Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
foytek

Same old crap!

15 posts in this topic

Returned to the game to put in a solid campaign....

Broke my vow...  I was simply going to stat [my mom]...

Ignore the map, Ignore the HC, ignore the sad and sorry state of the zeelands.

Ended up once again raging at the lack of Northern activities the way the Navy and the Zeelands is treated as needless map space!

Once again finding myself sad that I came back to play, sad that the game is still being dictated bye the worthless HC system!!!

Allys made stupid flag moves that a blind person could see, Axis played over aggressive and as always focused on there rush thru the south.  

The same stagnate repetative over used strategy just makes me sick!!!

You want to fix this game!!!  Get rid off all HC...  Make all AO's system placed... 1 in the north at all times, 1 in the south at all times, 1 in the center at all times...

Let the playerbase choose where they want to be!!!  Let the playerbase vote on flag movement's...

Get rid of all the stupid AI, Get rid of the Horrid EWS that ruins the game! 

 

Also your new smarter capping is just going to turn into a Time Zone 3 Big town cap fest as the underpopulated side will actually have the advantage when in a big town with lots of caps to guard...

You will see big towns falling because no matter how you try to tweek the game there is no magical fix to population!  Though I could certainly think of some better fix's...

 

For example Mobile spawns should have a limited spawn pool based of being Over poped....  the underpop side's MS would be unlimited....

But the easiest fix for the game is to bring players back....  Bring the Navy and Airforce back bye making our game relavent in this world again...  And that means a relavent North...

I don't know add some freaking factory's up north so maybe its more important but do something already.... How about bring back the dedicated Northern AO... That would be a great first step!!!

But I am gone, I will come back a year from now as I always due so I can see that nothing has changed and curse at the Heer for being my mortal enemy in life!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same old good is here too still, and more?  i.e. new toys, HE audit, etc.

Hey, they are trying things, give them credit for moving in the right direction?

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I look forward to the north being relevant again as well.. Town supply will help that. Wont stop HC from choosing where AOs go though. Now with what looks like the ability to edit terrain again, helps for adding towns. We need it in the south, north and east. 

Hopefully when you return next year you will see town supply back, more towns throughout the map and many other features. Thanks for at least giving it a try again.

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

Same old good is here too still, and more?  i.e. new toys, HE audit, etc.

Hey, they are trying things, give them credit for moving in the right direction?

 

In order to agree with this I would have to believe that HC and AO's and Mobile spawns were better then the old days of Squad's running the map working together Infantry covering tanks because you couldnt just instantly be back at battle because you had to rid on a tank or a truck to get back....

 

So many of you seem to think that the old game ^^^^ was so bad,  I quite liked the old game myself...  I enjoyed DD's setting up ambushes (Impossible Now because of EWS)

I quite enjoyed sitting in a bunker for hours because that town could be attacked at anytime... I quite enjoyed the smaller scale battles that happened because the playerbase was spread across the entire front line not all at the same damned place!

 

You see its all based on the fact that the current AI and EWS and mobile Spawns and HC has actually improved the game....

I could list 50+ Names here without even having to think hard of naval players who have left this game because

"THE NORTH DOESNT MATTER"

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Full supply at an underpop side fms is still only 10 guys...umm i really dont think you realise the gravity of the tz3 issue.

I actually agree tho with making fms only able to spawn say 25% of the spawnlist. Force the playerbase to bring in more fms if they want more feet on the ground.  We have a trickle resupply mechanism now. You could adapt that for fms supply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello all,  day 1 player here.

 

I found that this game was at its peak when :

1. There was no AO system - players attacked whenever and wherever they wanted - it kept players on their toes and allowed for an element of surprise - and life was ok.

2. There was no Brigade system - nothing needed to be moved or staged or placed - There were also consequences to losing equipment, and if you ran out of equipment in your garrison then another Brigade couldnt be magically moved in - players had to manually drive stuff....believe it or not, life was ok. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since getting on the "wrong" path took a while...I think getting on the "right" path is also going to take a while.

Having said that... and having played under the points you note #1 and #2 (mike),

I wonder if the need to move supply to new places, not have it magically happen put something different into that game.

i.e. that a group of people had to spend time bringing stuff that would make a difference to the battle, there was no "magic" arrival of a brigade to the rescue. Individual players in squads who did bring supply were engaged in an action that involved coordination, communication etc.. with other squads and players and with those in HC. People would "woot" just as much as a successful re supply or tank column, or bombing raid as an actual town capture.

