goreblimey

THE AMERICANS ARE COMING , well some of them

207 posts in this topic

13 hours ago, khbeowuf said:

Sorry OHM, but starting back at Tier 2, I started looking at the numbers Brit/French vs the Axis. Kept hearing people [censored] about "how do they still have supply? We are spent." Well numbers do not lie. 

This is why people are calling Axis bias. 

I have always stated when the US shows up, we (allies) are handicapped. I took a US division vs an Axis division and I was completely shocked at what I found. Well, other than I was right.

 

US Inf- 1408
Axis Inf- 1657

US Armor - 170
Axis Armor - 193

US ATG - 215
Axis ATG - 229

The US ATG honestly needs to be dropped by 76. With the F76 not able to be towed without flipping over, it is not used other than in town. 6 plus months the Allies have been told the flipping would be corrected. Well, while new ideas have been brought into the game, the F76 is still broken. 

Very simple fix. The US should not be using French equipment period. Guessing no one knows or knew that US used the Brit 6 pounder between the US 37 and 76. Why give the US have French supply and half British? Make no sense and the reason I keep hearing is BS. 

Bolt Action Rifles.
US - 480
Axis includes Italian - 484

Semi Auto Rifles
US - 265
Axis - 405

SMG
US - 320
Axis including Italian - 356

LMG
US - 105
Axis - 90

 

Those are just a few of the number. This is just the US. I have the numbers for the French and British, as well. 

Semi automatic rifles - These numbers should be completely reversed. Main stay of the US Army in Europe was M1 G. The only 1903 were the A4 Sniper rifles. and early Grenadiers. The 1903 was in the Pacific with the Marines, who slowly transitioned to the M1 G. How many old pictures do you see from WW2 Europe, where the US is carrying a 1903??

Axis main stay for the whole war, was the 98K not the 41 or 43. The 41 was a POS, which is why the 43 came out.

 

I'm so F'n SICK of this sh*t happening. And then, getting the "gee, not sure how that happened, I'll fix it" response. Totally unacceptable and NO WAY to run a successful business. Strike 2.5 for me CRS. 

One more F*ck-up like this, and I'll have to seriously rethink my loyalty to this cause. 

Edited by lipton
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Nick said:

You'd think that it would be really easy to balance out the unit numbers and adjust as necessary wouldnt you, it isn't.

I know it's frustrating but please bear with us as we all try to get to grips with the nuances of the tools that we have inherited, most of them are a half broken mess, we're slowly getting our ducks in order.

The thing is nick, this wasn't a problem for YEARS.  YEARS.  I mean for at least a decade straight this almost never happened.  The only time I remember ANYTHING remotely close to this was when there were M10s in the T0 spawnlists, and that was corrected right away.

 

So with all due respect, I don't buy it that you cannot seem to figure this out.  If the players can CONTINUOUSLY catch these discrepancies, WHY CAN'T YOU CATCH THEM BEFORE YOU START UP A CAMPAIGN?!?!  It is more fundamental to gameplay than ANYTHING ELSE.  ANYTHING.  PERIOD.  

 

We had the Axis on their factory doorsteps but we weren't able to crack any extra towns once their supply got nice and concentrated.  It's impossible to capture the last set of towns when your opponent has hundreds of extra QUALITY infantry units PER battle.  We had RDP at massive highs and it simply had no effect.  

 

I understand the recent breakout wasn't directly caused by this extra supply.  The Axis deserve some credit for their play obviously.  But you're not going to convince a single Allied player that this extra supply didn't have an indirect effect.  We probably would have had the campaign won by now if it wasn't for this major mess.  

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't been online for awhile but if that's the case , I think Allies should get the Victory , adjust the spawn lists and let the campaign keep going ,maybe just leave it tunning instead of resetting and see what happens. 

But definitely award this campaign to the Allies,  last time I was online I was pretty much convinced that intermission is up and running by the next time I have a chance to come online again.

So seeing a breakout in the north was a surprise but with not having enough soldiers in Brigades it does make sense , u can't cap if you run out of Infantry.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, dre21 said:

I haven't been online for awhile but if that's the case , I think Allies should get the Victory , adjust the spawn lists and let the campaign keep going ,maybe just leave it tunning instead of resetting and see what happens. 

But definitely award this campaign to the Allies,  last time I was online I was pretty much convinced that intermission is up and running by the next time I have a chance to come online again.

So seeing a breakout in the north was a surprise but with not having enough soldiers in Brigades it does make sense , u can't cap if you run out of Infantry.

