• Announcements

    • B2K

      Forum Upgrade - 7 Jun.   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 beginning on 7 Jun in the the early evening Server Time. 
imded

Here is what happened in the last 11 camps.

88 posts in this topic

Both sides have communication problems, lack of situational intel, and way too much BS scrolling rapidly down the screen. We need to get back to using target chat and Army/Air whatever chat rather than side for everything. A few more channels would help, even just another two to facilitate inter squad comms and army and air, but we need to use the six we have properly and improve our attack and defence comms.

It starts with HC and the Vets, if we use the correct channels then newer players can see them being used properly and can be guided to them in game by the community, and we then wont have "ei in NCP" appearing in side chat next to a discussion on your favourite  bourbon etc.

S! Ian 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, ian77 said:

Both sides have communication problems, lack of situational intel, and way too much BS scrolling rapidly down the screen. We need to get back to using target chat and Army/Air whatever chat rather than side for everything. A few more channels would help, even just another two to facilitate inter squad comms and army and air, but we need to use the six we have properly and improve our attack and defence comms.

It starts with HC and the Vets, if we use the correct channels then newer players can see them being used properly and can be guided to them in game by the community, and we then wont have "ei in NCP" appearing in side chat next to a discussion on your favourite  bourbon etc.

S! Ian 

Totally agree.

As a ground player I always try to use the 10 channel (Axis Heer) or the Target or Mission channels. 

For some time now, the side channel has been used for important warnings or tactical issues.... Formerly that channel was used to talk about bull[censored] and [censored] on the enemy.... XXXX hax... XXXX cheats..... XXXX clips..... Italan food..... good wines and beers, good weed.....bla bla bla

 

2 people like this

Share this post


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

Formerly that channel was used to talk about bull[censored] and [censored] on the enemy.... XXXX hax... XXXX cheats..... XXXX clips..... Italan food..... good wines and beers, good weed.....bla bla bla

Hmmm... Sounds like someone wasn't managing player resources very well. These channels were set up for a purpose. When we initially set them up, you could lose your HC position for refusing to utilize them properly, and players that didn't follow protocol could earn some GM attention and time off.

I'm all for general BS'ing in the game, but not on reserved channels. You have to keep some channels reserved for game use, specifically for current in game news and communication. Somewhere published that everyone knows is primarily free of "noise" and can be counted on for real-time ongoing developments/actions comms your team needs to share.

Share this post


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

Both sides have communication problems, lack of situational intel, and way too much BS scrolling rapidly down the screen. We need to get back to using target chat and Army/Air whatever chat rather than side for everything. A few more channels would help, even just another two to facilitate inter squad comms and army and air, but we need to use the six we have properly and improve our attack and defence comms.

It starts with HC and the Vets, if we use the correct channels then newer players can see them being used properly and can be guided to them in game by the community, and we then wont have "ei in NCP" appearing in side chat next to a discussion on your favourite  bourbon etc.

Totally agree! S!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/1/2018 at 3:04 PM, odonovan1 said:

 

Let's also remember both the last two campaigns won by the Allies had significant amounts of Allied RDP missions.  That seemed to disappear, this last campaign.  Did the Dambusters take the day off, or what?

100% - they got bored so stopped. the why for the boredom has been discussed.

Share this post


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

100% - they got bored so stopped. the why for the boredom has been discussed.

Do tell.......was this a private discussion or a forum discussion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

idk - but i'd check the hangar searching a few weeks back.

 

essentially allies = "you guys suck at life and can't figure out how to intercept us - lol herp derp roll tide"

german players = "i'm not going to spend all night trying to spot you through the soup, have fun bombing undefended factories"

many people argued the details.

 

general consensus is germans need the ju88, allies the wellington, and we all need clear skies. until the skies are clear, with much longer view distances, RDP will never function well for the interceptors nor the escorts. this will always lead to burn out and boredom. first the interceptors will just get frustrated and stop trying to intercept. when this happens, the escorts stop flying escort. sooner or later, even the grognards that love flying bombers ... even these guys eventually stop.