Anyway...just some thoughts on it.

S!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You should ask for the democratization of HC.

Meaning you would own a small brigade and together with other players choose instead where and when to attack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely the lack of north stuff has nothing to do with HC or TZ3 but just down to A: Antwerp being too hard to cap and B: the sheer ease Axis have with the Laon cut off.

 

Think both HCs would love a far north or south campaign just to try different things, but map sets up currently high risk for either doing it.

splitting big towns up would help one........other harder to solve, maybe making a 4AB city in that Laon cut off area

Share this post


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

Hello all,  day 1 player here.

 

I found that this game was at its peak when :

1. There was no AO system - players attacked whenever and wherever they wanted - it kept players on their toes and allowed for an element of surprise - and life was ok.

2. There was no Brigade system - nothing needed to be moved or staged or placed - There were also consequences to losing equipment, and if you ran out of equipment in your garrison then another Brigade couldnt be magically moved in - players had to manually drive stuff....believe it or not, life was ok. 

 

 

1. YES

2. YES

 

The old CRS definitely didn't get it, and it looks like the new CRS doesn't quite get it either.

Brigade + AO system is worse than having no brigades & AOs for reasons similar to those that make government attempts at controlling economies (i.e. "centrally planned" economies) consistent failures (regardless of how well-informed, well-intentioned, or even brilliant the planners might be). Small groups of individuals cannot successfully coordinate the myriad complex interactions of very large groups of individuals on economic scales regardless of how much they know (or think they know). CRS assumes that since organic self-organization and self-direction are the exact opposite of what happens in real warfare (which is arguably an example of what central planning can do in the "real world"), this is a game, and no person is motivated to act one way or another because of anything whatsoever like the same incentives (and disincentive) structure real soldiers face (i.e. there is no such thing as desertion; if someone wants to log out, nothing is stopping them from doing so). No video game will ever have military correctional facilities to punish players. On the other hand, the choices people make in this game are like the choices producers and consumers make in economies; if I don't want to buy what you're selling at the price you're selling it, I simply won't. As Adam Smith said, "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.” Likewise, every person who pays to play this game (whether by investing time, money, or both) is doing so out of their own self-interest, period.

Actually, to be clear, small groups of individuals can coordinate the interactions of large groups! The problem is that it will inevitably make them worse off; not only will they suffer, they won't want to be there anymore.

WWIIOL has had its own experiences with unhappy people wanting to leave the "country"!!

Given those realities, letting players organically determine the flow of play will almost *always* result in

more cooperation

more teamwork

more cohesion

=> larger groups working together for common ("common" meaning their shared team, i.e. Axis vs Allied) interest  (again, by organic self-organization rather than crude video game mechanics)

 

The fact that the level of player cooperation, the enormous tank columns, air raids, etc that used to characterize this game has correlated almost perfectly inversely with the increasing level of game control intended to "funnel" players (i.e. brigades, AOs) is as clear and unambiguous as any evidence can get that CRS's approach was wrong. The fact that there have been enough players to form e.g. such columns but that the columns nevertheless don't materialize just emphasizes this reality even more. CRS's choices ultimately made squads virtually irrelevant, and in doing so, it took away one of this game's most special aspects: The incredible, unique (and extremely satisfying) self-organization of players on scales that were simply not to be seen anywhere else.

The beauty of it is that if you don't want to fight in the north, you don't have to; you can fight wherever you want. But there will be people who do want to fight in the north (see the recent thread), and they'll be able to!!! THAT'S THE WHOLE DAMN POINT; since everybody is different, there will always be groups of like-minded players who coalesce in the areas where THEY want to fight. Not everyone will be happy (as far as I know, the universe holds no secret to making every single last person happy), but (many) more people will be happy  than otherwise would've been under the current system.

 

LET PLAYERS FIGHT WHERE THEY WANT, DAMMIT!!!!

While it seems counter-intuitive, the less the game tries to funnel players, to shoe-horn them into one spot or another, the less it tries to control their actions, the *more* organized, *more* cooperative, and *more* satisfied they'll be.

Edited by xanthus
1 person likes this

Share this post


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

The old CRS definitely didn't get it, and it looks like the new CRS doesn't quite get it either.

