BLKHWK8

1.36 Vital Questions

226 posts in this topic

When:

is the HE update going to be released?

is the new vehicles going to be released?

is the new supply system going to be in place?

Anticipation is quickly turning into frustration.  I thought then CRS approach was to have smaller, more frequent updates.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another factor to keep in mind in regards to overstocking is that nearly all of the best Allied tanks for overstocking are slower than Panzers (Char, S35, Matty, Churchill), except the Stu and Sherman.  That can be somewhat offset by the Allied scout cars however.  

 

If you place a limit on high tier stuff, the Allies might just focus on overstocking scout cars.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The HE and KE are almost in testing .

 

The Production team is working their tails off .    I am waiting to do testing on this stuff myself as this is going to be big changes 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for late responses but I have updated the latest round of questions with the answers from CRS.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, blkhwk8 said:

Sorry for late responses but I have updated the latest round of questions with the answers from CRS.

thank you for the update. lot of work. appreciate it. S! 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the responses @XOOM @Cornered Rats.  I realize this is a work-in-progress and understand why some answers couldn't be given, but I was very pleased with the attention to certain details being brought forth.  As per usual, thanks for hearing us out.

 

As far as mimicking the current trickle timer for new garrisons (particularly garrisons deployed into newly captured towns), I think that could be a mistake.  The current trickle timer is already unpopular atm.  I completely understand using the status quo as the starting point, but I expect this to be changed relatively quickly.  Otherwise, you are giving a massive advantage to any side that just executed a successful AO (i.e. potentially turning a snowball into an avalanche; avalanches drive players away).  

Edited by Capco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/20/2017 at 2:57 PM, delems said:

*** Delems, this can be fixed with the trickle settings of no supply first 15 minutes

Hmm, 10 km in 15 min?  Still to fast.

How about trickle starts 1 hour after move and leave the rate at the current every 2 minutes?  Now that might work.

I'd go for that, a shim, but worth trying; and as you say, think they could change those numbers for next map as a trial.

 

One hour is too long.  The thing that everyone keeps forgetting is that the defender has to have skin in the game.

 

Another thing to remember is that units that move out or are bounced out will have the same effect.  So if we go with the 15m one the depot link for the bounced  brigade if still friendly will populate but 15m is plenty of time  to finish it- an hour and you'll never get one of those no-man-land battles except for preset supporting brigades.  Which i'm in favor of, a lot of the purpose of things like this trickle timer and NAO is about spreading the action and supply around and reward having flags spread around instead of stacked.

Keep in mind your 1 hour deal would also horribly punish ANY moves, simply moving a division down a line could leave a whole front without supply for an hour. And a sweeping set of naval or air units being shuffled could cut off access to all the units at once.

 

 

Oh, that's a question-

 

Rats, will town supply drop when the AB is taken, and will depots open up to use linking town supply?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎22‎/‎2017 at 3:23 PM, Capco said:

Another factor to keep in mind in regards to overstocking is that nearly all of the best Allied tanks for overstocking are slower than Panzers (Char, S35, Matty, Churchill), except the Stu and Sherman.  That can be somewhat offset by the Allied scout cars however.  

 

If you place a limit on high tier stuff, the Allies might just focus on overstocking scout cars.  

Even back in the TBS days the Allies overstocked the PAN and DAC like crazy... dont see why that would change... 

I just (personal opinion) don't want to have the TBS garrisons to become mini-factories of Tigers and Matties - IE uberweapons that can reallllly upset the hybrid system CRS wants to implement.  Why use a Brigade as a hammer when you can simply just massively overstock a garrison with 30 Matties and roll over the Axis. The garrison by nature is going to be rather "hidden" from view as opposed to the Brigade with a flag. The other side can "see" whats happening with the Flags, but a inconspicuous garrison has the potential to become more powerful than a division if the uberweapons are not kept in check.  I rather work the uberweapons to go from supply to garrison if you want the garrison to have uberweapons avail.  Overstocking uberweapons should have a price and risk.  Not 4 links of mini factories for Tigers and Matties.  They are just way to powerful to be easily massed.  And what I said before - RPATs. We already way reduced the RPATs to manageable numbers but overstocking of them needs to be very limited. MB max double RPATs if that.. from 5 to10 or better 5 to 7.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Can we think about eliminating overstocking in the game by keeping all supply separated?

