Jump to content
Welcome to the virtual battlefield, Guest!

World War II Online is a Massively Multiplayer Online First Person Shooter based in Western Europe between 1939 and 1943. Through land, sea, and air combat using a ultra-realistic game engine, combined with a strategic layer, in the largest game world ever created - We offer the best WWII simulation experience around.

major0noob

"generating activity" game philosophy/attitude, can it be directed to the FMS

Recommended Posts

dre21

There used to be more on TeamSpeak then what we have now.

I personally don't use discord, the only reason it's on my PC is cause my kid uses it.

Other reason is I don't care what one had for lunch or if he has a hot sidechick. I care that I can hear that ET coming so I can get the drop on him and I can't do that when one has fighters over my head dog fighting and Charly is trying to tell everyone a story over discord.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
major0noob
12 hours ago, kase250 said:

The Rambo INF who magically sneaks through the lines placing FRUs..... no that was not fun, specially for tankers and specially if we talk about keeping an AO alive cause it was very easy to place DFRUs behind the attacker lines.

Some players left the game because the truck FMS, well, me and many others left the game because the magic and wonderful FRU.

yes... but there's no denying there was lots of gameplay and AO's were active throughout their lifespan.

compared to the FMS, giving up on a AO after 15min is common

 

12 hours ago, kase250 said:

ADDITION: Well, I have not played for almost a month due to work and personal issues. But I think the FMS is not the main problem, the problem is lack of numbers. IMHO and like i said other times, first we need to decrease the volume of trucks, maybe adjust the EWS too, but the main problem is the lack of numbers not the FMS system IMO.

i agree, i'm arguing the FMS's required "ZoC and teamwork"  vs the "ZoC and teamwork" to deny them/camp/and blow them is unbalanced

the numbers required for a single one need too many people compared to the number of defenders.

 

it can be 2 defenders vs 10 attackers and the defenders will still win. or 5 vs 20, the defenders threshold for stopping gameplay is too low.

it's easier to get 5 people than 20, the 5 don't even need teamwork or leadership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
major0noob
13 hours ago, kase250 said:

But I think the FMS is not the main problem, the problem is lack of numbers

this... i was [censored]ing and moaning for 10 months from FMS's 3min build times, we would go 3-6 hours at a time without a FMS. (Tz1)

in that time nearly everyone stopped playing because there was nothing to do. the FMS is causing low activity and people are not playing from low activity.

 

we were all trying to build them, but it was too easy to kill us while building.

Edited by major0noob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aismov

Lets increase satchels to kill a FMS to 6, thereby requiring two engineers to take one down and see what happens. The build timers are reasonable as they stand right now.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bmw
13 hours ago, kase250 said:

The Rambo INF who magically sneaks through the lines placing FRUs..... no that was not fun, specially for tankers and specially if we talk about keeping an AO alive cause it was very easy to place DFRUs behind the attacker lines.

Agreed. 

While the concept was well meaning the actual implementation was not well thought out.  Tankers suffered greatly from this and Im sure it caused some to unsub...........BUT it was a good way to get action into town.  Maybe the sapper should have been eliminated from that equation at the time but it really makes no difference now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
major0noob
43 minutes ago, aismov said:

Lets increase satchels to kill a FMS to 6, thereby requiring two engineers to take one down and see what happens. The build timers are reasonable as they stand right now.

regardless of our difference in opinions, the FMS is not getting the attention it deserves compared to the AO's supply and cap timers

it took 10 months to see 3 min build times were a bad idea, by then a lot of people gave up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Elfin

In the Battle of Five Armies in the Hobbit movie series large tunnelling worms created on the spot "spawns" for the advancing Orc's (no truck sounds, not easily destroyed, secure supply route). This along with the charging Dwarves with large axes mounted on large Hogs and on Dall sheep with large ramming horns could be crucial to taking out enemy tanks and infantry and safe guarding the "spawn."  Include some attack Eagles and advanced nesting areas.  If implemented properly these features alone could revive the whole game. 

S!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
delems

What do you suggest to change/improve the FMS?  I don't think our current MS is that bad, trucks need to set, that is good.

(yes, the bogus silent allied trucks that coast 10,000m is an issue... please fix...)
 

EWS for trucks has already been shortened to 700m, almost to short imo.

Sound is an issue, but if you control the area, your truck can make it in and set.