I agree... but after this Axis breakout, can you imagine the Axis screams that CRS stole their possible victory from them?  

Edited by Capco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The outcome of any campaign shouldn't be changed because of the supply differences. Especially this one, where Axis has played and executed their tactic(s) extremely well.

 

 Instead, CRS just needs to fix the issues instead of letting it slide into each new campaign. 

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will take all the blame on this as it is my job and I have failed everyone.... for the next campaign I will try and make sure the TOEs are better for the next campaign.    

 

Nothing else i can say

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Intermission is there for a reason. Prep the supply before next campaign. Use the time during intermission to test stuff out, tweak it if needed and ask for help if you need some. It shouldn't be rocket science.. 

Hoping to see a balanced and fixed supply for both sides next campaign. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there are 2 main reasons this is happening:
1) New gear, adding the italians made configuring axis flags much trickier - guessing they were added w/o removing some german supply at first?

2) USA entrance with semis; normally, on each tier move, the base number of 'like' gear stays the same.  So, from tier 0 (200 rifles) to tier 1 (200) rifles; what should happen is the 200 bolts become 170 bolts and 30 g41.  Then when tier 3 comes along it moves to something like 100 bolt, 30 G41, 50 G43, 20 FG42.  In other words, the rifles in flag never changed from 200 total.  (numbers are for example - not what has to be or is)

 

That is what use to happen - the base size of a flag didn't change tier to tier, just the units in the flag. (exception - schrecks added, but then ATRs were removed - so net almost same)  So, if an infantry reg had 500 units in tier 0; it still had very close to 500 at tier 3.

However, what I've seen happen lately is as tier gear is added, the bolts are not removed.  So, tier 3 instead of being 100, 30, 50, 20 - it is 200, 30, 50, 20.

The base infantry size changed from 200 to 300.  My thought is USA didn't get this change since they weren't in the first tiers.  Hence, they 100sh short.

Just my guess.

 

Anyways, great to see this adjusted quickly.

 

Edited by delems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing many of you need to realize is a lot of people are volunteers and wear many hats.

I understand some don't want to hear this but THAT/THIS is the reality.

Errors and mistakes are made especially when some of us put in a full day at work.

It's not an excuse but a lot of us sacrifice our time in game to create and keep this game alive.

If you feel like you are being slighted then hop on board and help us do a better job.

You'd be surprised how much effort it takes to run this game.;)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Pittpete said:

One thing many of you need to realize is a lot of people are volunteers and wear many hats.

I understand some don't want to hear this but THAT/THIS is the reality.

Errors and mistakes are made especially when some of us put in a full day at work.

It's not an excuse but a lot of us sacrifice our time in game to create and keep this game alive.

If you feel like you are being slighted then hop on board and help us do a better job.

You'd be surprised how much effort it takes to run this game.;)

And everyone knows this by now. But if your hands are tied, then someone else should be trying to fix the issues and mistakes. If most of the people are volunteers and wear many hats, then their work should be prioritized when they have the time to help out.  I would say one of the most essential things in the game is the supply list (and balance) for both sides. 

Edited by gretnine
2 people like this

Share this post


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

Well, the US does have the 6pdr
The M1A3 57mm is a 6pdr built on license in the US.

They lack the little M3 37mm for their bottom end.
So aside from the 37mm (which may not be a very effective piece by tier 3) they have their full line up of ATG
Of the 2 borrowed pieces,  they actually have 1 more effective ATG than they would in the MLE 1937 (47mm).
US line up would otherwise just be M3 37mm, M1 57mm (6pdr), M5 3 inch (76.2mm).
The T8's did not even go to field trials until after the war unfortunately, so axis will own that category with the PAK43 (88mm)

The M3, simply can not be made as a variant of any existing vehicle base, which makes it harder and take longer
because the game is strangely cranky about taking a new base model, and the previous team did not leave an instruction manual
so it's a bit of a learning process.

Of the existing kit, i think there only 4 items that need swapped out
M8 Greyhound for the DAC
Willys MB or Ford GPW or Dodge WC51 for the bedford OY
Dodge WC62 for the Morris
M2A4 is the closest thing to replace the Vickers for the US, and that is a bit of a stretch, because all US active M2A4's in WWII went to the Marines in the pacific.
The US just did not field a tank in the vickers/PZI class, the M1 light tank didn't make WWII unfortunately, otherwise it would fit right in that class.
So if we want to be correct, we might just have to give back the vickers and do without there.
But as a consolation kind of, when they get properly tiered, they'd have an M3 Lee to play with

Not to downplay your other valid concerns.

