• Announcements

    • GVONPAUL

      New Community Volunteer Opportunity   04/29/2017

      With the looming Steam release, we are anticipating many new players to the game. This is great for all of us, and it's important that we retain as many as we can. With that in mind, we'd like to enlist players to help with the inevitable questions asked in the forums. Ideally, gameplay questions are asked and answered in-game, but it's not always easy or convenient to answer questions while playing. A Gameplay Support Forum would be a good place for those who want to help. We are now accepting volunteers for the Rat Patrol, who will provide correct and consistent info to new players in the Forums. The more new players we retain, the better it is for the game and the biggest hurdle in player retention is grasping the complexities of this game. If you are interested, send me a PM.  
    • Dodger

      Squad Leaders Contact GVONPAUL OR Dodger for Squad Forums   05/18/2017

      Soldiers!

      We are seeking Squad Leaders to volunteer their squads to help us test the upcoming Squad Forums system. This system will integrate squads who wish to participate into a self-sustained "forum within a forum." You will be able to add members to your squad, assign permissions, and create forums/calendar events on your own. The idea behind this system is part of our commitment to support squads as a integral part of our community. This service will be offered free of charge to all squads of World War II Online upon launch. Our goal is to offer all of the services a squad off-site forum can offer but free of charge and tied in to our existing forum service. So what do you need tested? We need willing volunteers to test the whole system - make forums, post threads, assign permissions, etc. The idea is to have several squads giving it a test run to point out any flaws before we launch it publicly. What are the requirements? We are ideally looking for medium to large squads - Ideally ten people or so plus, but smaller squads feel free to apply - and a willingness to use our platform. It's important to note (as of now - these may be included at a later date) we are unable to convert posts from a private forum if your squad previously used one, and you (or your XO's and recruiters) will need to assign individual members permissions. It is entirely possible that in the future this system will be automatically linked to the game's squad roster, but as of now developer priorities are elsewhere (1.37 and steam, w00t!) How do I sign up? PM me ( @Dodger ) on the forums, or email me at dodger@playnet.com - Please indicate your squad name and how many members you have. I will get back to you with more instructions.

kuronyra

A point of view form a returning player about Steam Release and what it could do.

44 posts in this topic

We will finally put to rest the notion that player numbers matter. I just hope they up the timers.

Share this post


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

I cannot deny that it generally sucks to tank as Axis by comparison (T1 with the 3h is probably their best overall armor tier).  But historical stats completely reject the notion that flying Axis sucks.  Before Stats 2.0, I ran the numbers on overall K/D for Axis and Allies, fighter vs fighter (including fighter-bombers).  The historical Allied K/D was 0.95.  If you removed both the 110s from the calculation, the Allied K/D dropped to 0.77.  But I'm sure all your anecdotal information will continue to convince you otherwise.  

 

Also, I'm not saying there isn't room for improvement (there's massive room in fact), but WWIIOL is still a good game with good gameplay even in its current form.  The one thing that keeps it from achieving that good gameplay is a lack of players.  When this game has pop and is rolling on all cylinders, it's extraordinarily fun.  While these moments are rare, I have yet to experience equivalent "highs" in other games.  On some level, I know you feel the same.  Otherwise you wouldn't keep posting here.  

 

When the Steam version is released, there will be great battles and lots of fun, even if CRS does nothing from this moment on other than Steam.  That's simply a function of the expected population spike.  BUT, if we want to actually take steps forward and get that good gameplay around the clock, CRS needs to keep working hard.  

 

Thankfully, they are.

Can't say I enjoy riding around in those Allied tanks with no commander view either. Can't see anything and can't hear sh*t. Zero situational awareness .  But man, I do luv me some Stuart! 

Edited by lipton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well technicly, the germans tank suffer from a lack of armor, armor not angled and a gun that is a average.

The thing is the Tiger that can angle himself and be a real threat.

 

 

For the Allies, it's even simpler, the Shermans are supposed to be easy to knock out, but hard hitting with the 76'.

