• Announcements

    • HEAVY265

      TOS Change regarding the Forums   11/23/2018

      Rule 23 is in discussions.  The official change will come out soon.  It will go effect Jan 1st. As it stands from this point.  Political and religious posts are allowed in off topic.  Be mindful to be respectful to each other.   That is all for now. Thank you for your continued support and patience.
raptor34

Town/Airfield supply and nationality

79 posts in this topic

4 hours ago, stankyus said:

"Town has a British garrison force. Attack is made from the town and supplies are wiped out.
Town ownership gets flipped to French, and new supply comes in. Town does on attack again.
And then repeat this cycle."

I'm not looking at this verbatim or situation specific, but the idea of switching for supply at faction barrier does hold merit.

If you have backline town that has 2 links to frontline towns, you can overstock depleting your forces to the same faction, then instead of waiting on timers to refill the faction link, switch the backline town to the other faction.. then overstock the second factions front line town.  The gamble is that the rear towns left over supply is wiped out till the new factions tickets are filled again. Going to need some forethought by HC though, but with practice it could work.

Well we have said you can do that by design? We allow for HC to change ownership of their Garrison to support the type of supply you guys want, that was a key design ingredient to avoid the past troubles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's been a lot of discussion within CRS about how the country percentages are going to be maintained, Im not sure whether a final decision has been made yet. There's been ideas about the system trying to keep the percentages within the required ranges when towns are captured. There's also the idea of giving HC a certain amount of time to make a change, if HC are forced to flip a country then I wouldn't expect the longer trickle timer to apply, that wouldnt seem fair.

Be assured that CRS are giving everything about this plenty of thought, we won't do anything that favours one side more than another.

Share this post


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

There's been a lot of discussion within CRS about how the country percentages are going to be maintained, Im not sure whether a final decision has been made yet. There's been ideas about the system trying to keep the percentages within the required ranges when towns are captured. There's also the idea of giving HC a certain amount of time to make a change, if HC are forced to flip a country then I wouldn't expect the longer trickle timer to apply, that wouldnt seem fair.

Be assured that CRS are giving everything about this plenty of thought, we won't do anything that favours one side more than another.

Well to be fair, if we are on the retreat and exceed any faction percentage due to retreat there should be zero trickle timer to flip a town. Not one minute more. I think the idea is ok on paper if the Allies have control and are pushing that they get to chose what type of brig goes where, its when they are not in control of the map IE - retreat that requiring any town at any point on the map to be flipped to lose supply for any matter of [more than?] trickle time is fair.  No matter how you slice it, its a penalty for losing territory that is applied to only one side.  Now if the lines where two links deep, you could flip some of those towns to where the supply trickle damage might not be so damaging.  Gah, the more I think about it, the more ways if I was GHC I could game the system so bad to an advantage.

I see a solution, but its not one that can be done anytime soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just checked in with our DEV team again to confirm that, we'll have two timers that are important:

  1. Trickle of supply once you take an enemy town (Garrison), and your new Garrison is established.
  2. Trickle of supply if you're Allied and forcibly change one of your Garrisons ownership.

Having this differentiation should allow us to keep things flowing smoothly in terms of Campaign operations and providing an option (at a cost) for Allied Officers to change their supply around a bit.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, XOOM said:

I just checked in with our DEV team again to confirm that, we'll have two timers that are important:

  1. Trickle of supply once you take an enemy town (Garrison), and your new Garrison is established.
  2. Trickle of supply if you're Allied and forcibly change one of your Garrisons ownership.

Having this differentiation should allow us to keep things flowing smoothly in terms of Campaign operations and providing an option (at a cost) for Allied Officers to change their supply around a bit.

What happens to any over stock in a forced switch? Lose it?

Share this post


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

What happens to any over stock in a forced switch? Lose it?

Yes, because it does not meet the requirements of it having the same country. It totally restarts the supply pool. Making a change to the ownership of a Garrison is not intended to be something to be done without consideration, there are consequences, in this example of overstock being lost, that's a significant penalty for doing so. Part of the HC training should be to evaluate those Garrisons for supply and making sure they do not interfere with overstocking efforts. Given that their work load will be reduced pretty dramatically, and hopefully more Squad participation is in HC, they will be more prone to adding this to the to-do list prior to making such a big change.

