nugitx

The experience of a new player that starts to play

233 posts in this topic

59 minutes ago, Mosizlak said:

That type of forcing players to play a side they do not want to will never work.  They'll just not play. 

 

Ofcourse some *would not* - that's why they would choose their side at start of the war.

But there are players like me, who play both sides, so i wouldn't mind.

Edited by nugitx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

You clearly love this game, why jeopardize your input on future features by focusing on lost battles from the past?

Because other games show, that sometimes *new* is not better, and people want the *gameplay* back (wow classic, old school runescape). That's why people would return to ww2ol.

Ideal situation would be, if Rats had *AO that allows open front, or open front with a different mechanic than AO that prevents mole/zerg*

Edited by nugitx

Share this post


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

Because other games show, that sometimes *new* is not better, and people want the *gameplay* back (wow classic, old school runescape). That's why people would return to ww2ol.

Ideal situation would be, if Rats had *AO that allows open front, or open front with a different mechanic than AO that prevents mole/zerg*

Nostalgia is what makes people want the "gameplay" back, such as WoW classic or Runescape. Chase the magic dragon ya'll. 

Edited by gretnine
1 person likes this

Share this post


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

Nostalgia is what makes people want the "gameplay" back, such as WoW classic or Runescape. Chase the magic dragon ya'll. 

 

Pleas, stop. it's NOT nostalgia.

I played both of those games,  current wow/runescape has different gameplay.

The game that existed in 2004 (world of warcract, runescape) does not exist anymore, that's why those companies are bringing the *old game*.  For the gameplay.

Chess is an example of game with timeless gameplay, it is how hundreds of years old? and people still play it, because it has excellent gameplay - not nostalgia.

Edited by nugitx

Share this post


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

Not realy restrict. Did you guys 'get' what I did write?

Every player/squad chooses a side at start of the war (or later when he joins the war), and only if the game gets unbalanced, for example there will be 60 allies and 30 axis, the balancer kicks in and only then the *next joining the war players* have to go to axis untill it is 60 vs 60.

So if you and your buddies choose axis at start of the war, you will be axis for the whole duration of war.

You just contradicted yourself
You will be axis, unless the balancer kicks in and then you wont be.
And for most squad member players, that's going to mean they log back out, and if it happens too much they wont be coming back, and then possibly their squad along with them.

I am pretty sure we want squads back, not decimated

Share this post


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

You just contradicted yourself
You will be axis, unless the balancer kicks in and then you wont be.
And for most squad member players, that's going to mean they log back out, and if it happens too much they wont be coming back, and then possibly their squad along with them.

I am pretty sure we want squads back, not decimated

 

Merlin go to suggestions forum, i've written about it in more detail

Share this post


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

You know, the rats have already decided on a solution, explained what it is in detail, and are well into implementation.  There are no other paths that is the works.  Now the system in development might be tweaked, and those discussions in the forums might be useful.  But this discussion of radically changing paths at this point is not worth much if anything, especially from persons unwilling to identify themselves.  If you really want to make the game successful, help with the path forward as best you can.

'there are no other paths that is the works' - make one, lol.

'But this discussion of radically changing paths at this point is not worth much if anything' - Current Rat team inherited the game from old rat team with all its flaws, cut out the flaws.

Is the current Rat team bound to old team? If no, then 'think outside the box', and bring in new ideas.

 

Of course if the current Rat team, wants the game to go in the way the old Rat team wanted........ then it's a different thing, but as a player, i'd favour if the current team went in opposite way.

Edited by nugitx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't waste your time trying to have any type of discussion about an idea on how to fix the overpop problem in this game. CRS is NOT interested.  

I posted a thread that now has... what?... 10 pages on an idea recommended tweaks to that idea on how to deal with the overpop problem that is KILLING this game. 

CRS doesn't care. I don't believe a single Rat commented in that thread. Couldn't be sure without re-reading the entire thing. But, I don't recall ANY Rat input. 

But, if you're interested... the link to that thread is in my signature. 

Share this post


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

You know, the rats have already decided on a solution, explained what it is in detail, and are well into implementation.  There are no other paths that is the works.  Now the system in development might be tweaked, and those discussions in the forums might be useful.  But this discussion of radically changing paths at this point is not worth much if anything, especially from persons unwilling to identify themselves.  If you really want to make the game successful, help with the path forward as best you can.

THIS! This is why I'm letting my sub run out after 15 years. We've been making suggestions all along. And at times, we've BEGGED CRS not to implement changes they've made, because they would cause people to un-sub. And they ignored our pleas and people un-subbed in droves. 

Now you say (in an Orwellian 1984 voice) that the die is cast and we must go along with the plan that the Corporation has for us.

Oh, and I'm always willing to identify myself. Right up until my post gets deleted. Over and over and over.... I am sooooo done here. 

Share this post


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

'there are no other paths that is the works' - make one, lol.

'But this discussion of radically changing paths at this point is not worth much if anything' - Current Rat team inherited the game from old rat team with all its flaws, cut out the flaws.

Is the current Rat team bound to old team? If no, then 'think outside the box', and bring in new ideas.

 

Of course if the current Rat team, wants the game to go in the way the old Rat team wanted........ then it's a different thing, but as a player, i'd favour if the current team went in opposite way.

Do you even know about 1.36? It’s been in the works for at least six months and will take another 3-6 to implement.  If the rats majically decided to implement what you want it would probably take a year or so.  And most of the rats are volunteers.  The quickest change will be 1.36 and that is a major move in the right direction.  BTW, these rats are not the old rats. They listen and change pretty well.

