• Announcements

    • CHIMM

      RAT Chat Sunday 12/8 3pm server time!!!!   12/07/2019

      CRS is working overtime preparing and setting up the NEW SERVERS at the Portland colocation. This Sunday, December 8th, at 3:00 pm CST/9:00 pm GMT (Greenwich Mean Time). XOOM and the RATs are hosting a live chat discussing the move, and what services will be temporarily impacted in the process. Live chat link will be provided in discord channels when available. We look forward to chatting with you!
moe5000

Need to get rid of the HC system

86 posts in this topic

10 hours ago, moe5000 said:

This is why it BOGGLES my mind that they don't even offer a discount to HC members. Not even a discount lol, for making their game playable.  Without the HC in the current game system, there is no game, yet there is absolutely no incentive to join the HCs. 

Yeah it seems to me there should be some substantial perks for this. Even if it’s not a discount. But some thing value added.

Share this post


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

best point. it actually is more of a ww2 hobby than a game by today's standards (both players and games),  and trying to market it or even compare it or judge it as the Steam Community does, as a game - it will lose it as per Knuck's points above. but hobbyists do spend money and don't expect stuff for free. 

not sure how you can expand the market - but there would probably be more interest in the broader WW2 hobbyist collector model memorabilia wargame groups than online gaming communities. its how a lot of napoleonic niche war games survive actually (ie. histwar, etc). 

Image result for ww2 hobbies

I think there are a range of groups who would find interest in this outside of the typical gamer. People who would play this game if they knew it, but do not play others. I ordered those business cards from Xoom the other day. I intend to use them in non gamer settings mostly.  I have another idea to get non gamer people in. I am a little hesitant to invest the $300-400 plus time if when I sign people up they end up leaving due to complexity, learning curve, and sometimes bad community relations from other players. “I.e no one helps on the help channel” I need to sell my idea to the host of this event to be let in. I have a few other market ideas outside the gamer market too. WE WWII ONLINE need to stop the bleeding, start the breathing, and treat for shock.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, black5 said:

I think there are a range of groups who would find interest in this outside of the typical gamer. People who would play this game if they knew it, but do not play others. I ordered those business cards from Xoom the other day. I intend to use them in non gamer settings mostly.  I have another idea to get non gamer people in. I am a little hesitant to invest the $300-400 plus time if when I sign people up they end up leaving due to complexity, learning curve, and sometimes bad community relations from other players. “I.e no one helps on the help channel” I need to sell my idea to the host of this event to be let in. I have a few other market ideas outside the gamer market too. WE WWII ONLINE need to stop the bleeding, start the breathing, and treat for shock.

  Seems like I remember CRS placed ads in WWII History or Military Heritage magazine back in the day.  I think the grognard market has been tapped, either they're playing it now or have played it in the past.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, rendusp said:

That shouldn’t take long.  

Yeah but some one would need to actually do it. 

11 hours ago, rendusp said:

That shouldn’t take long.  

Yeah but some one would need to actually do it. 

11 hours ago, rendusp said:

That shouldn’t take long.  

Yeah but some one would need to actually do it. 

11 hours ago, rendusp said:

That shouldn’t take long.  

Yeah but some one would need to actually do it. 

11 hours ago, rendusp said:

That shouldn’t take long.  

Yeah but some one would need to actually do it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, black5 said:

Yeah it seems to me there should be some substantial perks for this. Even if it’s not a discount. But some thing value added.

While i agree, only active HC should receive perks.

If CRS offered HC perks can you imagine how many players would sign up for HC knowing they can get a discounted sub?

The problem then becomes how do you insure that HC members actually log in and contribute?

Someone or some program will have to monitor their in game activity.

More work for a mostly volunteer team.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of the faults that this game has, you choose the HC system as one of the main issues.... what about all the other game cripppling issues...? Cheats Lag bugs population imbalance they are real killers... the HC system makes this game different from the rest out there

So much focus on the HC system being the killer... what about 5 axis players vs 1 allied? that we have seen for the last 2 weeks 70% of the time?? that is what is taking the population away

 

The HC system and flag system is what makes this game what it is, although not perfect its totally unique and adds a whole different side of the game to be explored if you give it the chance.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I promise to be on HC until I die, then I will dwell in Valhalla for eternity.

Edited by actonman
2 people like this

Share this post


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

While i agree, only active HC should receive perks.

If CRS offered HC perks can you imagine how many players would sign up for HC knowing they can get a discounted sub?