 

RDP should be turned off and not re-evaluated until such time that we can see in a straight line for more than 3.72 miles. interceptors and escorts need at least 10 miles of view distance so they can properly do their damn jobs.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, who has only flown axis, AWS killed RDP bombing. We got AWS because everyone complained about map skirting. I used to bomb as axis and I skirted the map. I have lots of video of being attacked by spits and such, yes almost always after drop, but it was action.  Defending axis factories I killed plenty of skirters by actually looking for them at the edge of the map and responding quickly to town ews, which is what we had for a warning back then. There was lots of action and yes it was hard to kill bombers before they dropped but it could be done. But the yells of "skirters" in the forums won out and we got AWS and moronically it shows enemy air in enemy territory.  And since it's implementation I was never able to intercept allied bombers again and never able to bomb as axis without getting shot down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Risk has disappeared from what I’m reading and trying to catch up on. You have to be prepared to risk one town to gain 6. More times than not we would pull back our line just to adjust for an overall tactical advance. It seems people lost that desire and excitement to get risky for massive reward. The fear of loss is consuming HC and taking away the fun/excitement to take chances. Screw that! You must be bold and create the environment for your side to succeed otherwise it’s stale, boring and that creates more people logging off.

Share this post


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

Risk has disappeared from what I’m reading and trying to catch up on. You have to be prepared to risk one town to gain 6. More times than not we would pull back our line just to adjust for an overall tactical advance. It seems people lost that desire and excitement to get risky for massive reward. The fear of loss is consuming HC and taking away the fun/excitement to take chances. Screw that! You must be bold and create the environment for your side to succeed otherwise it’s stale, boring and that creates more people logging off.

you can't do this without proper hand offs to the next shift of HC. if there is no shift, due to the lengthy list of things we all know suck about the old HC system (causing huge burnout andlack of desire to be HC), doesn't matter what you're willing to risk as you'll never pull it off. then, sadly, your risk turns into a snowball where instead of losing 6 towns you lose an entire section of the map as no HC were around to do anything about it.

 

you aren't wrong per se, but the ship you're talking about done been sunk for awhile now. from what i can tell, the HC we have left are riding in the life boats from the ship that sunk.

Edited by madrebel
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/19/2018 at 8:40 AM, Ce said:

Risk has disappeared from what I’m reading and trying to catch up on. You have to be prepared to risk one town to gain 6. More times than not we would pull back our line just to adjust for an overall tactical advance. It seems people lost that desire and excitement to get risky for massive reward. The fear of loss is consuming HC and taking away the fun/excitement to take chances. Screw that! You must be bold and create the environment for your side to succeed otherwise it’s stale, boring and that creates more people logging off.

Need to read up on hybrid supply Ce, it's going tactical and HCs are supposed to be Rommel not Guderian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/19/2018 at 10:37 AM, madrebel said:

you can't do this without proper hand offs to the next shift of HC. if there is no shift, due to the lengthy list of things we all know suck about the old HC system (causing huge burnout andlack of desire to be HC), doesn't matter what you're willing to risk as you'll never pull it off. then, sadly, your risk turns into a snowball where instead of losing 6 towns you lose an entire section of the map as no HC were around to do anything about it.

 

you aren't wrong per se, but the ship you're talking about done been sunk for awhile now. from what i can tell, the HC we have left are riding in the life boats from the ship that sunk.

This handoff thing affected my work even years ago, I would take much greater risks then I normally did at the 2200-0200 timeframe I used to AHC at.  But because of lack of that TZ3 cadre, I had to do things with the idea that once I logged no one would be on for six hours.  That made for boring lackadaisical moves on my part, except for the few times I was pulling Allied cajones out of some encirclement fire.

 

Asked, begged, cajoled for tools.  Screw it, never got what we needed, and I don't see the tactical UI leader/comms tools coming either.

 

Was talking to my HC partner HG last night who was asking about some of the Facebook chatter he picked up, we agreed that the Rats 1.0 didn't take the workload tools seriously.

 

Rats 2.0 solution seems to be well strip that sucker out, which I can't argue that something had to be one (although the what was more debatble IMO).

 

But stripping out ToEs' workload/risk that doesn't address the real issue.  They are going to find out IMO that the squad leadership everyone seems to squawk about won't be there either and no one will be guardians of gameplay, not without some serious incentive to provide leadership services for gain for their side/tribe.

 

That means tools.  Pfft, it's so frustrating to even discuss this stuff and watch everyone blabber on about what they want while the real issues go wanting.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.