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

Yes, because it does not meet the requirements of it having the same country. It totally restarts the supply pool. Making a change to the ownership of a Garrison is not intended to be something to be done without consideration, there are consequences, in this example of overstock being lost, that's a significant penalty for doing so. Part of the HC training should be to evaluate those Garrisons for supply and making sure they do not interfere with overstocking efforts. Given that their work load will be reduced pretty dramatically, and hopefully more Squad participation is in HC, they will be more prone to adding this to the to-do list prior to making such a big change.

Well, I think the less of a job HC is, the more players will join HC. Prior to brigade I know the GHC orbat was almost always filled, when I switched allied there were some gaps but it was rare if we had less than two HC On that I can remember.

that being said, HC training does not trump laziness.  

How about the switch over do something like.... instead of a wipeout of supply, a gradual replacement of supply. Lose 15 French infantry while adding 15 BEF infantry.

i still think that there shouldn't be any penalty to switch brigs. I could see that a penalty could be applied if you violated the percentages but if the Axis don't have this, we shouldn't.  We already have a link, supply, overstock, new ticket penalty due to not being able to mix overstock.. why tack on a supply penalty also for switching up? I could see one if we switched a town multiple times in 24 hours..  We already have limitations the Axis don't even have to worry about, why compound them?

Share this post


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

I don't know why that would be a coded in.  If the rear towns stayed static without the ability to switch.. it only works if you push the map because you can control the front line faction percentage.. however if you fall back the inactive BEF towns (for instance) become active. Not only it they might exceed the percentage, but you then create a hard supply wall if the frontline towns that fell back are French. The garrisons are not going to act in a specific E-W direction, they will go N and S also. Some by HC design, some because the Allies where forced to keep faction percentage limits.  If we cannot control our rear line faction, you can literally cut the faction reserve supply until they are eliminated.. Nobody is going to switch the frontline because it wipes the supply for 6 hours. Nobody is going to resupply 300 infantry to fill the gap from the rear.. plus the Axis will see the front line switch and hit it immediately. All a good GHC needs to do is look at those barriers and do some math and they will game the systems barriers that effects only ONE side.  As the hybrid systems current design, the barriers are going to be gamed as it is, why compound the issue?

 

This brings up another issue with creating a percentage limit.. What happens if the Axis are on a roll, they hit ALL BEF towns on the front and now our new frontline exceeds the faction percentage?

Are we forced then to switch some towns BEF?  What if its 5 or 10 towns that have to be switched to BEF? Does that not kill a good portion of our supply for 6 hours? What if no HC is on to make the switch? How fast do we have to make the switch.. sounds like a lot of foresight would be required to switch towns as not destroy a towns overstock or creating a new resupply issue?

If the switch supply takes the same time than normal TBS ressuply timer, why would allies switch towns having lost a few supply due to overstocking ? They cannot re-arm more quickly by doing so.

Share this post


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

If the switch supply takes the same time than normal TBS ressuply timer, why would allies switch towns having lost a few supply due to overstocking ? They cannot re-arm more quickly by doing so.

In order to overstock the other factions brigade... 

the Axis have the same deal. Except they can split the difference if they wish.

One backline town, two two links to frontline towns. They overstock the link on the right with tanks... wait six hours, then the left.

allies overstock the tanks in the same faction on the right, switch ownership to the faction on the left wait six hours and overstock with tanks from the switched faction. The problem is ALL supply is wiped out.. axis still has what's left, allies ave a penalty for switching timer wise from what I gather, and a hole in supply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cc I see your point now @stankyus 

Allies will indeed have to keep whole map areas British and other areas french (and some US) to avoid these problems. Like we had in the past but with more flexibility today.

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

Cc I see your point now @stankyus 

Allies will indeed have to keep whole map areas British and other areas french (and some US) to avoid these problems. Like we had in the past but with more flexibility today.

Here is the deal, you cannot avoid these issues because no side has complete control over the map all the time. You also cannot avoid losing supply tickets with the current set up period - that is unavoidable..

As for the need to keep areas Brit or French is an......  Opinion.  CRS has to rely on the Allied PB to make this work because its the Allies that are effected by these barriers and town switching penalties to supply.  The Allied PB in reality does not have to cooperate with CRSs wishes to make it work. You know that right?  [censored] off the allied side long enough and they walk/don't care or don't cooperate. Seeing  the Tiger/StugG Parity debacle currently going on.  That is one reason why I don't trust CRS when it comes to balance  and u all can say it all day long, it does not make it true. Figuring out the balances as Hatch says takes a while, well its not rocket science and certainly does not take well over a year to get a grip on it and fix it.