Can we open spawn links from FBs and rear FBs all the way through to the  linking CP?

Can we make the only way to stack supply is the from invisible flags with a single stack limit. Only two total flags may combine with any town garrison?

Can we restrict supply from entering into contested towns? [Then make the attacking side have to hold off; AO/DO flip for at least 30 minutes before a flag begins arriving and before any garrison supply starts to trickle in, I believe CRS has a plan for this]

Can we make existing flag supply automatically fall back one town back or by HC command with player base command back up.?

Can we make surrounded or trapped supply or totally destroyed supply get routed to and then have to leave from training?

Can we have all supply subject to realistically represented movement rules?

[for example...move command for new flags issued; after 30 minutes light stuff starts to trickle in; at 1 hour heavy stuff starts to trickle in; at 1.5 all light has arrived and within 2 hours the last piece of heavy equipment and for the flag arrives. 30 minute cool down timer in-between moves.]

Overstocking rules are my only concern moving forward. I would rather see depot spawning of rear supply linked through the FB between the towns including a mission with light supply into a front line defended town through the depot and not allow overstocking from garrisons and flags should be out of bounds as well. Of course move forward as you think is best. Maybe just keep the heavy stuff out of garrisons but that doesn't sound right either. Clear supply differentiation with some organically driven supply flags. Whether that is through HC  command with a player base back up command or with actual command vehicles that resupply in- game. If we have overstocking,it will have to be managed well.  I would rather reinforcements be more organic and depot link specific/limiting. In my humble opinion, that is.

S!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/27/2017 at 1:45 PM, GrAnit said:

Is there a link to the Rat's responses to these questions?

Ive been editing the original post at begining of thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, stonecomet said:

Hi,

Can we think about eliminating overstocking in the game by keeping all supply separated?

Can we open spawn links from FBs and rear FBs all the way through to the  linking CP?

Can we make the only way to stack supply is the from invisible flags with a single stack limit. Only two total flags may combine with any town garrison?

Can we restrict supply from entering into contested towns? [Then make the attacking side have to hold off; AO/DO flip for at least 30 minutes before a flag begins arriving and before any garrison supply starts to trickle in, I believe CRS has a plan for this]

Can we make existing flag supply automatically fall back one town back or by HC command with player base command back up.?

Can we make surrounded or trapped supply or totally destroyed supply get routed to and then have to leave from training?

Can we have all supply subject to realistically represented movement rules?

[for example...move command for new flags issued; after 30 minutes light stuff starts to trickle in; at 1 hour heavy stuff starts to trickle in; at 1.5 all light has arrived and within 2 hours the last piece of heavy equipment and for the flag arrives. 30 minute cool down timer in-between moves.]

Overstocking rules are my only concern moving forward. I would rather see depot spawning of rear supply linked through the FB between the towns including a mission with light supply into a front line defended town through the depot and not allow overstocking from garrisons and flags should be out of bounds as well. Of course move forward as you think is best. Maybe just keep the heavy stuff out of garrisons but that doesn't sound right either. Clear supply differentiation with some organically driven supply flags. Whether that is through HC  command with a player base back up command or with actual command vehicles that resupply in- game. If we have overstocking,it will have to be managed well.  I would rather reinforcements be more organic and depot link specific/limiting. In my humble opinion, that is.

S!

@stonecomet Are these suggestions or questions on how the mechanic will work. I am a bit confused, as some of these questions contradict what has been already stated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/28/2017 at 9:15 PM, blkhwk8 said:

@stonecomet Are these suggestions or questions on how the mechanic will work. I am a bit confused, as some of these questions contradict what has been already stated.

