a scythe through first one side, then the other.

 

Attack you say?  Sure, I'm game.  But the overpop/underpop spawning/FB time to battle, cap timers and other hardcoded game elements virtually guarantee no traction.

 

I want to change that so they CAN attack, which at least allows some relief to being beat on if they so choose and variability/uncertainty for the overpop to have to allocate resources at risk just like underpop or evenpop situations.

 

So that one can sign on 24x7 and have the sense that it CAN be turned around, and not by having to sign on like it's a job for weeks on end to build up that TZ, but anyone can pick up and go if they can persuade their side sufficiently.

 

You know, like a sporting game and not a job.

 

I think that will make for a more likely environment for leaders to stay/develop/flourish and players to stay on longer and ultimately reduce the whole bad overpop/underpop business to begin with.

 

As to your personal challenge, my RL job and time is such that I cannot commit the several hours per day it takes at what for me is 2300-0300 to build up TZ org.  I am oncall 24x7 50% of the time, can be interrupted while I am on and I HAVE to leave the game right then, and often resting up when I am not oncall.  Last time I pulled a long HC shift, I stayed on until 0500 and got sick for a week.  My workload and that of my partners does not permit any more such dereliction of duty for a game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
david01

I've got to wonder at the people here stridently arguing against a simple community solution. This is a MMO, the easiest and surest way to get players to better enjoy their time while online is to improve the social aspect. It works for underpop and even for overpop too. I guess that no one ever investigated why there used to be groups of players that would enjoy resupply columns or patrolling around an empty town, or why some pilots always flew together up very high and barely saw any action compared to the pilots that tangled low over the AO, or any other fringe game activity where not many kills were had or ingame objectives achieved. In some cases there were large groups of players online not even directly interacting with the other team but still logging on and playing and feeling like they contributed. So if there's a problem of player motivation and enjoyment I don't see why stronger community isn't the first thing being looked at rather than a new series of rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PITTPETE

Quincannon, you state there is no solution. If so why do you continue to post in the forums about the lowpop problem that has plagued this game for many,many years.

In one post you're experimenting as a medic and refuse to help cap depots during the TZ you are questioning.

Some of you don't get it. I understand you can't recruit players that aren't there. Nothing is stopping players during that TZ from working together though. Together doesnt mean you need to be in the same squad. 

Go ask the Pathfinders how they defend towns. They check depots like crazy, call out incoming vehicles, mark stuff, check EWS, etc....They are constantly communicating with the playerbase.

If you are successful in shutting down a few of the 91st/251's attacks you can count on more players finding out about it and wanting to log on to be part of that. A few successful defense stories will find there way to the forums, just like the constant repetitive overpop threads that appear weekly. HC players will no longer have to spend precious time moving Brigades, setting fallbacks,etc...They can spend their time leading in game and rallying the playerbase. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...