The allies started to walk out because of three reasons I recall..

GHCs ability to game the faction barriers, no mixed supply (IE no mixed reserve or overstocking)  and the length it was taking to get the Brigades system active.  The primary reason why the allies loved the brigade idea back in the day was because town flags where determined by brigade occupation and could pass through each other. The second reason is as stated, all overstocking had to be done inside each division which eliminated the Axis overstocking advantage and evened the playing field.  If you go back to the Pre TO&E the majority of ppl wanting it In where the Allied PB, the Majority of ppl not wanting it where Axis players...  and it was about supply and overstock for the Axis and they where NOT happy we could put a French and Brit unit in a town at the same time.. they just wanted them to pass through town with a 15 minute sit timer or something like that bit unable to access the supply while there. Anyway ...

 

By the way IM BEING SHADOW LIKED.. I have more likes on my comments and my name is not even on the list.. I just went and counted them this week.. [censored] ya'll.  I noticed this a while back, I had 26 likes in one thread alone and it did not show up. I watched my likes start going away too..  Fix yo [censored].

Share this post


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

Here is the deal, you cannot avoid these issues because no side has complete control over the map all the time. You also cannot avoid losing supply tickets with the current set up period - that is unavoidable..

As for the need to keep areas Brit or French is an......  Opinion.  CRS has to rely on the Allied PB to make this work because its the Allies that are effected by these barriers and town switching penalties to supply.  The Allied PB in reality does not have to cooperate with CRSs wishes to make it work. You know that right?  [censored] off the allied side long enough and they walk/don't care or don't cooperate. Seeing  the Tiger/StugG Parity debacle currently going on.  That is one reason why I don't trust CRS when it comes to balance  and u all can say it all day long, it does not make it true. Figuring out the balances as Hatch says takes a while, well its not rocket science and certainly does not take well over a year to get a grip on it and fix it.

The allies started to walk out because of three reasons I recall..

GHCs ability to game the faction barriers, no mixed supply (IE no mixed reserve or overstocking)  and the length it was taking to get the Brigades system active.  The primary reason why the allies loved the brigade idea back in the day was because town flags where determined by brigade occupation and could pass through each other. The second reason is as stated, all overstocking had to be done inside each division which eliminated the Axis overstocking advantage and evened the playing field.  If you go back to the Pre TO&E the majority of ppl wanting it In where the Allied PB, the Majority of ppl not wanting it where Axis players...  and it was about supply and overstock for the Axis and they where NOT happy we could put a French and Brit unit in a town at the same time.. they just wanted them to pass through town with a 15 minute sit timer or something like that bit unable to access the supply while there. Anyway ...

 

By the way IM BEING SHADOW LIKED.. I have more likes on my comments and my name is not even on the list.. I just went and counted them this week.. [censored] ya'll.  I noticed this a while back, I had 26 likes in one thread alone and it did not show up. I watched my likes start going away too..  Fix yo [censored].

@stankyus I realize you're passionate about this subject, but be careful not to throw out your credibility as a level headed and respected player by going down an anti-CRS rhetoric path. We're listening to you and many of us are trying to talk to you about it, because we have that sort of respect for you.

CRS is not out to get the Allies. We're trying to fix a bigger problem that is impacting the game as a whole, negatively. The Allied supply situation is a bit more complicated, but we're not intentionally going out of our way to cause issues. Why the hell would we do that if our goal is to improve business?

If you're unsatisfied with our responses, I don't know what to tell you. But we sure are doing our best to treat you with courtesy and answer your questions the best we can.

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

@stankyus I realize you're passionate about this subject, but be careful not to throw out your credibility as a level headed and respected player by going down an anti-CRS rhetoric path. We're listening to you and many of us are trying to talk to you about it, because we have that sort of respect for you.

CRS is not out to get the Allies. We're trying to fix a bigger problem that is impacting the game as a whole, negatively. The Allied supply situation is a bit more complicated, but we're not intentionally going out of our way to cause issues. Why the hell would we do that if our goal is to improve business?

If you're unsatisfied with our responses, I don't know what to tell you. But we sure are doing our best to treat you with courtesy and answer your questions the best we can.

