tsetse

Steam release (yikers)

113 posts in this topic

8 hours ago, delems said:

***  if even 300 of those people sign up to play, (around 8%)

Hmm, check your math there, lol cause in my math it's 0.086%, but I get your point.

 

fyi, 8% would be around 28,000 - pretty sure that would end the game as we know it, as it would crash and not work :)

 

Heh... math isn't my strong suit. That's obvious.

 

I was being conservative. Worst case scenario, around 3-500 people sub up for at least a month.

Still and influx of funds, still a lot more player driven content, which is what makes this game.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So everyone here is gonna get the Steam version to give it the big thumbs up, right?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/1/2017 at 9:13 AM, lipton said:

I look forward to the killing field. The large numbers signing up will be great. But we will need them to stick around, and there is where the problem will be I'm afraid. 

We've had moments of population surge in the past. Granted, this 'surge' will put those to shame, but if it's only a surge and not sustainable... 

CRS will need to take advantage of the increased revenue immediately. I'm talking within months, or the window of opportunity will be missed. The negative reviews will be out there and they will be difficult to overcome.

I'm not a surfer, but in surfer terms... CRS has chosen their wave. Now they need to paddle hard into the wave creating momentum and speed that can be used to to set up the first move of the ride.  

Immediately.

They need to implement the HE and KE patches within the first month or the 30 day introductory players will just leave.

There is nothing more appalling in this game than the way HE rounds and shells just pop and leave infantry standing.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

 

Also, when an HE round bursts on a canopy of an aircraft... and it just flies away unharmed.

Or... being shot up a few times and all you get is a stream of steam for damage. That needs to be addressed. DMs and FMs have to be fixed in the air or anyone trying this game out will decide that the fishbowl sky, the ineffective DM and having to actually go into your .cfml files and add code will just leave.

If incremental flaps are necessary to managing tough air maneuvers, then just put it in the planes that had it and make it accurate. Remove invisible flight surfaces and properly balance out the crate with it's horsepower and torque.

Add sheer stress to the bigger bombers, so if they try to do stunt flying a wing will crack off and they will crash.

No way those planes ever managed this kind of maneuvering.

 

Fix armor leaks, add face-hardened armor. Implement better tank to tank ammo in all guns as tiers progress.

 

ASAP.

 

 

Steam releases, manage that. After it's working well, implement Hatch and scotsman's patches. No delay.

Otherwise, people will pay a month, laugh and leave.

 

 

 

Edited by vasduten1
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep in mind - relying on your existing playerbase to do the majority of technical game training to a majority of new players is not going to work. It has not worked for the past decade or so, it will not just start working now. To think otherwise is foolish. Surely some players will be of assistance, but many of them do not have much time on their hands to play the game and would much rather spend that time playing instead of working, so to speak, even if there's a common shared goal here. Do not make the mistake of the last team and use that shared common goal as some sort of justification for putting this workload on your customers. 

What you need to do is utilize your volunteers. You have a slew of people running around with CRS caps in their handle with various community titles, assign them scheduled training nights on the training server and broadcast this to the new people. (Also thank you to whoever fixed Area 51!) Something like every Wednesday night 8PM-10PM on the training server, etc. A scheduled, dedicated training regimen is going to be your best bet.

Also, incentivize your talent pool of players who would be good candidates for this role. These people are your trainers who can be found using the .tr command, and other players in the community who are very knowledgeable and have a lot of time on their hands, such as @merlin51, @OldZeke and @delems. I'd argue official CRS member hosted training events will be more effective, but there's a lot players like these can do for you as well. 

I want this to work just as much as the next guy, and from what I see here and on Steam, you have two major obstacles to success. First is the subscription model, personally to me not a huge deal, and in itself an entirely different discussion. Second, and more importantly, is the retention plan, culminating itself wholly in the form of familiarity with the game which is best employed through the methods listed above. 

 

EDIT: @zippycame to me with an excellent idea for training air players as well. I'd reach out to him too. 

Edited by jester
Additional info
3 people like this

Share this post


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

Keep in mind - relying on your existing playerbase to do the majority of technical game training to a majority of new players is not going to work. It has not worked for the past decade or so, it will not just start working now.