The churchill is a moving bunker from the front but with a gun also average in comparaison.

 

 

Not gonna lie, in general, germans tanks looks...

latest?cb=20131002015906

 

Cooler!

 

 

Edited by kuronyra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love posts like this because it is shows me that we're arguing about development as opposed to survival!  

Onward friends for WWII Online will continue!  

Onto England Axis!

S!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/17/2017 at 5:00 PM, B2K said:

67/131 =.51 X 100 = 51% (Excludes current campaign and Truces/draw)

 

So essentially even. 

Strange, from the wiki

 

Axis 68 52%
Allied 58 45%
Total 130  
Undecided/Truce 4  
Uncounted 7  

Share this post


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

I cannot deny that it generally sucks to tank as Axis by comparison (T1 with the 3h is probably their best overall armor tier).  But historical stats completely reject the

<snip>

Flying axis does suck and that's why no one seriously flies axis in this game anymore. My view on equipment is supported by player population. You should stop being so concerned with K/D, especially historical K/D and instead wonder why all the hardcore LW players disbanded or went to play other games.

 

There have been promotional periods over the last several years where the population spiked, but all the players went away soon after. That is because the gameplay is bad. The gameplay is bad because it advertises itself as a MMOFPS but there's not much fighting. There's not much fighting because the game really doesn't supporting fighting, in fact it does almost everything it can to deter and penalize it. This is because "balance" has always taken priority over fighting and other content creation in the game. The devs focused on making a balanced game (and failed) instead of a fun game and so they have very few players.

 

If a 1000 players were dumped on to the server tomorrow they would soon leave because none of the core systems of this game are designed to enable players, and they're also really fragile. So some changes to spawning, supply and AOs as well are needed for a good Steam release. Really what's needed is to stop prioritizing absolute numerical player balance over fun in the game; if a squad returns or a guild from another game comes over after a Steam release there can't be a dev complaining publicly about how they're imbalancing the game and ruining things, or players threatening to unsub or any other nonsense like what has occurred in the past.

Edited by david01

Share this post


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

Flying axis does suck and that's why no one seriously flies axis in this game anymore. My view on equipment is supported by player population. You should stop being so concerned with K/D, especially historical K/D and instead wonder why all the hardcore LW players disbanded or went to play other games.

 

There have been promotional periods over the last several years where the population spiked, but all the players went away soon after. That is because the gameplay is bad. The gameplay is bad because it advertises itself as a MMOFPS but there's not much fighting. There's not much fighting because the game really doesn't supporting fighting, in fact it does almost everything it can to deter and penalize it. This is because "balance" has always taken priority over fighting and other content creation in the game. The devs focused on making a balanced game (and failed) instead of a fun game and so they have very few players.

 

If a 1000 players were dumped on to the server tomorrow they would soon leave because none of the core systems of this game are designed to enable players, and they're also really fragile. So some changes to spawning, supply and AOs as well are needed for a good Steam release. Really what's needed is to stop prioritizing absolute numerical player balance over fun in the game; if a squad returns or a guild from another game comes over after a Steam release there can't be a dev complaining publicly about how they're imbalancing the game and ruining things, or players threatening to unsub or any other nonsense like what has occurred in the past.

Oh come on. Have you ever even played Allied? All the hardcore Allied air squads are gone. The Axis are the only ones with such a squad (Zulu); 4-wing arguably does more on the ground than in the air.

 

I went Axis for a couple campaigns and flew exclusively. I managed to stay in the top 5 through three tiers with the vast majority of my flying experience in Allied crates. And I'm not even a very good pilot. The 109 is the best overall airframe in the game. You are just flat out wrong here.

 

I don't think absolute numerical player balance is the solution, but there is certainly room for a pop neutral balancing mechanism. 