I should have put a smiley face on that comment, I was joking around about the Shadow liked comment.

Also please don't construe my opinion about the Parity as some sort of ANTI CRS bashing.  Its a legit response to allowing that situation to continue.   Its been detrimental to the allied side who many outright claim Xoom is Axis Bias..  I dont think having that opinion is good for the game. I'm not making that claim, however and I have told Xoom on the phone about how appearances are everything and that move is going to have very negative effects.  If I cannot say I don't trust you all when it comes to creating balance, its NOT bashing you.. I still pay to play this game, but there is no way in hell you are going to tell me that the S76 is worth as much as the Tiger, nor the StugG worth as much as the M10.  It simply not true and I don't play that game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the British/French border towns do present a challenge but I also think that you are making it to be much bigger of a deal than it likely will be.

Lets recall that the Andenne>Namur>Charleroi>Maubeuge zipper line of old wasn't as issue with overstocking it was that rank didn't go up on all allied personas. So if a French player had to respond to an area just North with British equipment they potentially didn't have the rank. Another major issue was social with squads carving out their turf and having less coordination with the "purely British" and "purely French" squads. That's why 3CD was assigned to there and did a great job holding that line, often attacking and being among the first to make a push east and threaten Liege.

I also highly doubt the one extra town link at the border between a French and British pair of towns is going to be the end of an entire sector of the map. Would it be better if you could manually overstock a Matty in a French town if you made the dedicated drive? Yep. But what are the coding resources that would have to go into making that a reality, and in the short term at least, would those resources be better spent somewhere else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/26/2018 at 5:29 PM, stankyus said:

How is that a supply advantage for the Allies? 

All axis gear that is despawned at an adjacent town is considered overstock and new tickets are generated at origin town. 

If a BEF tank RTBs at a town that is French, the BEF equipment gets returned to origin and no new ticket is generated. ONLY FRENCH equipment is counted to overstock and new tickets are generated at origin.   That is a Axis supply advantage is it not?

I think mb you are seeing it as simply overstocking the full ticket list..  The overstocking function is not necessarily just a function of pooling supply, it also acts as a function of reserving supply.  IE after you take a town, the supply that is RTB'd after a successful attack enters the new towns supply as overstock and can be pulled if a counter attack happens before the towns ticket supply begins to trickle in.  The same can be said if you are using reinforcements after a successful defense.  If you start rolling a few towns that extra supply starts to grow at a greater pace along the faction line.

 

Er, despawns likely will go back to originating town if the mission itself was not a resupply mission in the first place.

 

Which, you shouldn't be able to do a resupply mission to an enemy town.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/28/2018 at 3:10 PM, aismov said:

I think that the British/French border towns do present a challenge but I also think that you are making it to be much bigger of a deal than it likely will be.

Lets recall that the Andenne>Namur>Charleroi>Maubeuge zipper line of old wasn't as issue with overstocking it was that rank didn't go up on all allied personas. So if a French player had to respond to an area just North with British equipment they potentially didn't have the rank. Another major issue was social with squads carving out their turf and having less coordination with the "purely British" and "purely French" squads. That's why 3CD was assigned to there and did a great job holding that line, often attacking and being among the first to make a push east and threaten Liege.

I also highly doubt the one extra town link at the border between a French and British pair of towns is going to be the end of an entire sector of the map. Would it be better if you could manually overstock a Matty in a French town if you made the dedicated drive? Yep. But what are the coding resources that would have to go into making that a reality, and in the short term at least, would those resources be better spent somewhere else?

I was there.  It was a big deal.  I won't rehash it, but it was.  Especially the little slimeballs that would cap a town 'wrong' and kill overstocking unless the Allies intentionally allowed a town to be capped so it could be recapped back to the right country.

 

Don't get me started on AF politics.

Share this post


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

I was there.  It was a big deal.  I won't rehash it, but it was.  Especially the little slimeballs that would cap a town 'wrong' and kill overstocking unless the Allies intentionally allowed a town to be capped so it could be recapped back to the right country.

I agree, it was a problem. We are talking about giving AHC the ability to determine who owns the town after the battle has concluded, not on the initial onset. That's being discussed internally now on how to achieve.

Share this post


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

Er, despawns likely will go back to originating town if the mission itself was not a resupply mission in the first place.

 

Which, you shouldn't be able to do a resupply mission to an enemy town.

The point was about tickets.