Hi,

I like a lot of what is happening with the supply dynamics/mechanics in the upcoming update. I do have overstocking concerns and have always had concerns about the movement speed/rules for flags. Stacking might not happen a lot if there are not many flags, I would still like to see some limits on flag stacking as in two flags only are allowed to stack. I know I will not get it all my own way. The latest questions are more about making sure the team thinks everything over. I'm sure they mull this one over a lot. Just some things that I would like them to either reconsider or add them into the new dynamics/mechanics if it makes more sense.

I also understand the new supply system is something that will evolve. I'm glad we will have a hybrid system and I'm glad it is being designed with the player base able to make things happen even when no HC is on. I'm excited about a lot of what I see up top. These latest are just my own personal concerns that I hope may be considered / reconsidered and I felt better putting them forth as questions.

I do not pretend to understand the overstocking that we are going to get. Maybe that is my real concern.

How will it work? Is it Garrisons can only overstock Garrisons? Can Garrisons overstock Flags? Can Flags overstock Garrisons? Can you create a juggernaut supply given enough time?

I'm just trying to wrap my head around what it will look and work like. So, yes, a little of both question/suggestion going on to be honest.

S!

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stonecomet, Thank you for the clariffication. I know CRS is taking this very seriously (as they do with all changes to the game mechanics, TOE etc) I know they are monitoring this thread as well as making comments so this is good open dialog.

I am sure as more is decided upon more questions will come up, and that is what I am trying to help facilitate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** to confirm, HC will have power of veto over population-based AOs? 

Uhm, No!

The whole purpose of player based AOs is to remove the HC bottleneck.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, delems said:

*** to confirm, HC will have power of veto over population-based AOs? 

Uhm, No!

The whole purpose of player based AOs is to remove the HC bottleneck.

 

i'm not in the decision loop on this topic, but it'll be amusing the 1st time 2 large groups get into a pissing contest for 1 ao...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, B2K said:

i'm not in the decision loop on this topic, but it'll be amusing the 1st time 2 large groups get into a pissing contest for 1 ao...

Better than the MOIC not giving an AO to a large group of players as we've seen in the past.

 

Share this post


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

Better than the MOIC not giving an AO to a large group of players as we've seen in the past.

 

is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, B2K said:

is it?

Yeah cause 1 guy being in charge makes them hate him and log off.

If theres a competing squad they just hate the other squad but thats it. 

Share this post


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

*** to confirm, HC will have power of veto over population-based AOs? 

Uhm, No!

The whole purpose of player based AOs is to remove the HC bottleneck.

 

2 What countermeasures will there be to stop deliberate misplacement of AOs by squads or players switching sides?

  • Veto mechanism. HC's will still have to follow the articles of conduct, and there will be a central command hub as similar to today's High Command that will work as the direct managers of the overall HC program. CRS Game and Community Management will also be involved as needed.

 

 

Unless the suggestion is that this veto mechanism will sit with GMs and CRS, with 24/7 coverage to manage situations where necessary. Perhaps I misread the @blkhwk8 response 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, B2K said:

i'm not in the decision loop on this topic, but it'll be amusing the 1st time 2 large groups get into a pissing contest for 1 ao...

Honestly, this population surge = AO decision is so full of pitfalls, I can't really understand why it's already been committed to. It seems very likely to end in morale and personnel carnage, which can be hugely damaging to the game's population. 

Share this post


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

*** to confirm, HC will have power of veto over population-based AOs? 

Uhm, No!

The whole purpose of player based AOs is to remove the HC bottleneck.

 

Yes
Think.....
You need a failsafe to be able to save your side from a grief attempt.

I highly doubt CRS will stand for HC bullying the playerbase by vetoing AO's simply because they don't want to fight there.
Those persons would probably find themselves permanently disbarred from HC activity ever again.

But say Whips or Lancers (not that either one would do anything of the sort) decided to flop sides and come trigger some bogus AO's
to pull everyone away from the area that's about to have a big OP opened up on it.

You gotta have some kind of failsafe to rectify that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.