• Announcements

    • CHIMM

      ***Expected Outage Scheduled*** 7 day Notice   12/15/2019

      Next Sunday, December 22nd 2019 outage and cut-over will START AT 9AM PACIFIC TIME or 5:00 PM GMT. All services will be effected for 24 +/- hours as announced in our previous article. Game server physically relocated  Website and critical data relocated Configure the game server all critical services to new ISP's We appreciate everyone's patience and understanding during this transition, our goal is to minimize server downtime. Official communications/status will be posted via Axis and Allied Discord, and FaceBook during outage. ***Effective that day, server time will be considered Pacific Standard Time (GMT -8), not US Central (CST) as it is now.***
arno

We have a camping problem.

154 posts in this topic

Option 3 the old FRU.  A little tougher than the truck and easily hidden.

 

Totally against that one. I'm going to assume ML set old box style insta soldier ?

If so never liked the ninja warrior ML Rifle walk to tank set FRU despawn respawn ,sap tank , despawn respawn as Rifle and look for new Tank. Also Soldiers out of a Box always rubbed me the wrong way. Out of a Truck or current FMS I can live with . Also if ML get to set these FRUs again then natural barriers like rivers and bridges become obsolete again. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, stankyus said:

I posted a cool proposition to allow engineers a scroll list of PPO designs to actually fortify your FMS.

Oh i definitely want more PPOs, i'd even be cool with a new heavy engineer class that has no weapons except maybe a pistol and only the ammo in it.
No HE satchels no grenades, but a large library of PPO and perhaps a much enhanced recharge time

by the way, for sandbags fast, grab a bunch of bolt action riflemen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dre21 said:

Option 3 the old FRU.  A little tougher than the truck and easily hidden.

 

Totally against that one. I'm going to assume ML set old box style insta soldier ?

If so never liked the ninja warrior ML Rifle walk to tank set FRU despawn respawn ,sap tank , despawn respawn as Rifle and look for new Tank. Also Soldiers out of a Box always rubbed me the wrong way. Out of a Truck or current FMS I can live with . Also if ML get to set these FRUs again then natural barriers like rivers and bridges become obsolete again. 

 

No, in my mind everything needs to be truck placed.  MSP/UMS/FRU/FMS would all be able to spawn inf and light guns.  The options available would allow the user to pick what works best for the objective.

I am completely opposed to ninja placement.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, merlin51 said:

Oh i definitely want more PPOs, i'd even be cool with a new heavy engineer class that has no weapons except maybe a pistol and only the ammo in it.
No HE satchels no grenades, but a large library of PPO and perhaps a much enhanced recharge time

by the way, for sandbags fast, grab a bunch of bolt action riflemen

How about a shovel they can use to beat an opponent with? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greetings,

Along the lines of the FMS,

You cannot dictate player behavior, that is for sure...nor can you expect old behavior patterns to change overnight. With the old ML or Infantry placed FRU my old squad used to often walk them in to avoid sound and setting off EWS early. So the behavior was to often auto walk from the FB to within 300 meters of town. I think it is 300 meters is the minimum distance you can place a spawn to an enemy facility. The point is you walked a long way and got very close and it was like a secret instant army popping up very near to an enemy town.

The behavior from HC or the One in charge of Flag movements and AO placements along with many a veteran player was and still is in some cases to call out for the placement of FRUs. Then follow with Armor and towed ATGs. It was and probably in the minds of many still is SOP. That was OK even with running trucks solo because the ML could, if he or she placed the FRU wait 10 minutes hiding in some bush, tall grass, barn or ruin reset the FRU. It was true wack-a-mole mechanics.

Now instead HC, veteran players and the one in charge of placing AO's should be establishing a new pattern of call outs. Armor and scout cars first. Hopefully with some infantry ridding along. Then Trucks towing and placing FMSs wherever the armor sets up. You cannot force players to build forts around the FMS but some of us actually have fun doing it. There also has to be an effort to train new players and retrain old ones to remind some players to form the rear guard. It used to be a rear guard was needed at the FB almost constantly to keep the action going. Thankfully CRS has made adjustments to stabilize the FB. Now playing the rear guard role is actually fun and more exciting. Guarding an FB could be mind numbing in the old days. Today guarding a well placed FMS is actually much more action oriented and exciting. But since we were so used to winning towns by placing the close and silent FRU and overwhelming with numbers, we still get many MLs calling to flood, flood, flood. Old habits are hard to break. I don't understand, other than what I discuss below, why we want the battles to end so quickly. Take your time but move quickly when it is imperative