If you take a town and despawn your equipment at the town and its the same faction, the supply becomes OVERSTOCK. That items tickets gets reset at the origin town so a new piece of equipment is generated. 

If a town is taken with two factions on the BF, the non-ownership town faction will despawn and the supply will go back to the originating town after RTB and no new piece of equipment is generated. 

That's the point I was making and in the past when I was with the 3rd PZ we would hit border towns specifically to create more supply loss than the kills we got on attack because the reinforcements that came to defense. Very few ppl would drive supply back to origin to preserve the supply, and no way to generate a new supply ticket for the item or RTB for ammo, loss commander, or tracked within RTB and stay in the town without having to drive all the way back. You could not despawn at the AB and immediately respawn at the same AB.. the supply went back to origin IIRC after 30 minutes.

I don't know what you mean about resupply mission to an enemy town.. I was specific to being able to take a town or how we used the ticket functions to our advantage on attack.

All that being said, Xoom and I had a good talk about this two days ago and he understands the issue loud and clear and I have a much clearer picture of their approach to why things are the way they are. We talked on the phone and understand each other better..  I can understand why he cant just come out and say YES and why, or NO and why. The bottom line is that he knows my POV and understands why this is a supply disadvantage. I understand his POV on the subject.  IF he wants to add the detail in which we discussed, that up to him to do so. I think it would be disrespectful to discuss here because he was open and frank with me.  Its not bad, I don't think he would want to be boxed in on things that may or may not work.

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

The point was about tickets.

If you take a town and despawn your equipment at the town and its the same faction, the supply becomes OVERSTOCK. That items tickets gets reset at the origin town so a new piece of equipment is generated. 

If a town is taken with two factions on the BF, the non-ownership town faction will despawn and the supply will go back to the originating town after RTB and no new piece of equipment is generated. 

That's the point I was making and in the past when I was with the 3rd PZ we would hit border towns specifically to create more supply loss than the kills we got on attack because the reinforcements that came to defense. Very few ppl would drive supply back to origin to preserve the supply, and no way to generate a new supply ticket for the item or RTB for ammo, loss commander, or tracked within RTB and stay in the town without having to drive all the way back. You could not despawn at the AB and immediately respawn at the same AB.. the supply went back to origin IIRC after 30 minutes.

I don't know what you mean about resupply mission to an enemy town.. I was specific to being able to take a town or how we used the ticket functions to our advantage on attack.

All that being said, Xoom and I had a good talk about this two days ago and he understands the issue loud and clear and I have a much clearer picture of their approach to why things are the way they are. We talked on the phone and understand each other better..  I can understand why he cant just come out and say YES and why, or NO and why. The bottom line is that he knows my POV and understands why this is a supply disadvantage. I understand his POV on the subject.  IF he wants to add the detail in which we discussed, that up to him to do so. I think it would be disrespectful to discuss here because he was open and frank with me.  Its not bad, I don't think he would want to be boxed in on things that may or may not work.

You're assuming a lot here.

 

As it stands, the mission system is not being described as fundamentally changed, and town/garrisons are effectively static brigades, at least from a database/ticket standpoint.

 

So if it is like current supply re: ticket handling, then the ticket goes back to the originating 'unit'.  Instead of going back to 110th Brigade or whatever, if you spawned from Charleroi it goes back to Charleroi Town Brigade.  The originating town is the originating town and gets back it's tickets that aren't destroyed.  Destroyed tickets would count down on the resupply timer and fulfill a replacement at the end of the timer for the ticket.  So assuming I'm right, your issue is a non-issue.

 

Now you COULD potentially despawn in a town then respawn like we all do for warp depots, and tanks should be able to respawn at the AB.  But ticketwise, it's still 'owned' by the originating supply brigade, which in most cases are going to be town 'brigades', and you finally despawn/die in the tank it goes back to the originating town supply.

 

Resupply missions are how you overstock now with brigades, has to be HQ, has to have mission with associated brigade in same division, target brigade has to be in a different town then source HQ.  I don't know exactly how town brigades will handle this, but I presume it's going to require the same mechanism, source town to destination town and specifically resupply mission.

 

What WILL be harder for Allies is both towns will have to be the same country.

Share this post


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

You're assuming a lot here.

 

As it stands, the mission system is not being described as fundamentally changed, and town/garrisons are effectively static brigades, at least from a database/ticket standpoint.