Maybe cut build time to 40 sec, not sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
major0noob

not suggesting anything, just want it to stop being ignored.

the 3min build times were ignored for 10 months, forced steam users to walk 5km or use a camped FMS.

 

even now there are people saying the FMS is fine, only conceding minor issues.

 

if you want ideas

  • the most unanimous is lowering truck noise, I'd say to modern car levels. there doesn't need to be easy truck hunting, let the defenders make a ZoC if they want to hunt trucks
  • my idea is instant FMS, ok they know your there but the spawn is up and they'll need to fight to take it down
  • then there's reverting to the inf-FRU, it DID keep AO's alive for more than 15min and let the players fight more
  • there's also ML FRU with limited supply

first there needs to be consensus that this is a problem...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dre21
6 hours ago, major0noob said:

not suggesting anything, just want it to stop being ignored.

the 3min build times were ignored for 10 months, forced steam users to walk 5km or use a camped FMS.

 

even now there are people saying the FMS is fine, only conceding minor issues.

 

if you want ideas

  • the most unanimous is lowering truck noise, I'd say to modern car levels. there doesn't need to be easy truck hunting, let the defenders make a ZoC if they want to hunt trucks
  • my idea is instant FMS, ok they know your there but the spawn is up and they'll need to fight to take it down
  • then there's reverting to the inf-FRU, it DID keep AO's alive for more than 15min and let the players fight more
  • there's also ML FRU with limited supply

first there needs to be consensus that this is a problem...

Inf FRU is a no go , it killed the Tank game the 1st time around you want the last Tankers to quit?  

ML FRU falls into the same . I never liked the Soldier out of a box like it's a magic trick routine. 

Having a Truck or the way we have it now makes st least somewhat sense from a simulation aspect , Soldier dismounting a Truck or coming out of a bunker , but soldiers out of a box , NO THANK YOU

16 hours ago, major0noob said:

this... i was [censored]ing and moaning for 10 months from FMS's 3min build times, we would go 3-6 hours at a time without a FMS. (Tz1)

in that time nearly everyone stopped playing because there was nothing to do. the FMS is causing low activity and people are not playing from low activity.

 

we were all trying to build them, but it was too easy to kill us while building.

Hmmmm odd obviously you did not see the need to subscribe to make FMS but rather relied on others but now you are upset , or at that time you were a paying player but did not see the need to set a FMS yourself and left it to others . 

In my eyes your point is kinda mute if you only [censored] about it but did not step up yourself.

 

 I think increase the amount of satchels it takes to blow a FMS

Let a Truck set 2 FMS or set one and then make the Truck itself  a FMS like we used to have it as a 2nd spawn point .

Lower Truck sound , only an option when all Trucks get the same glide distance offroad ( like virtually none). The Morris is a Racecar compared to the other Trucks in game , and it has an insane engine off glide distance even going uphill. 

Introduce more PPOs to protect a FMS better , like an Engineer can set a cluster of Anti Tank barricades instead of just 1 and then having to wait till it refills to set another one.

Edited by dre21

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kase250
5 hours ago, major0noob said:

not suggesting anything, just want it to stop being ignored.

the 3min build times were ignored for 10 months, forced steam users to walk 5km or use a camped FMS.

 

even now there are people saying the FMS is fine, only conceding minor issues.

 

if you want ideas

  • the most unanimous is lowering truck noise, I'd say to modern car levels. there doesn't need to be easy truck hunting, let the defenders make a ZoC if they want to hunt trucks
  • my idea is instant FMS, ok they know your there but the spawn is up and they'll need to fight to take it down
  • then there's reverting to the inf-FRU, it DID keep AO's alive for more than 15min and let the players fight more
  • there's also ML FRU with limited supply

first there needs to be consensus that this is a problem...

In my opinion it seems to me that you exaggerate too much about the negative impact of FMS on an AO and about the difficulty of activating them.

I think I have never coincided with you on the battlefield, I normally play in Eurotime and in an axis AO there is at least 2 FMS and many times there are more, I personally usually bring Opels frecuently. It is also true that many times there is only one left or only one can be put. And what are we going to do? It's supposed to be war. As I said yesterday, I have not played for a month but I doubt that things have changed in a month.