Edited by GrAnit

Share this post


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

THIS! This is why I'm letting my sub run out after 15 years. We've been making suggestions all along. And at times, we've BEGGED CRS not to implement changes they've made, because they would cause people to un-sub. And they ignored our pleas and people un-subbed in droves. 

Now you say (in an Orwellian 1984 voice) that the die is cast and we must go along with the plan that the Corporation has for us.

Oh, and I'm always willing to identify myself. Right up until my post gets deleted. Over and over and over.... I am sooooo done here. 

The 'old rat team' was a company from different times, when companies did not listen to player feedback at all.

 

What will happen to ww2ol, is yet to be seen, it all depends on the decisions of current Rat team. They have 15 years of feedback, they have our ideas and suggestion, now draw the conclusions.

 

Edited by nugitx

Share this post


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

Don't waste your time trying to have any type of discussion about an idea on how to fix the overpop problem in this game. CRS is NOT interested.  

I posted a thread that now has... what?... 10 pages on an idea recommended tweaks to that idea on how to deal with the overpop problem that is KILLING this game. 

CRS doesn't care. I don't believe a single Rat commented in that thread. Couldn't be sure without re-reading the entire thing. But, I don't recall ANY Rat input. 

But, if you're interested... the link to that thread is in my signature. 

Lipton this is just not correct.  Just because we have not simple snapped our fingers and done as you suggested. We are working on solutions and currently 1.36 is a major step in that. 

 

Furthermore, these solutions take time to code, which require resources which means $$$ which means your support and others. This team is trying to implement fixes correctly and that means documenting the code work involved so future changes will have a roadmap. The current code which implemented the things you mentioned is like a giant ball of multi colored twine all knotted up and intermixxing. You remove one color and it effects 3 others.

3 people like this

Share this post


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

Do you even know about 1.36? It’s been in the works for at least six months and will take another 3-6 to implement.  If the rats majically decided to implement what you want it would probably take a year or so.  And most of the rats are volunteers.  The quickest change will be 1.36 and that is a major move in the right direction.  BTW, these rats are not the old rats. They listen and change pretty well.

Yes I understand this, let's see what future changes will bring - but you also have the feedback on what old vets and new players would like - this should be  also taken into consideration for the future after 1.36

Edited by nugitx

Share this post


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

Yes I understand this, let's see what future changes will bring - but you also have the feedback on what old vets and new players would like - this should be  also taken into consideration for the future after 1.36

Agree.

Share this post


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

Agree.

CRS is listening, and just because we dont comment on every thought, we do value the commentary in these and the other forums. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@nugitx So, from a practical standpoint, this seems like a lot of extra work for the people who would want an open front.  I'm not really sure what the point of setting your initial spawn at Hatert when you are going to set a new spawn at S-Hert.  And not to mention the extreme distances given in your example.  To drive from Hatert to S-Hert in an opel would probably take at least 20 minutes.  

 

In theory I see what you are trying to do.  Thoughts like this could be helpful in a post 1.36 AO overhaul.  But this is too much of a radical departure from what is currently in game.  You need to think in present-day terms and work out from there.  

 

So far, the best idea I've heard is player-triggered AOs based off of EWS.  But even that idea isn't very great imo and needs a bit of work.  

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

So, from a practical standpoint, this seems like a lot of extra work for the people who would want an open front.

Yes, so it's not the main capping mechanic, but supplementing to AO.

Quote

I'm not really sure what the point of setting your initial spawn at Hatert when you are going to set a new spawn at S-Hert

Initialy my intention was that players at start cannot choose the 'front' towns as their spawn at start.

Quote

And not to mention the extreme distances given in your example.  To drive from Hatert to S-Hert in an opel would probably take at least 20 minutes.

Yes that's the point. (take note that the 'ao game' works normaly, this would work like a 2nd 'open front' game, and they both would intersect together at different moments, like for example when 'open front' attackers attack a town and a DO is set for the 'ao people')

 

Quote

But this is too much of a radical departure from what is currently in game.

 

I don't think it's that much radical, only 'town limit' and game remembering players spawn would have to be made, and it can start. AO already is here.

It maybe sounds radical on paper - but essentialy it is the same game.

Just open front combined with AO.

 

Quote

So far, the best idea I've heard is player-triggered AOs based off of EWS.

And this can be done also with this, for even more freedom, because AO would remain the same.

Edited by nugitxx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think of this as 'AO game mode' and 'open front game mode'

With AO - you play like currently

With open front - you move in-game, have one spawn location (which you change by moving), and can attack any town

 

And both game modes meet each other in battle.

Edited by nugitxx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ews triggered AOs will still be easily exploited. Line everyone up at the edge of ews and zerg zerg zerg all at once. Just like the good ole days ...

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

To drive from Hatert to S-Hert in an opel would probably take at least 20 minutes.

Think about the new gameplay options that are unlocked with this Capco.

 

- scouters, scouting for possible attack on towns

- patrolling the front in a fighter/bomber for  transporting players or players going to cap a town

- players organising in groups to go together

- squads of attackers from both sides could potentialy meet each other in middle of nowhere while going to cap a town

- surprise ambushes (just like in real life)

 

And best of all if someone will say 'nope, that's not for me' - he can go back to play the 'AO game' instantly, and those that like it, play the 'open front game'  and you both meet in battle eventualy.

If there would be even around 100 players again, this would work wonders.

It's a win-win for everyone, Rats included.

Edited by nugitxx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Behind the lines IMO both sides’ units should be unveiled on map to each other. Different kind of gameplay .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.