• Announcements

    • B2K

      Forum Upgrade Phase II Beginning.   06/01/2020

      The initial phase of the forum updating has been completed.  We will now be moving onto Phase II: Software update:   The current forum software is in need up an update to current version.  We have been testing the newer version, and are ready to update our live forums.    Themes: The Current WWIIOL Theme will be retired as part of the forum update.  It is non-compatible with the newer forum software.  A new WWIIOL Theme will be added after upgrade (as part of the upgade if everything goes smooth).   Once the update is completed the forums should look the same, but perform significantly better.   We will also be able to potentially expand functionality to include features and add-ons that are not available with our current version of the forum software.   There will be a few hours of downtime during the upgrade process, an exact date has not been set as we are working to align schedules.  
imded

Here is what happened in the last 11 camps.

88 posts in this topic

The major difference is that if I can't spawn into this Post Scriptum server due to side balance issues there are dozens of others that I can spawn into. However, there is only one WWIIOL that I can log into, and that will create issues with the loyalist wing and issues with squads as well who suddenly see players unable to spawn into squad night because the numbers are imbalanced. Eve Online doesn't force any population balancing. It is all organically created where you have massive factions that have grown in lockstep checking each others rise to power.

https://massivelyop.com/2018/02/06/eve-evolved-a-matter-of-balance-in-eve-online/

Interesting read to see how another old MMOG has to find innovative ways to balance players.

Share this post


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

I put it to you - try a few campaigns with forced side balance. Give it a chance.

you seriously underestimate the loyalist faction's commitment to their side.

if they're forced to play the other side: they'll unsub, or at the very least refuse to log in

 

it's ridiculous, but there is a huge chunk of players with this mindset. hell a few squad mates had 2 accounts, one for each side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎12‎/‎1‎/‎2018 at 10:22 AM, delems said:

That may be the last 11 maps; but the previous 57 are 28-27-2; very balanced.

So, that implies allies have ran over axis just as much.

Maps 112-121 axis were 3-7.

Maps 138-146 axis were 3-6.

And don't forget 6 straight losses 101-106.

Nice try. Allies are losing 75% of the time now.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎12‎/‎1‎/‎2018 at 6:25 PM, Capco said:

It's almost as if all those extra Tigers are making a difference.  Whoda thunk it?

and Axis 10,000 LMG and SMG that are laser accurate up to 500m

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎12‎/‎2‎/‎2018 at 8:53 AM, blakeh said:

Why is winning the campaign important?    What do you win? What do you lose?

What is important is day to day gameplay.

In that last campaign, the allies dominated early and pushed the map east.  The axis rallied and pushed back west.  It was a good campaign for both sides.

The only win that matters is that you your time in game.

 

When you always go in one direction (reverse), it get EXTREMELY old looking in the rear view mirror all the time. We do like looking out the windshield to. Whats with winning? MORALE. Your axis side has a high morale at this time. When you were losing your morale was low. So don't tell me that losing is just as fun as winning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MORE STATS!

Assign a point value to each AO.

Not sure if this possible. Make each town worth something.

Another reason why you should be on AO!

LIES

S!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, dropbear said:

Soooo..every other game in the current market has got it wrong?

I put it to you - try a few campaigns with forced side balance. Give it a chance.

Can we seriously ask new players who are seeing this game for the first time to log in (A) a seriously over pop side or (B) a seriously underpop side?

The very thought of it makes my sons and all their mates cringe. They won't even give the game a chance to impress. 

So I will have to wait for another player to join the server, and hope that they are wanting to play the opposite side to allow me to spawn in, or do I have to wait for an opposition player to leave? How long will the game survive with 10 v 10 as the max population? Or will it be me versus my non active second account, but at least I was able to get into the game? Will there be players kicked from the game if they have been in game for 2 hours and I have been waiting to spawn in for an hour? I want to play with my squad mates and friends, not randomise from login to login which side I and my friends will be "allocated" to.

Your side numbers neutrality might work for "every other game in the current market" but most of us do not play every other game, and some do not even play any other game. I believe that your suggestion will remove many of the last remaining vets from the game, and once gone it will be difficult to get them to come back again.

 

S! Ian

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ian77 said:

So I will have to wait for another player to join the server, and hope that they are wanting to play the opposite side to allow me to spawn in, or do I have to wait for an opposition player to leave? How long will the game survive with 10 v 10 as the max population? Or will it be me versus my non active second account, but at least I was able to get into the game? Will there be players kicked from the game if they have been in game for 2 hours and I have been waiting to spawn in for an hour? I want to play with my squad mates and friends, not randomise from login to login which side I and my friends will be "allocated" to.