There is one last mechanic that keeps it all from coming together and that is the ability to move a flag in once the town is contested. Again we are used to, hold that linking cp so we can move in more supply. If we were unable to do that, it won't be direct fear of death but emulated by fear of losing supply. Now the winner would often be the side that uses their equipment more wisely and effectively as attrition would have major impacts on wins and losses of battles. It would reward a team or side that was willing to bring in equipment from the rearguard town links or FBs. You would have to increase the minimum distance for the FMS most likely but that would actually be a good thing. You would have to balance some other things too such as slowing brigade movements and lengthening resupply timers. It all works together. I'm sure placing a rule to not allow an AO'd town to accept supply might cause other issues, but I'd say let's start somewhere.

Camping is just a form of suppression. There are ways to deal with it, such as creating a five second passive invulnerable and invisibility rule, or the ability for a friendly to take down the FMS from the inside using the shovel at a certain place or simply a blinking notifier that deaths are occurring very rapidly at spawn in on the active mission tab. It is also a learning experience for some. All it would take would be some of the great filmmakers out there to make a video demonstrating a camped spawn and making it mandatory viewing under the tutorial in order to graduate and play. That would go a long way to keeping more of the new players by showing them what not to do or what to look out for.

S!

 

P.S. For now I would simply lower the time it takes and the cool down length for engineers to build PPO's, drastically. They are engineers right? Seems like a no-brainer to me. They are in limited supply and who doesn't love a good fort.

  

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a serious camping problem this was fixed with Infantry placed MS but CRS revert this changes.

 

With Infantry Placed Mobile Spawns there was 0 camping!!!

With Truck FMS there was camping since day 1!!!

 

There needs to be a hybrid system placing an MS with infantry would only allow you to spawn a very limited number of units no ATGs if you drove truck and rtb at this MS location you would level the MS turning into the current FMS, moving the MS with infantry would reset it to level 0.

 

The fact that you can spawn more than one ATG can also make very dificult to get traction when you placed an AO due to early defenders placing FMS and spawning unlimited number of ATGs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These threads always make me laugh.  Change this, change that, wah, wah, wah, boohoo.  Every complaint I've seen in this thread can be fixed by teamwork and leadership. 

FMS camped?  Pm the leader.  No response?  Take lead and delete it.  Sometimes it takes a couple of minutes waiting with an unresponsive ML, but if you are whining about noobs getting slaughtered then YOU need to be doing the waiting to get it done.

Trucks are too loud and easily tracked down?  Use a team.  Take 5 trucks.  Spread them out.  A squad can do it or HC can lead from the fb.  It's not hard.  If you can't find 5 people maybe there should not be an AO, HC.  Just sayin'.

FMS is too easy to camp?  Then you are building them in the wrong place.  I've seen some brilliant placements that were practically uncampable.  Mostly what I see are bad placements.  Even those work if you work as a team and have multi FMS's or place more defensive PPOs around them.  Of course the more PPO's you put up, the easier it is to find.  It's a tradeoff.

CRS does not need to fix anything with the FMS.  They have better things to do.  It's fine.  Just adapt and use teamwork, people.  If you are not using teamwork you deserve to die.

 

 

 

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, ratzilla said:

These threads always make me laugh.  Change this, change that, wah, wah, wah, boohoo.  Every complaint I've seen in this thread can be fixed by teamwork and leadership. 

FMS camped?  Pm the leader.  No response?  Take lead and delete it.  Sometimes it takes a couple of minutes waiting with an unresponsive ML, but if you are whining about noobs getting slaughtered then YOU need to be doing the waiting to get it done.

Trucks are too loud and easily tracked down?  Use a team.  Take 5 trucks.  Spread them out.  A squad can do it or HC can lead from the fb.  It's not hard.  If you can't find 5 people maybe there should not be an AO, HC.  Just sayin'.

FMS is too easy to camp?  Then you are building them in the wrong place.  I've seen some brilliant placements that were practically uncampable.  Mostly what I see are bad placements.  Even those work if you work as a team and have multi FMS's or place more defensive PPOs around them.  Of course the more PPO's you put up, the easier it is to find.  It's a tradeoff.

CRS does not need to fix anything with the FMS.  They have better things to do.  It's fine.  Just adapt and use teamwork, people.  If you are not using teamwork you deserve to die.