 

So if it is like current supply re: ticket handling, then the ticket goes back to the originating 'unit'.  Instead of going back to 110th Brigade or whatever, if you spawned from Charleroi it goes back to Charleroi Town Brigade.  The originating town is the originating town and gets back it's tickets that aren't destroyed.  Destroyed tickets would count down on the resupply timer and fulfill a replacement at the end of the timer for the ticket.  So assuming I'm right, your issue is a non-issue.

 

Now you COULD potentially despawn in a town then respawn like we all do for warp depots, and tanks should be able to respawn at the AB.  But ticketwise, it's still 'owned' by the originating supply brigade, which in most cases are going to be town 'brigades', and you finally despawn/die in the tank it goes back to the originating town supply.

 

Resupply missions are how you overstock now with brigades, has to be HQ, has to have mission with associated brigade in same division, target brigade has to be in a different town then source HQ.  I don't know exactly how town brigades will handle this, but I presume it's going to require the same mechanism, source town to destination town and specifically resupply mission.

 

What WILL be harder for Allies is both towns will have to be the same country.

My understanding of the hybrid system ( I reserve the right to be wrong it this)

1. The Supply from Garrisons cannot overstock the Brigade. Brigades cannot overstock a Garrison. Two separate supply systems involved. One ticket system is tide to brigade, one is tide to town.

2. Garrison can overstock Garrison

3. Brigade can overstock Brigade.

4. Mixed faction can only happen with a Brigade moving into another Brigade town of another faction and a garrison of another faction.

Knowing this, we logically know that there are separate ticket system in place.

We also know that the limitations of NOT being able to mix factions .. IE the town is not a separated from supply, and how the mechanics of TBS worked prior (so this is an assumption) warping can only happen from depots.. Not the AB. That leaves tanks out of the "warp" mechanic... (RTB/Respawn) The AB is the Anchor for all supply.. the depots are just spigots. TBH, I don't think a French persona was able to warp to a Brit spawnable back in the day.. matter of fact I don't think warping was a thing till the FMS. It is a good question. I really am not sure, but I was never able to RTB/Respawn a Stu at a BEF AB during TBS that I can recall.

5. Overstock tickets is a transfer of supply to another supply but is treated as extra supply. Its limited by overstock slot limit (total amount  (back in the day tanks had a 99 limit slot) at receiving town or by percentage max is hit - which is how this system is going to work. I'm sure you know this, but just incase you don't so I'm not talking to you as some noob. When you despawn at the AB. That supply ticket terminated from the origin ticket list. The origin treats it as no longer there and generates a new supply ticket.

6. Back in the day, a RTB to the a different factions AB was a treated only as a RTB for stats and the equipment was lost. The resupply ticket was the same as if you where killed. Later they gave that RTB a return to origin after 30 minutes IIRC so the supply was not lost. IF, and I mean IF that supply was RTB'd to the nearest AB. Most ppl took the MIA because they did not want to return the supply because it took time. It was treated not as overstock but as if you RTB'd to the origination town. The ticket was still active as supply simply because the ticket was not reset because it did not end up as overstock. There was no place for the ticket to terminate. It did not matter how long your mission was. No ticket termination, no new ticket.

 

OH forgot one last thing - Most towns will not be brigades, they will be garrisons.  From the posts by the RATs about the brigades as it stands is going to be supplemental and few.  The HC system is broken and I don't think you will see much of a return or more brigades until we have HC in spades.  I think if you read the direction they laid out and what they are doing, the ease of gameplay for HC and look at population initiated AOs outside HC hands the hybrid is really to see if the Brigade system is even viable.  While there are flaws with TBS and Brigade systems, I think we know that the HC systems flaws are far more damaging.  I also think that if HC does not step up and SHOW the player base that the hybrid system is the best solution for both maneuver and elimination of softcapping and avoidance fighting.. I would not be surprised if the Brigade system is eliminated all together.  However.. IF HC steps up and gives a real test of the system because it DOES seem the best solution. All the barrier and ticket problems might find a work around.

Long post I know, hope I did not bore you.

 

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

My understanding of the hybrid system ( I reserve the right to be wrong it this)

1. The Supply from Garrisons cannot overstock the Brigade. Brigades cannot overstock a Garrison. Two separate supply systems involved. One ticket system is tide to brigade, one is tide to town.

2. Garrison can overstock Garrison

Yes these items are correct.