Your side numbers neutrality might work for "every other game in the current market" but most of us do not play every other game, and some do not even play any other game. I believe that your suggestion will remove many of the last remaining vets from the game, and once gone it will be difficult to get them to come back again.

 

S! Ian

Good post, I chose to play Allied last campaign , not because I had too. This coming campaign I'll be back with my Squad on the Axis side , cause that's what I told them I would do and because I want to play with my Squadmates. 

I think any game that has a open world runs into these issues. The smaller COD type games that have 1000s servers open for these games it does work . To either allocate players onto a side to balance things out but it's usually 10v10 32v32 15v15 like WOT but there it does not matter cause it's a mix of Armor and not a side preference.

Share this post


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

I think any game that has a open world runs into these issues. The smaller COD type games that have 1000s servers open for these games it does work . To either allocate players onto a side to balance things out but it's usually 10v10 32v32 15v15 like WOT but there it does not matter cause it's a mix of Armor and not a side preference.

On many of these kinds of games that are match based (WT, WOT, etc)
You queue for a match with your mates, and then you wait in the queue for the other team to get enough people
You might wait seconds, or minutes, or longer. It all depends

other games are open games, quake style, 1st come 1st served
If you have a clan match, you would have reserved a server ahead of time, or had your own server.
If it is a public server, you run around and shoot each other, as most employ auto forced balancing. Not necessarily a bad thing, who doesnt want to shoot their mates 
sometimes?

Neither of those solutions works well here though for different reasons.
The amount of players would would willingly sign up for auto balancing already do it themselves when they log in usually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the pop balancing "wait to select overpop side" is already in.

just goes to show side loyalty is stronger than pop neutrality to the players

 

hell SD got to over 3min a few times and consistently got over 60s and people still chose side loyalty over playing underpop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forcing folks to play for the other side is a non-starter imho, causing more problems than it would allegedly solve.

 

I won't play for the axis.  Ever.  If the game forces me to, I will simply not log in until the game allows me to play for the Allies.  I am not alone in this belief.  There are those who play Axis only, and those who play Allied only.  Overpop spawn delays proves, in my opinion, that many folks would rather wait than play for the other side.

 

Oh, and where in God's name would Vicmorrow EVER spawn, if the sides were forcefully balanced?  His side-switching is (his words/paraphrased) entirely based on wanting to play for the underdog side whenever he spawns in.  ;)

 

S!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, augetout said:

Forcing folks to play for the other side is a non-starter imho, causing more problems than it would allegedly solve.

Indeed, a good thing that we don't do that. I can't picture it either.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree would be nice to 'force' somewhat more even sides; not sure how to do it.  (we don't have to have EVEN sides,  we just need to not have extreme over/under pop sides)

One thought, if we did have balancing - where you have to log into the under pop side (or at least at some ratio - say if over 3 to 2), there could still be some exceptions.

For example, since mostly the issues revolve around squads, a solution might be, if a squad CO is on a side - all members of that squad can log into that side, regardless of pop issues - hence preserving squad integrity.  Possibly extend that to squad XOs too.

Or, maybe a subscription type?  A low cost "starter-balance" sub, where you get starter for half price, but will always be placed on the under pop side?

idk, but good to examine options.  It is the extreme pop issues that hurt imo, not the little bit over/under pop that each side gets.

Share this post


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

and Axis 10,000 LMG and SMG that are laser accurate up to 500m

LOL, said the side with the BAR Long Range Laser Gun  (BAR LRLG) , the StormTrooper Grease Gun (STGG), the Spitfire of Doom etc. etc. etc. The TESLA Bedford Morris and Lafflys......

I just LOL... stop the constant whining and log and play please. These kinds of posts are useless. I am so tired of the constant allied victim. I ask God you to win a [censored] time and leave us alone. 

PS: And Yes, I would NEVER play ALLIED.

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i remember testing ALL the auto's for a small arms audit, it's in the RAX forums. they're all inaccurate to similar degrees.

the MG34 was the only usable MG cause of the blinding flash (it's sights were over the worst of the flash), the allied LMG's were basically blind fire due to the flash. so he does have a point when bringing up the LMG disparity

 

it's not as bad with the new opaque flash but it's still annoying, and the MG34 does have a usefulness edge.

 

@XOOM how's the small arms audit going?

Share this post


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

i remember testing ALL the auto's for a small arms audit, it's in the RAX forums. they're all inaccurate to similar degrees.

the MG34 was the only usable MG cause of the blinding flash (it's sights were over the worst of the flash), the allied LMG's were basically blind fire due to the flash. so he does have a point when bringing up the LMG disparity

 

it's not as bad with the new opaque flash but it's still annoying, and the MG34 does have a usefulness edge.

 

@XOOM how's the small arms audit going?