Putting an FMS is an art that one dominates as one plays more and more:

- You have to know how not to put noise so they do not hear you 

- You have to know when you can turn off the engine to take advantage of the terrain and advance more time with the engine off 

-You have to be clear about where the IAS are 

-You have to plan a route and have a clear idea of where you will more or less locate the FMS,

-Knowing the terrain and good spots is also a key factor

If you do something wrong with this, you will probably get caught and killed or tjey will wait for you to set the FMS an camp it. It is what it is. Mastering this is not achieved the first day, is achieved by learning from veterans and above all trying it many times without being discouraged.

At the beginning of an attack we easily take Opels from 3 to 5 or more players coordinating on which areas we are going to try to place them and I would give you several names of very good axis players in this area: Krazydog, Sorella, Majes99, Hamza ... in short, many of which I have learned a lot.

Now, if what we want is a game that the newly arrived Steam players know how to put an FMS without difficulty and and where all the attacks are a success, for me this game is over. To take a city in a normal campaign with the allies and axis motivated and playing, it has to be difficult and most of the time you have to retreat and that is the grace (at least for me) of this game. 

What we like some players is precisely that things may not go well and, in fact, it is normal for an AO to fail. Then, you have to withdraw and try again later.

In the success of an AO many factors come into play:

-When the MOIC has launched the AO

-When the side begins to attack it without losing "momentum"

-When the EWS is trigered

-Obviously, how the defender will defend the town

If any detail of these fails, the AO will fail and we will have to leave to another place with the tail between the legs. That is precisely the grace of this wonderful game.

 

Things that I would improve regarding FMS:

-Lower engine volume

-Improve the ability of engineers to put PPOs

-Add more versatile defensive PPOs

-Increase the number of charges needed to destroy them

On the issues that the bedford and the morris and laffly have greater ease to cover ground with the engine off, it would also be interesting for CRS to look at it but I do not want to get too much into that topic because it will surely open another focus of discussion on the balance. 

As I said many times, this is a hard game, it costs to get the objectives and can be frustrating. If there are people who can not stand it, who always want to win, they have to find another game. If in 2018 the young people do not want to fight and walk and guard anymore and just want to shoot and pass the time, unfortunately these games will disappear, rock and roll will die and we will only listen to reggeaton and mainstream pop on the radio. What a [censored] world awaits us

Sorry for this text brick but I left  work sooner and I wanted to develop this well.

S!

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blkhwk8

What if a Recon Class infantry set a FRU where only Riflemen can spawn, to help set up a ZOC and give situational awareness for the truck coming in with the FMS?  

 

We did discuss the volume of the trucks (and are looking at what options we have) as it is not as easy as changing .sound truck from 10 to 5. It will take time (as all things do) but it has our attention.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dre21
1 hour ago, BLKHWK8 said:

What if a Recon Class infantry set a FRU where only Riflemen can spawn, to help set up a ZOC and give situational awareness for the truck coming in with the FMS?  

 

We did discuss the volume of the trucks (and are looking at what options we have) as it is not as easy as changing .sound truck from 10 to 5. It will take time (as all things do) but it has our attention.

Nope , against it  always hated the concept of a soldier out of a box . We have rivers for a reason we have bridges for a reason . You introduce or reintroduce a new FRU we get Ninja soldiers across rivers again. Don't care if it's just rifles, these Rifles will kill any  and all ATG or AAA guns  that will respond to Tank EWS and one thinks they are somewhat save cause the bridge is down.

 

You guys want to do it right,  figure out how we can get a Truck to set a Raft PPO, that can cross a river once across it then can become a spawn point . 

Or give Paratroopers a slight faster capping capability,  and introduce a Para Engineer and a Para FRU or FMS aka PMS ( Para spawn point)  .  The PMS only has a limited spawnpool, once exhausted new unit needs to be flown in . Yes the Para ML can set a PMS ( larger tent with camo netting over it. ) 

The Para  Engineer can fix or demolish bridges , set all the PPOs we already have in game.   And we actually make and bring Para units more into the game . Instead of having a ML set a Rifle only FRU.

We can also introduce (and I would say on a 5 min or maybe a 10 min delay timer ) a Parachute EWS icon that would show up over a town .

That would give the Para ML enough time to set a PMS and troops could spawn and repair / destroy a bridge or set a ZOC till other units arrive , like Trucks setting FMS for an AO .

Also to have a chance against Armor ,and EA they would get 2 of each AAA and ATG per PMS .  More ML on the flight more PMS can be set. Remember each PMS only has a limited supply of Parasoldiers.