*cough* hybrid supply system *cough*
just saying

Share this post


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

*cough* hybrid supply system *cough*
just saying

It's a step in the right direction.

BTW:

The fact that the current game system is leading to this truly pathetic situation (see below link) just drives home my point... :rolleyes:

 

Edited by xanthus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well then, perhaps the RATS should take an intermission and totally let lose with the rules- no HC, no AOs, no EWS  and see what happens.

nothing to lose by trying.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

 

 

1. YES

2. YES

 

The old CRS definitely didn't get it, and it looks like the new CRS doesn't quite get it either.

Brigade + AO system is worse than having no brigades & AOs for reasons similar to those that make government attempts at controlling economies (i.e. "centrally planned" economies) consistent failures (regardless of how well-informed, well-intentioned, or even brilliant the planners might be). Small groups of individuals cannot successfully coordinate the myriad complex interactions of very large groups of individuals on economic scales regardless of how much they know (or think they know). CRS assumes that since organic self-organization and self-direction are the exact opposite of what happens in real warfare (which is arguably an example of what central planning can do in the "real world"), this is a game, and no person is motivated to act one way or another because of anything whatsoever like the same incentives (and disincentive) structure real soldiers face (i.e. there is no such thing as desertion; if someone wants to log out, nothing is stopping them from doing so). No video game will ever have military correctional facilities to punish players. On the other hand, the choices people make in this game are like the choices producers and consumers make in economies; if I don't want to buy what you're selling at the price you're selling it, I simply won't. As Adam Smith said, "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.” Likewise, every person who pays to play this game (whether by investing time, money, or both) is doing so out of their own self-interest, period.

Actually, to be clear, small groups of individuals can coordinate the interactions of large groups! The problem is that it will inevitably make them worse off; not only will they suffer, they won't want to be there anymore.

WWIIOL has had its own experiences with unhappy people wanting to leave the "country"!!

Given those realities, letting players organically determine the flow of play will almost *always* result in

more cooperation

more teamwork

more cohesion

=> larger groups working together for common ("common" meaning their shared team, i.e. Axis vs Allied) interest  (again, by organic self-organization rather than crude video game mechanics)

 

The fact that the level of player cooperation, the enormous tank columns, air raids, etc that used to characterize this game has correlated almost perfectly inversely with the increasing level of game control intended to "funnel" players (i.e. brigades, AOs) is as clear and unambiguous as any evidence can get that CRS's approach was wrong. The fact that there have been enough players to form e.g. such columns but that the columns nevertheless don't materialize just emphasizes this reality even more. CRS's choices ultimately made squads virtually irrelevant, and in doing so, it took away one of this game's most special aspects: The incredible, unique (and extremely satisfying) self-organization of players on scales that were simply not to be seen anywhere else.

The beauty of it is that if you don't want to fight in the north, you don't have to; you can fight wherever you want. But there will be people who do want to fight in the north (see the recent thread), and they'll be able to!!! THAT'S THE WHOLE DAMN POINT; since everybody is different, there will always be groups of like-minded players who coalesce in the areas where THEY want to fight. Not everyone will be happy (as far as I know, the universe holds no secret to making every single last person happy), but (many) more people will be happy  than otherwise would've been under the current system.

 

LET PLAYERS FIGHT WHERE THEY WANT, DAMMIT!!!!

While it seems counter-intuitive, the less the game tries to funnel players, to shoe-horn them into one spot or another, the less it tries to control their actions, the *more* organized, *more* cooperative, and *more* satisfied they'll be.

Excellent post.

 I almost quit the first time I logged in. He111 on the box, no He111 in the game.

We used to complain about enemies blinking in or out because there were so many units in the area. I remember when RAF Eagle Squadron had 36 or more on squad night, used 3 Teamspeak channels to communicate. CRS released a patch that had a bug in it that allowed a 109 pilot to roll inverted and push forward on the stick, accelerating upward as if the nose was pointed at the ground. That was it. Next squad night there were ten of us.

 I think town based garrison, get rid of air EWS, 10 minute contention before AB is hot, 5 minute CP cap for 1 to 1 minute for 8, would be just grand. 

Alternatively, make the Axis have to conquer the whole of France and capture England to end a campaign. You could do that immediately without recoding anything, and it would make for an awesome fight. $.02.

I salute all those who have never cancelled your subscription. I wish I had been as loyal.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.