1 hour ago, stankyus said:

3. Brigade can overstock Brigade.

Division HQ can only overstock a Brigade, with specific mission parameters being met. Just as it is done in-game now.

1 hour ago, stankyus said:

4. Mixed faction can only happen with a Brigade moving into another Brigade town of another faction and a garrison of another faction.

Knowing this, we logically know that there are separate ticket system in place.

Yes this is correct, and the most smooth / seamless for the user interface. So specifically Brigades can move through the line smoothly and even over / through your existing Garrisons. Garrisons = static positions, which deactivate and activate based on capture conditions. Its supply is who ever is the country owner. So if the Garrison is BEF, you can move a French or US flag on top of it, and vice versa.

1 hour ago, stankyus said:

5. Overstock tickets is a transfer of supply to another supply but is treated as extra supply. Its limited by overstock slot limit (total amount  (back in the day tanks had a 99 limit slot) at receiving town or by percentage max is hit - which is how this system is going to work. I'm sure you know this, but just incase you don't so I'm not talking to you as some noob. When you despawn at the AB. That supply ticket terminated from the origin ticket list. The origin treats it as no longer there and generates a new supply ticket.

6. Back in the day, a RTB to the a different factions AB was a treated only as a RTB for stats and the equipment was lost. The resupply ticket was the same as if you where killed. Later they gave that RTB a return to origin after 30 minutes IIRC so the supply was not lost. IF, and I mean IF that supply was RTB'd to the nearest AB. Most ppl took the MIA because they did not want to return the supply because it took time. It was treated not as overstock but as if you RTB'd to the origination town. The ticket was still active as supply simply because the ticket was not reset because it did not end up as overstock. There was no place for the ticket to terminate. It did not matter how long your mission was. No ticket termination, no new ticket.

#5 is indeed controlled by percentage of overstock allowed, managed by the Game Manager.

#6 The same RTB rules will very likely apply and needs to be tested to verify as we currently see them in-game. But to clarify, most certainly if you are BEF and despawn at a French town, it will not overstock that French town as the countries are incompatible of holding available supply of another country.

2 hours ago, stankyus said:

OH forgot one last thing - Most towns will not be brigades, they will be garrisons.  From the posts by the RATs about the brigades as it stands is going to be supplemental and few.  The HC system is broken and I don't think you will see much of a return or more brigades until we have HC in spades.  I think if you read the direction they laid out and what they are doing, the ease of gameplay for HC and look at population initiated AOs outside HC hands the hybrid is really to see if the Brigade system is even viable.  While there are flaws with TBS and Brigade systems, I think we know that the HC systems flaws are far more damaging.  I also think that if HC does not step up and SHOW the player base that the hybrid system is the best solution for both maneuver and elimination of softcapping and avoidance fighting.. I would not be surprised if the Brigade system is eliminated all together.  However.. IF HC steps up and gives a real test of the system because it DOES seem the best solution. All the barrier and ticket problems might find a work around.

This. Really needs to be soaked in and understood for everyone because it is absolutely pivotal to follow through with. We cannot have the rest of the community sit back anymore and say, yeah let HC guys figure it out, I'm going over here to do my own thing. Because if you do...and you want more divisions / brigades, you'll be disappointed that we won't have more than 2 Divisions on the map. 

If High Command and community involvement in it does not improve, well then we're going to be put into a tough spot of figuring out if we want to keep those Divisions or not. Not a threat, not trying to be mean or withhold hopes and desires... it is purely a matter of necessity at this stage. So don't get upset, start planning as a WHOLE COMMUNITY how we're going to tackle a very longstanding saturation point with the community + HC relations, because it's not one or the other and it's not us vs them, we're a team.

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

All that being said, Xoom and I had a good talk about this two days ago and he understands the issue loud and clear and I have a much clearer picture of their approach to why things are the way they are. We talked on the phone and understand each other better..  I can understand why he cant just come out and say YES and why, or NO and why. The bottom line is that he knows my POV and understands why this is a supply disadvantage. I understand his POV on the subject.  IF he wants to add the detail in which we discussed, that up to him to do so. I think it would be disrespectful to discuss here because he was open and frank with me.  Its not bad, I don't think he would want to be boxed in on things that may or may not work.

I'd say that part of our discussion was to gain an understanding and maintain good communications. I'm hopeful that by my taking the initiative to phone call demonstrates not just how much I care to have good communications, but rather Cornered Rat Software as a whole.