I can understand this perspective and I'd agree that if we bank on this alone, it's unwise. There's a reason I have now made initial training mandatory, it's simply not enough with the overall learning curve of our game but it will give them the very basic necessities to being successful. 

That said we are all going to have to keep an ear out and lend a helping hand to inquiring minds. And that's all I am saying, if you see it, help. If we all do that on a global effort, we'll do the game a favor by keeping and educating these new guys.

S! 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, GrAnit said:

 The funnest times I ever had was after the release of a major patch (1.30?) and the population tripled for a week or so.

 Ok, will assume you mean funnest  time in the game.

Judging by the server down time today, we will get less then a week. 

Will the players who eventually get to join from Steam, get slapped in the face with full days of server down times within their first week of playing? lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, vasduten1 said:

If 350,000 people have checked the game's page out back in May, if even 300 of those people sign up to play, (around 8%) the game will be so much more fun. If 500 sign up, it'll be even better, and across more time zones.

What do you bet that if 300 people do join, 90% will go to whatever side is winning. Then CRS will be hit harder then ever with balance issues, that so far they have not done a stellar job with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a software implementer and trainer, the best approach is to have multiple and continual avenues of training available.  No manual will get it done, no class prior to go time will get it done, no online training system will get it done, and neither will dependency on experienced workers who have work to do.  

So Jester is spot on and you certainly cannot fully rely on your workers to get the training done.  But that said, using all the various methods possible will achieve the best results.  And here I think if the experienced players can step up a bit if they see someone struggling or some other opportunity to impart some wisdom it will certainly improve retention.

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, tsetse said:

 Ok, will assume you mean funnest  time in the game.

Judging by the server down time today, we will get less then a week. 

Will the players who eventually get to join from Steam, get slapped in the face with full days of server down times within their first week of playing? lol

It's not uncommon for games with online segments that get released on Steam to have the games go down a lot during the first, I don't know, month or 2 of their release.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/31/2017 at 4:59 AM, calyx6 said:

The problem comes when you start relying on Steam solely for the progression of your game and refuse outright to make important changes beforehand.

The other problem comes when you start thinking that releasing on Steam will suddenly open you to loads more people. People who buy games on Steam don't just rely on Steam for their gaming news. If people are interested in how WWIIOL currently is, they will already be playing it.

 

Various important fixes and updates have been postponed multiple times in favour of a quicker steam release. It doesn't seem to matter how many times the RATs are told this, they refuse to believe that it simply wont work. Despite being told so by people with far more experience than them.

One thing I have learned about steam. If the players say a game sucks, for me, they are usually right. I've burnt myself too many time thinking, "the game can't be that bad" So you better believe I look at player reviews and ratings before purchasing a game. I hope the RATS take heed, however I am wishing them the best of luck, and have posted on a website I frequent wwiionline., and will again when Steam releases.

Share this post


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

What do you bet that if 300 people do join, 90% will go to whatever side is winning. Then CRS will be hit harder then ever with balance issues, that so far they have not done a stellar job with.

Hmmm wonder what we could do. Maybe..>>>>>>>>>F2P Lock to Underpop<<<<<<<<< (follow the link)

:P:D:P:D:P

Edited by lipton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/1/2017 at 8:35 AM, vasduten1 said:

Remove invisible flight surfaces and properly balance out the crate with it's horsepower and torque.

Haven't looked at horsepower and torque recently except with 109's and it is historical as I could get it from prop and electric/hydraulic prop hub measurements and mass data. Wasn't extremely far off from what they are running now, just a bit light. Might still be as I don't have crankshaft or reduction gear torque factored in at present. Its all prop and hub...

But ahhh... "invisible flight surfaces"? What you talkin about Willis???? All the planes have the correct flight surface areas and locations for the airfoil components. What "someone" did to make them more stable at some time in the past, was jack up the weight distribution and rotational inertia values, and slow down control surface response time. They didn't add any invisible airfoils. Anyway, I put those values back to "normal" in the 109 series, and will do so with the rest as soon as I can.

Same with damage levels... Almost done with ordnance audits, so we can see how they act with current damage models. Will adjust to mach historical data as best we can after that.