As it should- the MG34 was a better weapon in RL, and this is supposed to be accurate weapons, not whinegineered last I checked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

less about being historically accurate, more gamey Hollywood flash crippling the allied LMG's.

same with the SMG's in all nations, arcady screenshake and gunshake treating 10lb 9mm SMG like a 2lb .308 automatic rifle

 

very far from historically accurate and nowhere near realistic, but we all like to clamor for nerfs...

Share this post


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

LOL, said the side with the BAR Long Range Laser Gun  (BAR LRLG) , the StormTrooper Grease Gun (STGG), the Spitfire of Doom etc. etc. etc. The TESLA Bedford Morris and Lafflys......

I just LOL... stop the constant whining and log and play please. These kinds of posts are useless. I am so tired of the constant allied victim. I ask God you to win a [censored] time and leave us alone. 

PS: And Yes, I would NEVER play ALLIED.

 

 

have you ever shot the bar. it is a scatter gun.

No hip firing accuracy. only prone.

 

Share this post


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

have you ever shot the bar. it is a scatter gun.

No hip firing accuracy. only prone.

 

Have you ever shot for example the MP40 or the MP34?

This is the usual ridiculous debate since the game exists. We have good weapons and you have good weapons. To say categorically that we have this or that is ridiculous because I can say the same about some allied specific weapons. What I'm not going to do is open a thread where indirectly it seems that those of us who play axis are the culprits of your failure, I'm fed up and it's enough. It's unfair and it's ridiculous.

And I do not have to play as an ally. I, like all of you here, pay my fee and I play on the side I want and my loyalty is 100% on the axis side because that is where I have my friends. If in the future, my friends decide to play on the other side, I will play as an ally as for example the WHIPS do. But honestly, seeing the attacks on my side, the ridiculous accusations, I lose the desire to play as an ally.

GL this map, as I said i hope you can win this one.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

imdead's the perfect example of the populations stance on pop neutrality.

they will not log in on the other side.

 

axis side loyalist's are just logging in more. when allies were on a roll their side loyalists were logging in more.

 

I don't even need to check the history, I'll make this statement:

 

Ehis exact thread was brought up when allies were rolling maps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, imded said:

have you ever shot the bar. it is a scatter gun.

No hip firing accuracy. only prone.

 

You ever fire the LMG from the hip?

I'm 50 / 50 with it , died plenty of times to a Rifle cause my rounds went all around the guy but not into him , that's why they call it Spray and Pray.

I had no issues with the BAR last campaign shot hunnybunny while she/he was at full sprint at 400 +meters.

The German LMG was a feared weapon in WWII that whole platoons did not advance till an LMG nest was 1st disposed off.

I think the biggest side bias cries come from players that never ever switched sides.  I fall victim to that talk once in a while too when I stay on one side to long. But as just recently it showed again the Axis and Allies all butch about the same things.

ATG not dying ( hence why we need a visual dmg model for AAA and ATG)   to soldiers jumping from a CP land and take that accurate one shot and kill you ( yup happened to me as an Allied INF just as it does on Axis just the killers name is different. And so it goes on.

Best example I have is from yesterday and it involved a RAT. 

I was 38t it gets killed by a Panhard, I know about where the Panny is and come back as P2 well aware that my chances are prop 20 % of succeeding .

I get shot at, Panny directly in front of me behind berm so he gets the 1st shot off, I let my 20mm auto cannon go as soon as that is empty I fire my MG then switch back to Auto cannon to not give the Panny a chance to get its sight picture back.  He fires 2 more shots or 3 and kills my driver , all while he is getting pounded by me in intervals of 20mm and MG . 3 Belts later of each the Panny despawns and I get a 

MESSAGE, Bastage how did you not die .

I informed him driver dead he went Ahhhh great battle , my response yup.

That RAT was no other then my former Squad mate @XOOM

No call of accusations of me cheating or anything else , I was just lucky that my tactic worked vs a far superior gun .

What we see in game and all the side bias talk , in my opinion results of :

How long a player has been in game without a restart. 

PC speed.

Connection to server.

Internet connection.

Prop time of day and how much traffic is funneled at any given time in your neighborhood via your Internet provider..

Sheer luck in game 

Skill of player. 

Patience of player 

 

Again both sides [censored] and moan about the same exact things if you don't believe me shed your side bias I only play Axis or Allied and do just 1 campaign on the icky side ( you will survive trust me and it's actually a lot of fun seeing your squad mates on your kill list and the revenge they seek and try to hunt you down whenever they can)

And then when that little side bias monster comes back ( and it will trust me I know ) do another campaign just to remind yourself we all sit in the same boat , just different equipment and different color uniform.

 

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.