The problem then becomes how do you insure that HC members actually log in and contribute?

Someone or some program will have to monitor their in game activity.

More work for a mostly volunteer team.

 

Pittpete, 

     Yes sir I agree it should be Active HC only. 

To start CRS could offer only a limited number of slots,  

I thought CRS was considering kinda a voting system for HC's, it could be tied to that so only the better ones stay.

It doesnt need to be a discount. some of these guys sport multiple accounts and pony up extra cash when needed. it could be something added the others dont get.. like whiskey! :) I m not sure what is feasible for CRS... i dont see the P&Ls, but I'm sure you rats can come up with something super cool. that doesnt hammer the budget or strain the man hours.  

26 minutes ago, actonman said:

I promise to be on HC until I die, then I will dwell in Valhalla for eternity.

Actonman... Till Vahalla my brother!

Share this post


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

Of the faults that this game has, you choose the HC system as one of the main issues.... what about all the other game cripppling issues...? Cheats Lag bugs population imbalance they are real killers... the HC system makes this game different from the rest out there

So much focus on the HC system being the killer... what about 5 axis players vs 1 allied? that we have seen for the last 2 weeks 70% of the time?? that is what is taking the population away

^^^ THIS ^^^    .    /Thread

Share this post


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

While i agree, only active HC should receive perks.

If CRS offered HC perks can you imagine how many players would sign up for HC knowing they can get a discounted sub?

The problem then becomes how do you insure that HC members actually log in and contribute?

Someone or some program will have to monitor their in game activity.

More work for a mostly volunteer team.

 

Maybe just track HC login time with the number their flag moves ?  That should be easy to track for HC activity.

Also, maybe combine that with a “playerbase HC feedback form” that lets the players grade their own HC.

These two approaches would provide both quantitative and qualitative feedback results for HC.

The top HC performers could then get some kind of incentive reward based on the results.

Cheers!

Edited by krazydog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The re-implementation of the HC uniform will increase the numbers in the ranks. Seriously!

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, poker said:

The re-implementation of the HC uniform will increase the numbers in the ranks. Seriously!

Normal players will love to kill them, thats sure :D

Anyway: IF the new flag system pulls the stress of the "flag mess" - "shit nobody to move; players cant fight" - "oh man we moved bad and our 2 divisions are cut and my side log off" - "after six hours of efforts both sides just put more supplies in and the sense of no reward for the hard job done goes to... everybody",  THEN, both sides will keep their officers longer, we will have more players interested on coordinating and planning (cause IT DOES COUNT)  and tactical simulation could return.

Or that is at least my dream...

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, fiambre said:

Normal players will love to kill them, thats sure :D

Anyway: IF the new flag system pulls the stress of the "flag mess" - "[censored] nobody to move; players cant fight" - "oh man we moved bad and our 2 divisions are cut and my side log off" - "after six hours of efforts both sides just put more supplies in and the sense of no reward for the hard job done goes to... everybody",  THEN, both sides will keep their officers longer, we will have more players interested on coordinating and planning (cause IT DOES COUNT)  and tactical simulation could return.

Or that is at least my dream...

I like you!

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/25/2018 at 3:43 AM, knucks said:

I've eyed this game for over 2 years. Every single time it is promoted whether it be twitch, youtube, or steam the #1 complaint is the manditory sub. It just sucks the life out of people. Dont ask me why, that's just the way it is. I'm sure I could put together a poll on steam and ask people why they dont join and stay and it will be the price and age. Not much mystery to it, just watch any big video about this game the first 3 most upvoted comments are about being sub based only.

Why invest hundreds of dollars a year in a unpopulated game when I can put that same money into the greatest mmos of all time (eve and wow) and eventually pay my sub with in game money.

If I want the war I play the other mmofps on market for free and pay the sub there and get tons of cammos and vehicle skins with it.

The big things that stand out about this game is its old, expensive and underpopulated for its massive map, all pretty damning if you're trying to market to new people

i understand. I eyed the game for TEN years before I wound up trying it out.

I started in 2012. At that time it was a two week trial. I tried it and initially was very frustrated, but after a couple of months I couldn't get it out of my mind. I have been subbed ever since.

I have also been a Steam player/ customer for even longer. I know what the competition is, and I choose THIS game over them all.