And YES. I want structural damage on these birds so bad I can barely stand it... Have a couple of ideas to implement it without having to completely code a new system. Like tying it into the overspeed damage application model that the gear, flaps, and cockpits use. But instead of using a speed "qualifier" to begin applying damage, maybe we can just add a "G" qualifier to the component. We'll see...

 

3 people like this

Share this post


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

But instead of using a speed "qualifier" to begin applying damage, maybe we can use a "G" qualifier as well. We'll see...

Didnt hoof have something in at one point, like late 2000 closed testing that kind of worked but unpredictably also broke for no reason?
Perhaps memory failing?

Since our planes fly on a physics sim, rather than a tables sim, doesn't the game engine know a particular value that the plane is experiencing for wing load?
Not sure if i am saying it right?

Reason i ask this is, if a snap roll say an HE-111 (not picking on axis, it just happens to be our biggest plane) There wont most likely be any sudden G's, and well it is an HE-111 so the word speed does not come to mind. But the wing stress would of course be insane. 

The physics sim has a value that equates to what pressure i just applied to the wings in some fashion?
Unless you took the value of the roll rate? Game obviously knows it, i suppose one could kind of assume wing loading from roll rate?
Then use your speed + G for another wing load check?

1 person likes this

Share this post


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



And YES. I want structural damage on these birds so bad I can barely stand it... Have a couple of ideas to implement it without having to completely code a new system. Like tying it into the overspeed damage application model that the gear, flaps, and cockpits use. But instead of using a speed "qualifier" to begin applying damage, maybe we can just add a "G" qualifier to the component. We'll see...

 

Since we can't have "structural damage" so to speak... you could just have the landing gear (invisibly) pop out. That makes a gosh-awful sound and screws with flight quite a bit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off, thanks for opening up the 'Welcome back Soldier', always like to come back to the game and see if I can shake off my rustiness. :)

Anyway, I see there being opportunity here for WWIIOL on Steam, there is a lot of positives about releasing 'now' than there was in previous years. (I've been following along for the past... eh 6 to 9 months?). Speaking of the positives, WWII genre is coming back into the mix. Folks are burnt out on the modern warfare and are looking for a tactical / less twitch shooters. Facts are out there... Squads, PUBG, Foxhole are intriguing games which play into WWIIOL wheel house. Heroes & Generals didn't end up successful as much as people though, slightly overhyped and was too much of a P2W game mode.

Now the negatives, game is straight up outdated when it comes to game engine and graphics... but that's fine... sell yourself as a 'low' development team that isn't some triple A game/developer. Easy, proof is all here. Team is running on their own and care for the community, but that has to be stressed otherwise Steam will down play the votes. 2nd Negative, infantry play is slow. Play PUBG, Squads, etc... you're not going to have the slowness field when running or cutting around a corner, or as much network lag. But thats what it is... advantage is WWIIOL is more than just infantry play, downside is its a good 60% of the game.

Things I'd look at, keep promoting the community. Listen to what the new players say but never folk the older ones (they are your loyal customers). Revamp the capping system, don't think so much of point of interest, but more House to house (fox hole). Make tweaks to improve infantry play, which will promote more people wanting to play infantry. I felt like that has been the killer throughout the years.

Regardless, the first hurdle has been cleared... now we gotta keep running and look further out.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My two cents here. I think we as a community need to make this a positive environment for the new steam players should be priority #1.  

Get them into squads, help them learn and succeed on the battlefield. Get them on discord... I'm still somewhat new to this game but comms on discord made this game even more enjoyable. 

I understand things need to be tweaked with damage, population, ui, etc. 

hopefully with a high user retention of steam players will allow enough capital for the rats to bring on more staff to address the issues people have been complaining about.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never seen so many green tags in game then right now and someone said there's more in training than in the game.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like CRS is playing with supply, and spawn timers. Would not want the non-paying customers to lose, or have to wait for a spawn timer, or not have a shiny new tank to spawn in. Line up paying customers, your needed to welcome the new guys, and die for the glory of their Steam release!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yesterday I saw a stream of green tags like 10-15 people advancing to recapture a CP.

Prolly a squad from another game trying this game. Looked promising.