US production[edit]

М1 production
Year 1942 1943 1944 1945 Total
Number produced 3,877 5,856 3,902 2,002 15,637

The idea of manufacturing the 6 pounder in the US was expressed by the US Army Ordnance in February 1941. At that time, the US Army still favoured the 37mm Gun M3 and production was planned solely for lend lease. The US version, classified as substitute standard under the designation 57 mm Gun M1, was based on the 6 pounder Mark II, two units of which were received from the UK. However, since there was sufficient lathe capacity, the longer barrel could be produced from the start.[3] Production started early in 1942 and continued until 1945. The M1A1 variant used US "Combat" tyres and wheels. The M1A2 introduced the British practice of free traverse, meaning that the gun could be traversed by the crew pushing and pulling on the breech, instead of solely geared traverse, from September 1942. The M1 was made standard issue in the Spring of 1943.

A more stable carriage was developed but not introduced. Once the 57mm entered US service, a modified towing point design was introduced (the M1A3), but only for US use. Tractors for the M1 included the Dodge WC-63 112-Ton 6x6 and the White Half-Track.

Two-thirds of American production (10,000 guns) went to US Army Divisions in Europe. About one-third of production (over 4,200 guns) was delivered to the UK and 400 guns were sent to Russia through Lend Lease. When the United States re-armed and re-equipped Free French forces for the Normandy landings, their Anti-Tank units received American-made M1s.

Like the British Army, the US Army also experimented with a squeeze bore adaptor (57/40 mm T10), but the program was abandoned. American shell designs and production lagged behind the introduction of the gun once it was accepted for service and so, at first, only AP shot was available. The HE shell was not available until after the Normandy landings and UK stocks were procured to cover its absence.

Its use by regular US Army front-line units was discontinued in the 1950s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, gretnine said:

How about you take a timeout after this campaign

Hard to do when Eleventy angry requests per hour come in to

"end intermission now, we dont care if your not done with XYZ yet, end intermission, we'll deal with it, end intermission NOW"

42 minutes ago, khbeowuf said:

US production

Yes? US troops have that in game now.
Then they have 1 stand in, the MLE1934

And they have one extra, which technically they should not have at all, the MLE 1937
Which you could remove because, the US only fielded 3 ATG's for the duration of the war.

Am i missing something you're trying to show?
 

Edited by merlin51

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, merlin51 said:

Hard to do when Eleventy angry requests per hour come in to

"end intermission now, we dont care if your not done with XYZ yet, end intermission, we'll deal with it, end intermission NOW"



 

Yet you all have the time and effort to reply to the same threads and messages that complain about the issues. 

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

M2A4 is the closest thing to replace the Vickers for the US, and that is a bit of a stretch, because all US active M2A4's in WWII went to the Marines in the pacific.

I will take a jeep with a 50 cal mount.

1945_mb_lasvegas_nv1.jpg

Edited by GrAnit

Share this post


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

I will take a jeep with a 50 cal mount.

Me too, but i fear the vickers and PZI crews will outlive us both :) 
Then again, we could try LA drive by style :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, merlin51 said:

Hard to do when Eleventy angry requests per hour come in to

"end intermission now, we dont care if your not done with XYZ yet, end intermission, we'll deal with it, end intermission NOW"

 

The hardest part of any leadership is that sometimes the answer is 'No'.

 

That it is hard does not make it the wrong thing to do.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, numbers look way better for INF flags.  Bolts, semis, SMGs good.

But I don't get USA getting 90 BARs, while axis only get 30 LMG and 20 FG42??   That is nearly 2 to 1 ratio?
They should only have 50 BAR; that or axis need 40 more FG-42.

 

Other thing I see is axis only gets 5 sappers, allies 10?   Like, allies don't need sappers!   axis does.

 

And again, good job responding and getting numbers closer..   but still need a few tweaks.

 

Edited by delems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is my current list from going through each type of brigade.. I did not do Navy or AF..

 

51d5695467270877e3adc39c2683d88e.png

3 people like this

Share this post


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

Well, the US does have the 6pdr
The M1A3 57mm is a 6pdr built on license in the US.