The Current market ( and I play several MMOs currently), unexplicably favors the Pay to Win crowd. They don't want to pay a sub.  They are barely willing to pay for a base game client. What they WILL pay for is a cash shop that caters to their power gaming little hearts. That's become such a huge part of gaming that it boggles the mind. Sure they complain all the time about game companies being greedy, but fail to provide some form of power gamer extras and they have an aneurysm.

Your statement: "If I want the war I play the other mmofps on market for free and pay the sub there and get tons of cammos and vehicle skins with it." Confuses me a bit. If you can already get what you say you want, then why are you still here and posting? My guess is that you see something that isn't just a run of the mill FPS. The problem with what you're describing is that this is not only a niche game, but it does not, and likely will never have the capability to have a cash shop with all of the little extra bits, cammos, skins, or pets that you see in other games. It was never designed that way. people forget that the newer games are being designed from the cash store up, while older games were designed for play.

As far a subs, WoW still charges subs. Many other MMOs offer subs  that give a lot more then their F2P , and people... a LOT of people... pay those subs. Your in-game money comment? I do that in another game. Funny... all that means is that I went from paying $10 a month, to paying zero, and that company loses my money, because I don't then decide I have an extra $10 for keys.

This is the wrong kind of game to have an in-game economy. It's a WWII game. Yes I have seen that another WWII game has in game currency, but I think it's a stupid system. It makes no sense. No way WWII soldiers would be paying for their own weapons and vehicles.

Be careful what you wish for. Consider if CRS could make these changes...  if their emphasis went to money instead of realism. People got bored with every other WWII game on the market in just a few years. WWII online has been here longer than any of its competitors, and a large part of that is the core community. If those changes chased them off, and then the new Steam players got bored (which they will), then the game would die. It's pretty common where a company is either bought out or forced to abandon its core customer base.

HC needs some sort of overhaul in combination with the game. Population issues need to be addressed successfully. Otherwise, This old game is hands down a superior playing experience than any other WWII game.
 

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/23/2018 at 10:25 PM, praevus said:

Actually the solution is more people need to volunteer at present. 

It's not a hard job by any means, it simply requires one to grow a thick skin, and be a bit open to taking criticism (sometimes from morons...) 

 

this is never the solution and sometimes a bad design is just a bad design. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What we need is that every player when attained x Rank and X time on the campaign, could request one brigade to command on the map.

No need to apply and have a human accept it or not by adding more brigades and reducing the supply for each, there would always be movement and something to move on the map while simultaneous allowing to loose a few of them since the supply would be smaller.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, pbveteran said:

What we need is that every player when attained x Rank and X time on the campaign, could request one brigade to command on the map.

No need to apply and have a human accept it or not by adding more brigades and reducing the supply for each, there would always be movement and something to move on the map while simultaneous allowing to loose a few of them since the supply would be smaller.

it should be pretty obvious to all by now that giving some players control over others is just a failed concept. 

2 people like this

Share this post


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

it should be pretty obvious to all by now that giving some players control over others is just a failed concept. 

you mean the way some squad leaders have control over their squad? until the squad members who don't like it leave? or how a good squad can control the momentum of how an attack goes? the way one player can totally control other players by blowing their fb?   the same way mission leaders control where their fms is and thus where other players spawn? the way 4 players flying together take control of the air away from enemy pilots? the way some players, however grouped, take control over a city and kick other players out? 

yes initiative and leadership is definitely a failed concept. not only in this game, but in the world. 

because as we know, in the modern world we should all be able to do what we want, when we want, and get want we want, all the time, all by ourselves and win. for free too. 

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sorella said:

you mean the way some squad leaders have control over their squad? until the squad members who don't like it leave? or how a good squad can control the momentum of how an attack goes?  the same way mission leaders control where their fms is and thus where other players spawn? the way 4 players flying together take control of the air away from enemy pilots? the way some players, however grouped, take control over a city and kick other players out? 

yes initiative and leadership is definitely a failed concept. not only in this game, but in the world. 

because as we know, in the modern world we should all be able to do what we want, when we want, and get want we want, all the time, all by ourselves and win. for free too. 

you can't compare voluntary groupings within the context of top down design to a mandatory top down design. one is players willingly doing something aka the carrot, the other is forced upon players .. aka the stick. further, this isn't the real world. this is a game, intended to entertain. yes, in that context, you do need your players to feel like they're getting what they want when they want. why is this hard to grasp for some?

 

do go on practicing flawed logic though. i'm sure it helps the discussion.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heroes and generals got a similar system. Sur some player send there brigade where they aren't needed. But others send them where they are needed.