One thing I was disappointed to learn in the phone call is this stigma that myself (Xoom), and/or CRS has it out for our Allied community, stemming from some previous decisions made (which were mistakes and have since been corrected), my previous time as a player as Axis (although I also was in HC and ran an Allied squad for awhile), and some abnormal technical errors which resulted into erroneous unintended supply levels due to  some older clunky host tools.

During the conversation I reiterated there is recognition and difficulty that the Allied supply management system will be trickier and more difficult than the Germans, as it is inherent in the games structure and design by how we manage Allied personas (all 9 of them, vs Germany's 3).

WWII Online has been with me and part of over half of my life now (I was a player for 8 years, and a RAT now for 8 years as well, and I'm 31). I cherish the memories and I am working very hard, day and night with our team to preserve all of our shared dream. This is truly a labor of love, and the Allied community represents one half of our critical equation. Allied representation is strong within our team at CRS, just as Axis representation is strong within our team at CRS. This is achieved by the majority of our team being community members from both sides.

All of this 1.36 Hybrid Supply is happening because it has to. We have to take a step back, in order to rebuild and move forward. We're not trying to hurt any side, or anyone's feeling of what the game is going to be. If you're worried and concerned, please take some assurance that we're here talking to you, trying to brief you and be aware of what's coming, and that we're committed to listening and incorporating viable changes to the plan. At this point that's about the best we can as we're not going to slam on the brakes.

My team and I know what it's like to be on the other side as a non-Rat and feel like you're not being heard. While we cannot incorporate every idea, or respond to everything, you're all being heard. We are discussing the contents of these forums and all of our other feedback pipelines. 

In closing I want to say I value our Allied community, just as much as I value our Axis community. You are all collectively my responsibility to take care of, as is ensuring WWII Online's health going forward. I have made mistakes in learning how to do all of this, and I cannot promise perfection going forward, but I can promise I will ensure CRS makes corrections to recognized (genuine) errors and do our best to avoid them. Your patience and grace is immensely valued and necessary.

I wake up every morning grateful and honored to be in this position. I don't take it fore granted and I know you're all counting on me and CRS. All I can say is please keep supporting our team and game, we have a long ways to go and we're counting on your continued support as a subscriber to make sure that happens. 

This is a tremendously significant time and WWII Online still has a lot more in it. If we work together as one whole community, we're going to beat the odds as we have done all of these years and do some pretty amazing stuff. 

S! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, XOOM said:

One thing I was disappointed to learn in the phone call is this stigma that myself (Xoom), and/or CRS has it out for our Allied community

Merlin51 would like to note that, Game population showing even, Merlin's faction of preference is to play Armee de Francais
but happily dons the uniform of whom ever is underpop. (and usually becomes a nice corpse)

I want EVERYTHING to work right and NOTHING to work better than it should.

I dont think anyone on the team is side biased, there are way too many others on the team who would beat you down and flog you if you tried
to swing things that way, BmBM and Hatch would flay you alive.
XL2Rippr is 31st Wrecking Crew, that is old school axis on the team right there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, well that's a bit disappointing, I don't think this is a balanced situation re: supply handling with attack units going straight to whatever town they are at.  Could be self-correcting though if the tickets hit the regular max and discard.  I suspect they don't now like they did before.

 

Stanky, I understand that the towns are not brigades, but they are static brigades in the sense of being spawnlists and a database object with X Y Z numbers tracked of whatever faction it supports.  I'm using the term as regards tickets/supply repository, not moveable spawn units, which is probably not a good terminology for people not inside my brain.

So each town effectively will have a minimum of 4 spawnlists logically of whatever country, possibly 5 when we get a full Italian set, plus possibly another 4-5 of AF and 4-5 of Nav.  Only one faction is active at a time.

Which begs a question, if a town is BEF does that mean the AF will be RAF and the naval is RN?  Or can they be mixed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Xoom, internet paranoia has always haunted this game. 

 

The one thing that I do think is legit is that the two sides really don't understand each other very well as a whole so I've had discussions with Axis background guys and they really DON'T get the Allied thing, and vice versa for non-big squad Allies understanding the Axis guys.

 

The other part is everyone can be readily convinced the game is coded against them, especially if they never switch sides and discover just how much pain the other guy is getting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.