 

The one thing that kills fun and pop more than anything is imbalance. You can't have fun without balance. That has to come first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/17/2017 at 8:08 AM, Silky said:

That's not actually correct 

its 50-50 wins over at least the last 10 years if not longer. there's a thread with the exact numbers.  campaign wins can go in rolls like 3/4/5 in a row but tables then turn. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, chyrenz said:

I love posts like this because it is shows me that we're arguing about development as opposed to survival!  

Onward friends for WWII Online will continue!  

Onto England Axis!

S!

Never a truer statement made!!!

S!

Share this post


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

Flying axis does suck and that's why no one seriously flies axis in this game anymore. My view on equipment is supported by player population. You should stop being so concerned with K/D, especially historical K/D and instead wonder why all the hardcore LW players disbanded or went to play other games.

 

There have been promotional periods over the last several years where the population spiked, but all the players went away soon after. That is because the gameplay is bad. The gameplay is bad because it advertises itself as a MMOFPS but there's not much fighting. There's not much fighting because the game really doesn't supporting fighting, in fact it does almost everything it can to deter and penalize it. This is because "balance" has always taken priority over fighting and other content creation in the game. The devs focused on making a balanced game (and failed) instead of a fun game and so they have very few players.

 

If a 1000 players were dumped on to the server tomorrow they would soon leave because none of the core systems of this game are designed to enable players, and they're also really fragile. So some changes to spawning, supply and AOs as well are needed for a good Steam release. Really what's needed is to stop prioritizing absolute numerical player balance over fun in the game; if a squad returns or a guild from another game comes over after a Steam release there can't be a dev complaining publicly about how they're imbalancing the game and ruining things, or players threatening to unsub or any other nonsense like what has occurred in the past.

Well, I pretty much disagree with everything you just said. 

Let me clarify. I disagree with your interpretation of what's wrong and what can be fixed in a reasonable time with limited resources. 

But I'll just point out the one comment you made that is totally and absolutely incorrect.

The Axis LW players did not disband their squads or go play other games because of equipment disparity. Historical stats show that most top pilots were Axis. 

They left because the low fog layer was introduced. That was the straw that broke the camels back for Axis pilots. 

Why? Because the 109 is a BnZ plane and does this VERY WELL. Once the low fog layer was introduced, the Allied pilots would just stay under the layer and avoid the fight while bombing Axis into rubble. 

They got bored and angry... so they quit. It had nothing to do with equipment. 

And whether you want to admit it or not.... a closer numerical balance would help tremendously. You're just against the idea of F2P Lock to Underpop  because you're a F2P vet.  (said with love in my heart and goodness on my mind)

Edited by lipton
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, lipton said:

 

They left because the low fog layer was introduced. That was the straw that broke the camels back for Axis pilots. 

Why? Because the 109 is a BnZ plane and does this VERY WELL. Once the low fog layer was introduced, the Allied pilots would just stay under the layer and avoid the fight while bombing Axis into rubble. 

They got bored and angry... so they quit. It had nothing to do with equipment. 

Correct.  Saw it first hand.  The sky was nice and blue then something happened when they attempted to play with the "weather" and it got all hazy and fishbowl effect.  Guys got peeved and left.  I was apart of a big air squad and they jumped over to EVE. Boom gone and they never came back............not even WBS events.

Edited by bmw
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/14/2017 at 4:27 AM, kuronyra said:

I don't recall saying the Tiger was OP.

I only said he was the only Heavy tank of the game. And I mean really Heavy tank. The Churchill barely count in comparaison, I think the Americans need the Pershing have more diversity instead of the usual shermans combos. :3

1) the churchill isn't 'kind of' a heavy tank, it IS a heavy tank

2) the pershing means the germans have or could have both the tiger2 and the panther - or were you suggesting crs introduce a late 1945 tank to go up against a mid 42 tank?

 

As for steam launch in general - look good or bad things could happen and some thought should be had trying to envision issues and have plans in case they happen - however - some context is needed. if this steam launch is NOT done then the future of this game is much more clear than the what if scenario of a steam launch. meaning, if more eyes don't see this game or have an avenue to even be informed that this game exists, it will continue to slowly wither. can't let possible doom n gloom scenarios prevent us from getting our name out there.