To have a small force you can send to a place would be nice. Especially if everyone can got one.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason we don't discount subscriptions or offer special weapons for HC is because too many would join HC just for that reason and we'd have to track activity etc... the people we need in HC are players with a volunteer spirit, players that want to make the game better for their fellow players just because it improves their game. 

If you base the discount on activity like moving units you'll get some clowns that come in move 5 brigades at random screwing up all measure of gameplay just to fill their quota... nightmare

The only people that will join and stay in the face of adversity are players that genuinely want to help their team, it isn't a perfect system by any means but until we shift to a town based supply it is what it is.

I had fun with it, I was in HC for years, I was CinC for 2 campaigns, I had a full HC roster and that made it easier. I salute the guys who do it now and stick with it thick or thin

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

Maybe just track HC login time with the number their flag moves ?  That should be easy to track for HC activity.

Also, maybe combine that with a “playerbase HC feedback form” that lets the players grade their own HC.

These two approaches would provide both quantitative and qualitative feedback results for HC.

The top HC performers could then get some kind of incentive reward based on the results.

Cheers!

maybe thats a way we could go.. i like it but whose plate would we put that on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, fiambre said:

Normal players will love to kill them, thats sure :D

Anyway: IF the new flag system pulls the stress of the "flag mess" - "[censored] nobody to move; players cant fight" - "oh man we moved bad and our 2 divisions are cut and my side log off" - "after six hours of efforts both sides just put more supplies in and the sense of no reward for the hard job done goes to... everybody",  THEN, both sides will keep their officers longer, we will have more players interested on coordinating and planning (cause IT DOES COUNT)  and tactical simulation could return.

Or that is at least my dream...

oddly enough this reminds me of war...

and troops love to kill commanders!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Quincannon said:

i understand. I eyed the game for TEN years before I wound up trying it out.

I started in 2012. At that time it was a two week trial. I tried it and initially was very frustrated, but after a couple of months I couldn't get it out of my mind. I have been subbed ever since.

I have also been a Steam player/ customer for even longer. I know what the competition is, and I choose THIS game over them all.

The Current market ( and I play several MMOs currently), unexplicably favors the Pay to Win crowd. They don't want to pay a sub.  They are barely willing to pay for a base game client. What they WILL pay for is a cash shop that caters to their power gaming little hearts. That's become such a huge part of gaming that it boggles the mind. Sure they complain all the time about game companies being greedy, but fail to provide some form of power gamer extras and they have an aneurysm.

Your statement: "If I want the war I play the other mmofps on market for free and pay the sub there and get tons of cammos and vehicle skins with it." Confuses me a bit. If you can already get what you say you want, then why are you still here and posting? My guess is that you see something that isn't just a run of the mill FPS. The problem with what you're describing is that this is not only a niche game, but it does not, and likely will never have the capability to have a cash shop with all of the little extra bits, cammos, skins, or pets that you see in other games. It was never designed that way. people forget that the newer games are being designed from the cash store up, while older games were designed for play.

As far a subs, WoW still charges subs. Many other MMOs offer subs  that give a lot more then their F2P , and people... a LOT of people... pay those subs. Your in-game money comment? I do that in another game. Funny... all that means is that I went from paying $10 a month, to paying zero, and that company loses my money, because I don't then decide I have an extra $10 for keys.

This is the wrong kind of game to have an in-game economy. It's a WWII game. Yes I have seen that another WWII game has in game currency, but I think it's a stupid system. It makes no sense. No way WWII soldiers would be paying for their own weapons and vehicles.

Be careful what you wish for. Consider if CRS could make these changes...  if their emphasis went to money instead of realism. People got bored with every other WWII game on the market in just a few years. WWII online has been here longer than any of its competitors, and a large part of that is the core community. If those changes chased them off, and then the new Steam players got bored (which they will), then the game would die. It's pretty common where a company is either bought out or forced to abandon its core customer base.

HC needs some sort of overhaul in combination with the game. Population issues need to be addressed successfully. Otherwise, This old game is hands down a superior playing experience than any other WWII game.
 

I almost didn't read this whole dissertation, I am very glad I did. I enjoyed reading it. you made some really solid arguments. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, KMS said:

 

I had fun with it, I was in HC for years, I was CinC for 2 campaigns, I had a full HC roster and that made it easier. I salute the guys who do it now and stick with it thick or thin

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.