 

 

 

Umcampable FMS Never seen one.. I just take a tank and it's done once it's camp it's pretty impossible as infantry or atg to do anything against it.

Gameplay design should be like a paper, rock and scissor game there should always be a solution to win.. there is almost no salvation for a camped FMS other than driving from FB to try to uncamp(takes time and you will probably be dead before getting there) or close it.

 

I also have encounter purposely placed FMS to drain supply from brigs.

Edited by pbveteran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll camp it from the front. I've no qualms about doing that, what else are you supposed to do? Let them have a free pass into your town or FB?  At least from the front they have a chance to throw smoke and do SOMETHING other than adding to the pile of corpses. 

Since Steam release, the only time I'll camp it directly on the spawn point is when we have an engie coming to take the FMS down. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/31/2017 at 3:45 PM, arno said:

The FMS is easily camped. The design needs to be revisited.  Killing our new players like that is killing any future the game might have.

 

1 hour ago, ratzilla said:

These threads always make me laugh.

kbkzur.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, pbveteran said:

There is a serious camping problem this was fixed with Infantry placed MS but CRS revert this changes.

 

With Infantry Placed Mobile Spawns there was 0 camping!!!

With Truck FMS there was camping since day 1!!!

 

There needs to be a hybrid system placing an MS with infantry would only allow you to spawn a very limited number of units no ATGs if you drove truck and rtb at this MS location you would level the MS turning into the current FMS, moving the MS with infantry would reset it to level 0.

 

The fact that you can spawn more than one ATG can also make very dificult to get traction when you placed an AO due to early defenders placing FMS and spawning unlimited number of ATGs.

1. There was extensive camping of the player based MS. I used to do it all the time, you just did not want to hit the MS or it would go down.

2. The playerbased MS destroyed the tanking AA and ATG game.  Having a ninja style MS placed inside your ZOC or next to it equipped with sappers and RPATs and a brigades worth of infantry was horrible.

ALL MS, FMS etc.. should always be placed with a truck. No more infantry placed spawn points.

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

I'll camp it from the front. I've no qualms about doing that, what else are you supposed to do? Let them have a free pass into your town or FB?  At least from the front they have a chance to throw smoke and do SOMETHING other than adding to the pile of corpses. 

Since Steam release, the only time I'll camp it directly on the spawn point is when we have an engie coming to take the FMS down. 

I think the point in being is that a FORTIFIED spawn point should be fortified.. IE making it difficult to kill ppl actually spawning in the second they become visible.  Not impossible but very difficult.  To me what you are doing is cutting the spawn point, not camping it. Camping is simply killing them as they spawn in. IF its fortified, they can be cut from leaving their fortified spawn area but at least have a chance to defend it from ppl coming to sap it.

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

I think the point in being is that a FORTIFIED spawn point should be fortified.. IE making it difficult to kill ppl actually spawning in the second they become visible.  Not impossible but very difficult.  To me what you are doing is cutting the spawn point, not camping it. Camping is simply killing them as they spawn in. IF its fortified, they can be cut from leaving their fortified spawn area but at least have a chance to defend it from ppl coming to sap it.

THIS I agree with. It should be large enough to support the spawning of infantry and ATG's without being immediately killed.

They may die instantly if / when they leave the FRU spawn area, but they should be able to spawn with a reasonable expectation of survivability so they can defend said spawn point from sapping.

The attackers should then be required to mount a team to  attack the spawn point and overcome the defenders and blow the structure.  

Personally, I think it should be the size of a small FB with a portion with overhead cover to protect infantry from being strafed the instant that spawn in, and a small walled area to protect AAA and ATG's that want to spawn in but allows the AAA to fire at planes. 

Obviously, AAA firing at planes would instantly give the FMS location away, but the damn thing would be so big it probably wouldn't matter anyway. :lol:

Edited by lipton
1 person likes this

Share this post


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

THIS I agree with. It should be large enough to support the spawning of infantry and ATG's without being immediately killed.

They may die instantly if / when they leave the FRU spawn area, but they should be able to spawn with a reasonable expectation of survivability so they can defend said spawn point from sapping.

The attackers should then be required to mount a team to  attack the spawn point and overcome the defenders and blow the structure.  

Personally, I think it should be the size of a small FB with a portion with overhead cover to protect infantry from being strafed the instant that spawn in, and a small walled area to protect AAA and ATG's that want to spawn in but allows the AAA to fire at planes. 

