nugitx

The experience of a new player that starts to play

233 posts in this topic

3 minutes ago, nugitx said:

Many questions here toward me lol.

I log in from time to time to check if anything has changed over the years on the free accounts, but everytime i check it, I instantly see AO and usualy log off lol

?
AO means people are fighting someplace.
Are you saying you log off because you cant just go pick any random town and run off to capture it?

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

?
AO means people are fighting someplace.
Are you saying you log off because you cant just go pick any random town and run off to capture it?

Yes.

Like it or not, this is the essence of ww2 online.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, nugitx said:

Yes.

Like it or not, this is the essence of ww2 online.

That's just bad gameplay man...

 

The game is about having meaningful battles, and the meaning comes from the territory that is fought over.  THAT is what separates the AO from the 32v32 battlefield server (not to mention that we can have way more than 32v32).  

 

The game is not about the territory first.  It's about the battles first and the territory second.  

Share this post


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

 

 

The game is about having meaningful battles, and the meaning comes from the territory that is fought over. 

Haha! Exactly.

How can we have battles if people cannot go and take territory they want?

 

The game is not about the territory first.  It's about the

battles first and the territory second.

Battles come from territory, when people go where they want, defenders will spawn to protect the territory and battle is made.

 

AO is technicaly doing that, but it is forcing people, and limit the huge map (which was one of the selling points of ww2 online).

 

Like I said before....... AO is like playing  Battlefield or Call of Duty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, nugitx said:

Yes.

Like it or not, this is the essence of ww2 online.

That just is not the essence of WWII Online, never was meant to be.
Was always about combined arms and people teaming up to win battles.

18 minutes ago, Capco said:

not to mention that we can have way more than 32v32

We can also have more AO's as population dictates :) 

Share this post


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

That just is not the essence of WWII Online, never was meant to be.
Was always about combined arms and people teaming up to win battles.

 

What? This game is a MMO right? MMO usualy implies thousands of players, to have thousand of players you need a big map - AO limits the big map.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, nugitx said:

 

What? This game is a MMO right? MMO usualy implies thousands of players, to have thousand of players you need a big map - AO limits the big map.

AO does not limit the map, it helps players figure out whats going on and have some cohesiveness and direction.
They can change AO's and can have as many AOs as online population dictates is needed.
Log 6k people in and you'd probably have more AO's than you could find towns to put them on.

It sounds as if you would prefer a 24/7 free for all, which i highly doubt the majority of the player base would terribly much enjoy having to contend with
especially in lower pop TZ3 in mid week.
No one wants to run around chasing two men and a plane (upgraded from 2 men and a truck) who just randomly arrive someplace
and keep doing it until no one shows up and then go on a domino softcap  fest across the map.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It sounds as if you would prefer a 24/7 free for all, which i highly doubt the majority of the player base would terribly much enjoy having to contend with


especially in lower pop TZ3 in mid week.
No one wants to run around chasing two men and a plane (upgraded from 2 men and a truck) who just randomly arrive someplace
and keep doing it until no one shows up and then go on a domino softcap  fest across the map.

 

Apples and oranges, just look at the population of 2001-2004 and post 2006 when battleground europe launched.

People decided with their wallets.

Share this post


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

 

Apples and oranges, just look at the population of 2001-2004 and post 2006 when battleground europe launched.

People decided with their wallets.

oranges and apples. gamers move on. what game is anyone still playing that they played in 2001? what game are you still playing that you played in 2001? other than this one, chess and maybe pinochle? 

Share this post


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

oranges and apples. gamers move on. what game is anyone still playing that they played in 2001? what game are you still playing that you played in 2001? other than this one, chess and maybe pinochle? 

Morrowind, Fallout 1, plenty of DOS games with dosbox and i'm waiting for world of warcraft 'classic'.

 

I'm not playing WW2 online because it's NOT like it used to be, not because i want 'new changes'. People like me 'moved on' because the game was changed.

Edited by nugitx

Share this post


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

Are you saying you log off because you cant just go pick any random town and run off to capture it?

 

1 hour ago, nugitx said:

Yes.

Like it or not, this is the essence of ww2 online.

 

This is supposed to, at least in the limited way, SIMULATE World War Two.  So, you're saying any WWII soldier, from either side, could run off on their own and attack any town at random?  Riiiiiiight...

 

If you DO want to do things on your own, get enough rank to set missions.  Drive a truck near an enemy FB and set an FMS.  Spawn in an engineer and destroy the FB.  Go to a nearby town and get rid of the AI, to help set up a future AO.  Get a bomber and make an RDP run.  There are things you can do on your own.  Attacking a town isn't (and IMHO never SHOULD be) something you can do on your own.  I just have a vision of a single WWII soldier running full-on into a city where there is zero enemy presence, yelling at the top of his lungs, "I capture this town in the name of the (side)!"  The residents would look at him as if he was crazy, shake their heads, and go about their business.  Nothing would change.  With the exception of the native population, that is actually modeled pretty accurately in this game.  :)

 

 

 

-Irish

 

 

Edited by odonovan1
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'real life argument' is  a moot point because:

- a single truck would not drive near an enemy base in real life

- an engineer would not spawn near enemy base

- a single bomber would not attack enemy factories

Edited by nugitx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actualy think that the game would improve, if it went in opposite direction than it went, have more destroyable targets and things to capture on the map while having an open front.