On 5/17/2017 at 3:35 PM, capco said:

I cannot deny that it generally sucks to tank as Axis by comparison (T1 with the 3h is probably their best overall armor tier).  But historical stats completely reject the notion that flying Axis sucks.  Before Stats 2.0, I ran the numbers on overall K/D for Axis and Allies, fighter vs fighter (including fighter-bombers).  The historical Allied K/D was 0.95.  If you removed both the 110s from the calculation, the Allied K/D dropped to 0.77.  But I'm sure all your anecdotal information will continue to convince you otherwise.  

Those historical numbers include the clipped HE bug as well as the pre 109 nerf numbers. A better number would be the post 109 nerf numbers till now. also don't forget german greentags for the longest time had to fly 110 vs hurri/h75 and those numbers were laughably one sided.

Share this post


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

2) the pershing means the germans have or could have both the tiger2 and the panther - or were you suggesting crs introduce a late 1945 tank to go up against a mid 42 tank?

The M26 would pair well with the Panther or Tiger I.  Only a single M26 was created to go toe-to-toe with a King Tiger, the Super Pershing.  

 

The Tiger I arrived in late-42, after being rushed to service in its prototype form, and the design didn't really come into its own until mid-43.   The M26 was also ready for service by 1943, but there were many factors that kept it from being put into service that had nothing to do with the technological advancement of the design:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M26_Pershing#Delayed_production

 

Comparing the M26 to other armor is not nearly as simple as introduction dates suggest.  Even the "Heavy" designation isn't straightforward.  

Edited by capco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If CRS wanted to get a little bit what-if, the Sherman-with-90mm-T26-turret ("Persherman") could have been in Europe in 1943, sooner than the T26E3 due to having fewer elements to debug and fewer production aspects to bring up to speed.

In the past, the planned next tank set was to be Firefly; Panther; and M36B1. The latter was an M36 turret with 90mm gun on a Sherman hull, providing Sherman-like power turret drive and Persherman-like gun performance but with minimal turret armor.

A later set was to include Comet, Tiger II, and T26E3 / M26.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

Motor pool  ... bleh

Are importants just like infantry pool and plane pools.

People won't be and are not satisfied with so few tanks, especially when there is potential for so much more.

 

 

Think of it, another tier after the current tier max, with even bigger tanks, with even more planes like the P-51 and the P-47.

Wouldn't you love to fly a P-47? I sur would love to.

 

Same goes for the tanks, I would love to face Panther that would have there own characteristic compared to the Tiger, and even tanks like the Marder, you could even go crazy and bring in the Tiger II, the Elefant/Ferdinant, the M18 Hellcat for the allies and the M24 Chaffee.

 

There is so much more that can be done.

Edited by kuronyra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/14/2017 at 5:05 AM, kuronyra said:

. (And I think the Allies need there own Heavy Tank. Like the Firefly, or the Pershing who would be a perfect counter for the Tiger)

Whats wrong with Matildas? LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And to go back to your point, about new players being inclined to try the "evil" side first. Let them be awed by the mighty Axis Panzers of T0, that, as we all know, wreak havoc among the enemy lines... (insert sarcastic grin here)

Speed vs armor is a very interesting debate, that is relevant in real warfare, and was especially relevant during the Blitzkrieg. But, how do we replicate a Blitzkrieg scenario in this game, where the actual speed with which units can move from one town to another is IDENTICAL. Its almost instantaneous, as soon as HC decides to move them. (Yes, there are timers, but those timers are not unit specific) Maybe we can tie those timers to the actual max speed of the unit??

Edited by bogol

Share this post


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

Speed vs armor is a very interesting debate

i raced a shreck from FB to town once, the shreck almost beat me.

the ground is always 100% roughness so there's no tactical mobility, it's 20km/h across the board.

except the Brit heavies and stuart which are + - 50%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   1 member