 

Edited by dre21
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merlin51
15 minutes ago, dre21 said:

and a Para FRU or FMS aka PMS

Id probably be against a para ground spawn point.
What i would be for is allowing the para planes to "DEPLOY" old truck FRU style, except of course with the plane in motion.
Tie the deploy function to the drop door.
Get over the drop zone, you open to door, and MS appears on the mission, and everyone spawns.
Pilot closes drop door, add a small cool down time on deploying again so it isnt too gamey, pilot gets out of the hot area, hopefully comes around on a new approach and we go again.

Could even trade spawning among multiple pilots on same mission.

And give pilot points for unique spawns, just like the FMS owner gets

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blkhwk8
42 minutes ago, dre21 said:

Nope , against it  always hated the concept of a soldier out of a box . We have rivers for a reason we have bridges for a reason . You introduce or reintroduce a new FRU we get Ninja soldiers across rivers again. Don't care if it's just rifles, these Rifles will kill any  and all ATG or AAA guns  that will respond to Tank EWS and one thinks they are somewhat save cause the bridge is down.

 

You guys want to do it right,  figure out how we can get a Truck to set a Raft PPO, that can cross a river once across it then can become a spawn point . 

Or give Paratroopers a slight faster capping capability,  and introduce a Para Engineer and a Para FRU or FMS aka PMS ( Para spawn point)  .  The PMS only has a limited spawnpool, once exhausted new unit needs to be flown in . Yes the Para ML can set a PMS ( larger tent with camo netting over it. ) 

The Para  Engineer can fix or demolish bridges , set all the PPOs we already have in game.   And we actually make and bring Para units more into the game . Instead of having a ML set a Rifle only FRU.

We can also introduce (and I would say on a 5 min or maybe a 10 min delay timer ) a Parachute EWS icon that would show up over a town .

That would give the Para ML enough time to set a PMS and troops could spawn and repair / destroy a bridge or set a ZOC till other units arrive , like Trucks setting FMS for an AO .

Also to have a chance against Armor ,and EA they would get 2 of each AAA and ATG per PMS .  More ML on the flight more PMS can be set. Remember each PMS only has a limited supply of Parasoldiers.

 

You could always throttle the supply similar to a CP. So x amount of bolt action rifles can spawn and a throttle timer to resupply the FRU.  Your point is valid on the bridge crossing, like I said this is all just theoretical

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aismov

My own personal views: Against paratrooper mobile spawn. You will have single paras dropping into the abyss from a suicide Ju52 on a one way mission to create an army-out-of-a-box. Also against a recon infantry class creating mobile spawns.

As merlin said the issue with ninja infantry mobile spawns is they they cross rivers and other things which players realistically consider obstacles in the game world. Creating any sort of ATG or tank defense with infantry mobile spawning is extremely difficult and frustrating because you have a constant stream of enemies popping out of mole holes behind your front lines.

I am all for daring ops that surprise the defenders. But if you are going to have a high-reward impact on gameplay (decimating a prepared defense by surprise attacking from the rear), it should be an equally high risk operation that takes time and planning. I by all means welcome paras and infantry behind the lines - but do it the hard way and try to navigate that Ju52 cleverly to the drop point past defending EA. Or try to sneak in that truck by crossing an undefended rail bridge down river from the city. Don't send in one lone para or a swimmer across the river.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simarauder

Don't see why land spawns can't be both worlds if you introduced LINKING PPO spawns. Originating PPO (that gives the more complete kit list) still starting from truck, a few basic rules/checks to keep the gamey-like aspects from getting ridiculous, things like max links, a smallish x meter-x meter max distance between them, you create a large to smaller set of PPOs that also gets easier to destroy, taking out 1 breaks any links beneath it, you could even start naturally making front lines with it because people would want the benefits of spawning closer as they took ground. ZOCs would be pushed back instead of destroyed outright.

L version that takes 1 > engi satchels, spawns full kit

M version that takes a couple or few satchel, spawns partial kit 

S version that takes couple frag/he/satchel, spawns barebones kit

You'd have all kinds of knobs to flip and dial back, forth, give reason to spawn the more basic front lines kit and not just BAR/FG42, give reason to spawn CS to HE something.

Maybe the L version is a heavy truck PPO and normally most attacks use the M -> S version. 