Obviously, AAA firing at planes would instantly give the FMS location away, but the damn thing would be so big it probably wouldn't matter anyway. :lol:

I think IMHO they should be fortifiable as I mentioned before.. more PPO type scrollable choices that allow you to build out its dimensions and design.. OR you run into a problem with placement availability due to terrain.   The initial design IMHO could be as simple as adding a wall infront of the opening and the infantry spawn inside the bunker.  I like the idea of the pb being responsible for fortifying it further.  Like being able to upgrade the FMS with the engineers.  The upgrade would be to expand the design allowing for AA and ATGs to spawn in.. once this is done you could upgrade the FMS to mb give it an upper level in the bunker.  I think the engineer should have the ability to do a tall wall or low wall, depending on where you are in the building process you could chose the sandbags to auto connect to form a continuous wall or turn and it the continuous wall would create a corner. MB even allow for the highwall to have a choice w/ firering ports. I think that the sandbag walls should also be upgradable so they could be strengthened.. mb to a having a double thick sandbag wall.  I like the idea of being able to add log backed eartherned walls to build tank bunkers.

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

 

kbkzur.jpg

You actually going to take the time to look through the reviews to see if that matches up with this discussion? Because camping doesn't even factor into a lot of them. It was resolution issues and being difficult to learn. Yes there were negative reviews on dying a bunch, but you can't use that to make your case by posting the overall rating.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/3/2017 at 2:01 PM, chaoswzkd said:

You actually going to take the time to look through the reviews to see if that matches up with this discussion? Because camping doesn't even factor into a lot of them. It was resolution issues and being difficult to learn. Yes there were negative reviews on dying a bunch, but you can't use that to make your case by posting the overall rating.

Well said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/3/2017 at 2:01 PM, chaoswzkd said:

You actually going to take the time to look through the reviews to see if that matches up with this discussion? Because camping doesn't even factor into a lot of them. It was resolution issues and being difficult to learn. Yes there were negative reviews on dying a bunch, but you can't use that to make your case by posting the overall rating.

I read them.

Some are valid, many are simply nonsense.  If you down vote a convertible sports car because it's cold in winter and sucks in snow, that's invalid, it isn't supposed to be any of those.  

Some are flat out lies sadly.  0.1 hours playing and claims of having their money stolen etc.

Nonsense

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, merlin51 said:

Some are flat out lies sadly.  0.1 hours playing and claims of having their money stolen etc.

there is a double billing problem, some people get billed 2 months for 1 month using one of the payment methods.

not sure if we're allowed to talk about it though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, major0noob said:

there is a double billing problem, some people get billed 2 months for 1 month using one of the payment methods.

not sure if we're allowed to talk about it though

Very crucial information. Did you report this to the rats?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, major0noob said:

yes but

 

Yes but?

 

Submit a ticket, like any other game online.

these people are doing a decent job of managing things, and I've NEVER had an issue with billing that wasn't easily fixed after submitting a ticket to Playnet or CRS over the years.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hehehe, when you take some distance, you can see how volatile this community can be in its opinions...

I was NOT a FMS supporter, and I won't say "I told you", but let's face some real facts.

 

- FMS came to break the "ghost armies" spawning behind your lines and bla bla bla. Now sometimes it happens the same, but FMS is tougher.

- They suposed to be the new core for building "old school" ZOCS again and promote the "combined arms" and "teamwork" from "old days" etc. etc. Is this really happening? Maybe it is more a desire than a fact atm.

- With FMS, no more "one grenade for killing an AO" or "one LMG clip for ruining the fun" or "one fighter pass and all is ruined" problem. Now in theory we have a strong position for building a tactical frontline... I understood back in the day people were asking for this.. Now I no longer know because I read complaints about FMS are too hard to kill so there's no more alternative than camping it...   ?????

- Also, no more annoying Zookas on sneaky ezmode killing armor. Maybe this is "fixed" now, but still armor dies because it is still playing alone and too close to towns. But that's a different story.

- Also, no more 3 guys sneaking on an FB, blowing it and therefore ofc the AO too. ANd with the new fb damage model, basically now is imposible to kill an AO busting the FB, so we eliminated a tactical op. that were a part of the game. Maybe we made it poorer?

 

FMS came a reality for more reasons, but those were the greatest. Now some former cheerleaders of them are ranting to the heavens because they are broken. Well, people is on his right to change their views, ofc, no problem with that. But some people is not analyzing facts carefully. It seems that all of the sudden the good things that came with FMS are no longer an advantage...