They lack the little M3 37mm for their bottom end.
So aside from the 37mm (which may not be a very effective piece by tier 3) they have their full line up of ATG
Of the 2 borrowed pieces,  they actually have 1 more effective ATG than they would in the MLE 1937 (47mm).
US line up would otherwise just be M3 37mm, M1 57mm (6pdr), M5 3 inch (76.2mm).
The T8's did not even go to field trials until after the war unfortunately, so axis will own that category with the PAK43 (88mm)

The M3, simply can not be made as a variant of any existing vehicle base, which makes it harder and take longer
because the game is strangely cranky about taking a new base model, and the previous team did not leave an instruction manual
so it's a bit of a learning process.

Of the existing kit, i think there only 4 items that need swapped out
M8 Greyhound for the DAC
Willys MB or Ford GPW or Dodge WC51 for the bedford OY
Dodge WC62 for the Morris
M2A4 is the closest thing to replace the Vickers for the US, and that is a bit of a stretch, because all US active M2A4's in WWII went to the Marines in the pacific.
The US just did not field a tank in the vickers/PZI class, the M1 light tank didn't make WWII unfortunately, otherwise it would fit right in that class.
So if we want to be correct, we might just have to give back the vickers and do without there.
But as a consolation kind of, when they get properly tiered, they'd have an M3 Lee to play with

Not to downplay your other valid concerns.

The US did field::

Universal carrier with US 50cal, some with 80mm mortar, some with Recoiless, some with british 2lb at gun

Halftrack with similar weapons so UC, as well as 1/2T with larger ATG

and that's just the obvious ones. There are also the all various APC the US experimented with throughout the war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh definitely, i was just talking about the existing kit parts.
Lots of not yet game modeled units for all parties.

One day T0 will be a nifty little pile of variety.
Antiquated perhaps in some aspects but still interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, SCKING said:

This is my current list from going through each type of brigade.. I did not do Navy or AF..

 

51d5695467270877e3adc39c2683d88e.png

Yep, there are minor issues all over that list, and for both sides too.  

 

Just go through this and match them up when you can, unit for unit @OHM.  Just remember that the US doesn't have an LMG or Grenadier, and so those two classes need a substitute (the BAR would be ideal imo).  

 

Everything else can match up, unit for unit.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like the French have been short changed on semi autos  100 per bgde . No wonder we are always struggling for supply. That's nearly 2 divisions worth of extra supply the axis have had for all of tier 3.

Are they going to get 2 Divisions less for the next 2 weeks to counter this. See how many axis stick around if that happens.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was asking the same question myself  how in the heck with almost a 70% reduction in resupply rate can the Axis still be fielding  all this gear. I was told it was due to the density of the Axis flags but that answer seemed not to reflect  what I was observing in game. Heck maybe this was the reason for what I saw or maybe it was just a overpop issue or just the flat out sloppy play I saw in game by players and HC who knows but regardless last night I said to heck with it and hit the unsub button and deleted the game. I will come back again when things balance themselves out some hoping the RAT's get things corrected and the game becomes more  balanced. Anyway good luck to the allied guys still fighting .

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

I was asking the same question myself  how in the heck with almost a 70% reduction in resupply rate can the Axis still be fielding  all this gear. I was told it was due to the density of the Axis flags but that answer seemed not to reflect  what I was observing in game. Heck maybe this was the reason for what I saw or maybe it was just a overpop issue or just the flat out sloppy play I saw in game by players and HC who knows but regardless last night I said to heck with it and hit the unsub button and deleted the game. I will come back again when things balance themselves out some hoping the RAT's get things corrected and the game becomes more  balanced. Anyway good luck to the allied guys still fighting .

Exactly.  All of our efforts on attrition, on RDP, on slogging it through thick and thin... for a week straight, all of it did nothing.  We did everything right and we still got screwed.  

 

I will be checking the spawnlists frequently next time I play (which probably won't be for a while).  If I find one more major issue like this, I am done.  And if I go I'm not coming back.  Go through my post history.  Find one instance where I threatened to leave.  If your most loyal customers are going to these extremes, it's because IT'S ACTUALLY A PRETTY BIG DEAL CRS.....

 

I'd trade all the development of the past six months for a balanced game.  

 

CRS can start by repairing the Allied side that they systematically broke down (apparently through innocent mistakes...).  I'm done fixing the problems that you guys have created.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, gretnine said:

And everyone knows this by now. But if your hands are tied, then someone else should be trying to fix the issues and mistakes. If most of the people are volunteers and wear many hats, then their work should be prioritized when they have the time to help out.  I would say one of the most essential things in the game is the supply list (and balance) for both sides. 

And if there's an apparent error then let OHM know.

Just put an @OHM and he'll respond.

Knowing is half the battle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.