I don't see why, for instance a basic straight line check between the last PPO to the next couldn't take into account a river is between them. If for instance the S version is an INF placeable one that is more easily destroyed.

You'd create high reward scenarios taking out the L or M out from all the rifles/smgs spawning on the S.

My 2 cents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
minky
2 hours ago, dre21 said:

Nope , against it  always hated the concept of a soldier out of a box . We have rivers for a reason we have bridges for a reason . You introduce or reintroduce a new FRU we get Ninja soldiers across rivers again. Don't care if it's just rifles, these Rifles will kill any  and all ATG or AAA guns  that will respond to Tank EWS and one thinks they are somewhat save cause the bridge is down.

 

You guys want to do it right,  figure out how we can get a Truck to set a Raft PPO, that can cross a river once across it then can become a spawn point . 

Or give Paratroopers a slight faster capping capability,  and introduce a Para Engineer and a Para FRU or FMS aka PMS ( Para spawn point)  .  The PMS only has a limited spawnpool, once exhausted new unit needs to be flown in . Yes the Para ML can set a PMS ( larger tent with camo netting over it. ) 

The Para  Engineer can fix or demolish bridges , set all the PPOs we already have in game.   And we actually make and bring Para units more into the game . Instead of having a ML set a Rifle only FRU.

We can also introduce (and I would say on a 5 min or maybe a 10 min delay timer ) a Parachute EWS icon that would show up over a town .

That would give the Para ML enough time to set a PMS and troops could spawn and repair / destroy a bridge or set a ZOC till other units arrive , like Trucks setting FMS for an AO .

Also to have a chance against Armor ,and EA they would get 2 of each AAA and ATG per PMS .  More ML on the flight more PMS can be set. Remember each PMS only has a limited supply of Parasoldiers.

 

The PMS....??? Really??? The PMS?  Man these forums have gotten B!tchy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
major0noob
On 11/28/2018 at 5:17 AM, dre21 said:

Hmmmm odd obviously you did not see the need to subscribe to make FMS but rather relied on others but now you are upset , or at that time you were a paying player but did not see the need to set a FMS yourself and left it to others . 

In my eyes your point is kinda mute if you only [censored] about it but did not step up yourself.

i was trying to set FMS's... so were a bunch of other people that were trying. we all gave up and most of us unsubbed

all our efforts usually only resulted in 1 spawn per AO, that was quickly camped. as well as never getting another up after defenders spawn

 

this was with the 3min timers

 

On 11/28/2018 at 5:17 AM, dre21 said:

Inf FRU is a no go , it killed the Tank game the 1st time around you want the last Tankers to quit?  

ML FRU falls into the same . I never liked the Soldier out of a box like it's a magic trick routine.

i know... it's a dirt,y ugly, and smelly thing, but the game is lonely without more than 15 enemies and dead AO's.

with all the flak the FRU got, there's no denying there was lots of activity with it.

there are better ideas, but the FRU is already made, all the work is done for it. with CRS's limited work capabilities these easy jobs are reasonable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
major0noob
23 hours ago, kase250 said:

Putting an FMS is an art that one dominates as one plays more and more:

- You have to know how not to put noise so they do not hear you 

- You have to know when you can turn off the engine to take advantage of the terrain and advance more time with the engine off 

-You have to be clear about where the IAS are 

-You have to plan a route and have a clear idea of where you will more or less locate the FMS,

-Knowing the terrain and good spots is also a key factor

If you do something wrong with this, you will probably get caught and killed or tjey will wait for you to set the FMS an camp it. It is what it is. Mastering this is not achieved the first day, is achieved by learning from veterans and above all trying it many times without being discouraged.

look in-game at the number of FMS's at AO's and dead AO's, they'll speak for themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kase250
1 hour ago, major0noob said:

look in-game at the number of FMS's at AO's and dead AO's, they'll speak for themselves.

Mate, I have already answered this in my post, I do a copy paste:

I think I have never coincided with you on the battlefield, I normally play in Eurotime and in an axis AO there is at least 2 FMS and many times there are more, I personally usually bring Opels frecuently. It is also true that many times there is only one left or only one can be put. And what are we going to do? It's supposed to be war. As I said yesterday, I have not played for a month but I doubt that things have changed in a month.