Well, FMS they are not broken or bad designed. What is broken is not (again) the system we use, it is the population (numbers are back to normal again pre Steam, 2 AOs, max 3, and not always, at prime time), and the players attitude/gameplay. PLAYERS HAVE NOT ADAPTED AT ALL TO THE CHANGE. At all. They blame the tool when the problem relies on them.

People is still using the FMS in the SAME WAY they used the former FRUS. Exactly the same. So, ofc, fail big time. Nowadays, 90% of MLs set FMS with a lonely truck, like before. NO heavy atg towing, now INF on the truck, no light armor on escort. That happened with FRUs also. Problem now is bigger than before because it takes like 2min to set the FMS and you are heared from 1,5km out. So ofc, if defenders are vet and smart enough:

a) You are dead before you finish the setting up.

b ) You are practically exact-marked so expect to be prettey camped soon.

But still most of FMS are set the same way again. We think that a lonely and undefended trucker will do the job... Oh, well.

My squad is gone, but during the first 2 weeks after Steam launch we were like 5 or 6 vets online. I didn't allow to set an FMS without at least INF on the truck and atg towed. During those days, every of our FMS were a success. Allies took more than one town thanks to our FIRST fms. This is not chest thumping at all. Is a fact. We didn't allow our FMS to be exposed from minute 1. That's all.

Because setting an FMS should be a squad/team work, not a TRUCKER task...

And that being said, I think we never should have eliminated the INF FRUs. I still think they can co-live with FMS. Just cut the supply it can be spawned (only rifles!) in them and most of the "problems" they had could be fixed.

Anyway, what it seems we are not recognizing in our deep is that the community, in general, went lazy. Or not enough veterans are leading the thing on "old school mode" as it was stated it was to happen... Or squads are completely gone or are so short in numbers that are completely ineffective. That is what is broken, not the FMS nor the FRU.

Numbers (especially experienced ones) and teamwork is what make whatever system work or not. We are COMPLETELY lacking of this nowadays.

 

Edited by erasmo
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, erasmo said:

Well, FMS they are not broken or bad designed. What is broken is not (again) the system we use, it is the population (numbers are back to normal again pre Steam, 2 AOs, max 3, and not always, at prime time), and the players attitude/gameplay. PLAYERS HAVE NOT ADAPTED AT ALL TO THE CHANGE. At all. They blame the tool when the problem relies on them.

People is still using the FMS in the SAME WAY they used the former FRUS. Exactly the same. So, ofc, fail big time. Nowadays, 90% of MLs set FMS with a lonely truck, like before. NO heavy atg towing, now INF on the truck, no light armor on escort. That happened with FRUs also. Problem now is bigger than before because it takes like 2min to set the FMS and you are heared from 1,5km out. So ofc, if defenders are vet and smart enough:

a) You are dead before you finish the setting up.

b ) You are practically exact-marked so expect to be prettey camped soon.

the difficulty in setting the FMS has gotten to the point where it's forced failure  without teamwork.

teamwork's good and fun but when the game is unplayable without it: its a bad design.

 

now we're talking about AO's with no FMS's older than 15min being hopeless...

 

27 minutes ago, erasmo said:

- Also, no more 3 guys sneaking on an FB, blowing it and therefore ofc the AO too. ANd with the new fb damage model, basically now is imposible to kill an AO busting the FB, so we eliminated a tactical op. that were a part of the game. Maybe we made it poorer?

no. everyone agreed constantly loosing every FRU, FB ping-pong, and guard duty was awful. even defenders didn't like all the gameplay suddenly stopping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, major0noob said:

no. everyone agreed constantly loosing every FRU, FB ping-pong, and guard duty was awful. even defenders didn't like all the gameplay suddenly stopping.

I did not say those things were good. I said now it is IMPOSIBLE to legit kill an AO busting an FB.

Between what we had then and we have atm, there has to be a middle ground, don't you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, major0noob said:

Teamwork's good and fun but when the game is unplayable without it: its a bad design.

The whole game design is based on teamwork. If not, we are not talking about this game, we talk about a different one.

If we begin to justify as "bad design" the things you cannot successful do all alone, we are taking a very different and risky path. CoD.

All player should be able to lonewolfing at some level, but even lonewolfs have to take in account what OTHERS are doing and adapt to that context, even in no need of communicating with them. That's what the design have to respect.

More than that it is asking for too much. There gotta be things that HAVE to need a teamwork effort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.