They didnt do bad at all from what I saw on the map,( I was not close.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/4/2017 at 5:21 PM, HATCH said:

Haven't looked at horsepower and torque recently except with 109's and it is historical as I could get it from prop and electric/hydraulic prop hub measurements and mass data. Wasn't extremely far off from what they are running now, just a bit light. Might still be as I don't have crankshaft or reduction gear torque factored in at present. Its all prop and hub...

But ahhh... "invisible flight surfaces"? What you talkin about Willis???? All the planes have the correct flight surface areas and locations for the airfoil components. What "someone" did to make them more stable at some time in the past, was jack up the weight distribution and rotational inertia values, and slow down control surface response time. They didn't add any invisible airfoils. Anyway, I put those values back to "normal" in the 109 series, and will do so with the rest as soon as I can.

Same with damage levels... Almost done with ordnance audits, so we can see how they act with current damage models. Will adjust to mach historical data as best we can after that.

And YES. I want structural damage on these birds so bad I can barely stand it... Have a couple of ideas to implement it without having to completely code a new system. Like tying it into the overspeed damage application model that the gear, flaps, and cockpits use. But instead of using a speed "qualifier" to begin applying damage, maybe we can just add a "G" qualifier to the component. We'll see...

 

Ah. Thanks for clarifying that.

 

I had read a few times that there were surfaces added to tank canopies because the .50cal could kill tank crews by strafing, a la DOC. 

Others chimed in that there were flight surfaces added to the bombers for stability, and well... when you watch 40MM HE rounds poof off of DB7s and Havocs and they fly on as if they never were hit at all... well, I guess I sot of ran with it thinking it was common knowledge. 

PS: Diff'rent Strokes reference!!! Awesome. 

 

Can't wait to see how things change. It's really goofy when a pair of Havocs is swooping in, dropping bombs at under 400M and flying away, then swooping back in over and over, never receiving damage from the bombs or from the AA on the ground trying to kill them, without any ill effects from stunt plane maneuvers those planes NEVER could perform IRL.

OR... watching them take 5-10 20MM HE rounds A2A and nothing happens.

 

I eagerly await the patches and can't wait to see the stunt bombing UFOs crash and burn when they drop on deck.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WWIIOL is a blast to play.  Been having fun with it for well over a decade.   I can't say that about any other game/sim and I have tried most of them.    Things I have learned in my 68 years :

Nothing is perfect.

What you get out of something is proportional to what you put into it.

Lighten up.

 

I welcome all the new Steam players.

 

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, vasduten1 said:

Ah. Thanks for clarifying that.

 

I had read a few times that there were surfaces added to tank canopies because the .50cal could kill tank crews by strafing, a la DOC. 

Others chimed in that there were flight surfaces added to the bombers for stability, and well... when you watch 40MM HE rounds poof off of DB7s and Havocs and they fly on as if they never were hit at all... well, I guess I sot of ran with it thinking it was common knowledge. 

PS: Diff'rent Strokes reference!!! Awesome. 

 

Can't wait to see how things change. It's really goofy when a pair of Havocs is swooping in, dropping bombs at under 400M and flying away, then swooping back in over and over, never receiving damage from the bombs or from the AA on the ground trying to kill them, without any ill effects from stunt plane maneuvers those planes NEVER could perform IRL.

OR... watching them take 5-10 20MM HE rounds A2A and nothing happens.

 

I eagerly await the patches and can't wait to see the stunt bombing UFOs crash and burn when they drop on deck.

 

 

 

Speaking from personal experience... when I'm flying a DB or Havoc, I receive AND FEEL the damage to flight controls every time I get hit by a 40mm or take damage from the bombs I drop. EVERY SINGLE TIME. 

But I still enjoy reading your constant exaggerated descriptions. Plz continue.  :popcorn:

Edited by lipton

Share this post


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

 

Speaking from personal experience... when I'm flying a DB or Havoc, I receive AND FEEL the damage to flight controls every time I get hit by a 40mm or take damage from the bombs I drop. EVERY SINGLE TIME. 

But I still enjoy reading your constant exaggerated descriptions. Plz continue.  :popcorn:

Having played both side and flown every plane on the game I concur that Havocs and Db7s are bullet sponges compared to everything else in game. Not sure if it is the way the plane is designed or if something is broken. I just know the take an awful lot of damage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.