I am an active player, so I know how many FMS usually are in an AO (at least from axis POV) and why and AO could be dead. I never saw you ingame so I dont know your TZ, your side.....

1 hour ago, major0noob said:

i was trying to set FMS's... so were a bunch of other people that were trying. we all gave up and most of us unsubbed

all our efforts usually only resulted in 1 spawn per AO, that was quickly camped. as well as never getting another up after defenders spawn

 

this was with the 3min timers

 

 

 

I can think of two things:

-The defenders did their job well

-Attackers are not very skilled and blame the game for their lack of skill, then they demand changes to satisfy their lack of skill, if the developers do not do it their decision is to abandon the ship. 

Of course, as a costumer, it is legitimate but in my opinion not very successful

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
major0noob
2 minutes ago, kase250 said:

I can think of two things:

-The defenders did their job well

the sum of my argument is this is too easy.

 

after i gave up on setting FMS's all that was left was going to AO's (the trucks kept dieing regardless of our ZoC) or join DO's. at the DO's it was easy to kill attacks before they even started

this was me lone wolfing vs organized people with leadership. if there were more than 2 of us the attack's got one up.

 

the defenders don't need skill leadership or teamwork to succeed, truck hunting is easy. it was child's play with 3min build times

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kilemall
On 11/25/2018 at 10:21 AM, aismov said:

And I think that the major culprit in all of the above is enemy knowledge where you will attack. Just my own two cents, but I think the AO has been the bane of the game since it was first introduced. It removed the need for defenders to actually defend and keep an eye out for things going along the front, and it made the job of attackers infinitely harder since it is clear as day where the action was going to be. Toss AO limits and the need for HCs to place (and have the power to pull) an AO. I could be wrong but I think AOs was always something holding the game back.

Will there be surprises and pre-camps? Yeah. Moling large cities? Yeah. But I think that a lot of the faults in the old system were intermittent while currently they are more constant.

This difference between intermittency and persistence is an important distinction. Many intermittent issues can be fixed such as breaking up large cities to minimize moling, or rear FBs and depot/FMS spawning to blunt the precamp. But you can never fundamentally escape HC control and the limitations Map OIC availability and personal decision making which may not align with the players/squads.

Ultinately HC/AO are two sides of the same coin and squads can't have the flexibility and tactical initiative they require. Dont't get me wrong. There is a very important role for both HCs and the signaling benefits AOs provide. No system will ever be perfect and we have to pick our poison. The question becomes which is the lesser of two evils?

The game was pretty damn great back in 2005 under the old rules. Not perfect. But fun.

Real big problems with AO elimination.

Doesn't force the big fights where the game pops.

Early going pop differential rarely exceeded 30%, now it does all the time.  Overpop in no AO means a bunch of overrun towns and two week campaigns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kilemall
On 11/25/2018 at 11:33 AM, aismov said:

But how then do we get around the issue of HC? They remain the gatekeepers to play. There is all this effort going in to give squads more ability to play and initiative, yet at the end of the day you can never be guaranteed that 1) HC will be on 2) HC agrees to placing AO when you want it and 3) HC won't pull AO If they need it elsewhere.

I completely agree with you that historically defenders had prepared defenses, but has the AO mechanic ever actually done that? The consequence is that now there is no defense and everyone waits for the next AO to pop up.

I just don't see how you can square the circle with trying to give squads more play and flexibility with hybrid supply, but not do away with the AO mechanic, which has always been the greater limiter of squad operations and what ultimately killed the squads.

As I said before, there is real value in the AO as a signaling mechanism or for example with bridge attacks to prevent grieving. But no squad is going to take the effort to organize a squad up if they are not guaranteed they can attack this town, on this day, and at this time. Even something as simple as an hours delay in getting the AO up means a ruined squad night since it usually takes an hour just to set the whole attack up, sometimes even more time.

Without the guarantee of an ability to attack, hybrid supply on its own will do little to bring squads back into play.

I have a solution to that.

 

NAOs, for New AOs.  HC places an AO, it stays for two hours minimum.  Every town connected to the target town is eligible for capture, including the defenders' towns behind the AO target town, and attackers' frontline towns linking to the target.

 

HC places AO, then forgets about it and hopefully concentrates on battle management.

 

Big regional fights.  AO not yanked, paradrops that count, interdiction for 15km around.

 

I have a whole thread on that I can bring up in Barracks if you are interested.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...