Edited by nugitx

Share this post


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

'real life argument' is  a moot point because:

- a single truck would not drive near an enemy base in real life

- an engineer would not spawn near enemy base

- a single bomber would not attack enemy factories

 

It's definitely NOT a moot point.  None of those things move the map.  You want one guy to be able to move the map and change the front for all the other players in the game.  Ahhhhh, I don't think so.  I'm shaking my head that you didn't get that obvious, important difference.  Oblivious much?

 

 

 

-Irish

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, odonovan1 said:

None of those things move the map.  You want one guy to be able to move the map and change the front for all the other players in the game.

 

 

 

That's the point, that's the whole point and essence of the FUN element of  what ww2 online used to be.

That EVERY player can move the map, this is what made ww2 online so GREAT.

No other game provided this, and no other game provides this even today (not even current version of ww2 online because AO)

It's what made WW2 online unique and special, it's why people paid 15$ a month, to play this unique game, this was the defining feature, the freedom to go where you want on this huge map, and choose where to attack or defend.

Edited by nugitx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know a good bunch of players including players from 66 Commandos  who would return to WW2OL if AO were removed or if the AO could be tweaked to customised specific missions like behind the lines strikes.  Now we have the paratroopers dropping troops behind enemy lines (like they did in WW2) is leaving a gaming mechanic not fully utilised now since the days before AO came in.

3 people like this

Share this post


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

Many questions here toward me lol.

I log in from time to time to check if anything has changed over the years on the free accounts, but everytime i check it, I instantly see AO and usualy log off lol

Then this game is not for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 20/8/2018 at 8:26 PM, Capco said:

This thread was over before it started.  

+100

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is clear from the commentary that more are in favor of the current model as opposed to the 2001 model.  The game mechanics you want were part of a flawed system.  All I hear when I see you pitch to "go back in time" is someone who loved an exploit that messed up the game experience for many others... but screw all those other folks because your needs are far more important... a tad on the narcissistic side if you ask me.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, reefmon said:

It is clear from the commentary that more are in favor of the current model as opposed to the 2001 model.  The game mechanics you want were part of a flawed system.  All I hear when I see you pitch to "go back in time" is someone who loved an exploit that messed up the game experience for many others... but screw all those other folks because your needs are far more important... a tad on the narcissistic side if you ask me.

This is pretty much what I concluded as well.  

Share this post


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

I played pre-AO days in the mornings and evenings Eastern time.  Some great battles in the evening, struggling for hours to take a few towns (at best).  Then in the am the 'Breakfast Club' would roll 5-15 towns that were undefended or defended by a vastly underpopped side.  Really frustrating to see towns lost in a 20 minutes that took hours to win over the day before. I just about quit this game beciuase of it, and I think many did.  Yeah, the AOs were not the be-all solution, but pre-AO the population was going down fast and moling with bum-rushes were killing the game.  Other CRSv1 decisions and factors did not help much imo, but those are other stories.  Some type of AO is necessary, and I think 1.36 appears to be a better system.  We will see.

You're talking like the introduction of AO's "fixed" the "Breakfast Club". Excuse me while I laugh my A$$ off. The only difference is, we now call it T3. It's still here and STILL a problem. So stop. Just stop. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think on any given night, there are more front line towns than available infantry- we could all have our own town to solo cap.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a good idea would be to allow all towns be be captured at anytime during an intermission- arguing back and forth is pointless- run a trial.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

a good idea would be to allow all towns be be captured at anytime during an intermission- arguing back and forth is pointless- run a trial.

 

During an intermission, granted nothing is serious, but i tend to think that many would get annoyed that the area they are trying to play or practice or train etc in keeps surrendering because people keep dropping paratroopers every place who then run all over collapsing strings of towns causing strange cutoffs where half the map is surrendering to the other half who is surrendering to the 1st half.

It would be a rememberable intermission, but i dont know about memorable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, blakeh said:

a good idea would be to allow all towns be be captured at anytime during an intermission- arguing back and forth is pointless- run a trial.

 

Yes, that's a good idea.

 

Nothing is lost from this test, because the player numbers are low anyway, and everything can be gained.

 

Quote

It is clear from the commentary that more are in favor of the current model as opposed to the 2001 model.

 

And count how many have left and are not posting here anymore because of this change.

I would not post here either, but I sometimes come back and check and this is just a simple plea?  You say like i'm the only one who liked ww2ol 2001-2004

Edited by nugitx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.