BMBM

Your idea of Fun

281 posts in this topic

agreed - we need more people. flags seem to have just bled players for a variety of reasons though. hybrid won't change much given the current population IMO in terms of how AOs play out. it will prevent soft caps though and it sets the foundation for more options for the presumed increased population.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Capco said:

What we have now in that sense is basically 1.36-lite.  

 

People asked to give importance to backline reinforcements and interdiction, and now that we have that in-game with the way the armored brigades are structured, those same people cry foul because they can't get the toy they want right away.  Now that aircraft is divvied up between bomber and fighter brigades, people are mad when they have to fly from an airfield that is farther away in order to get the airplane they want.  People love to talk down the old system until the benefits of that system are taken out from under them.  How ironic.  

 

It's like some of us have a crystal ball sometimes and could see this eventual level of disgruntlement from a mile away.  

Yes and no on 1.36 lite. People like a certain base level of gear to be there when a fight starts. As attrition sets in then people expect to have to drive in supply. This current system allows for use of an exploit of movement timers by the overpop side to force movement of armored brigades to take them out of the fight. The only real saving grace it has at this point is that the whole system is going down the tubes. 

Share this post


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

agreed - we need more people. flags seem to have just bled players for a variety of reasons though. hybrid won't change much given the current population IMO in terms of how AOs play out. it will prevent soft caps though and it sets the foundation for more options for the presumed increased population.

I don’t know. It sounds to me like the flags will just be a little bump in supply not a major tsunami. That opens up for new styles of attack. Rather than pressing a town and trying to over run it you can try to push for some measure of attrition. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that 1.36 means no more softcaps and less critical need for HC are its main selling points to me.  I support it for those reasons (and the token moveable supply).  The whole interdiction nonsense is just noise to me, because it means nothing without more players.  

 

But if there are fights in every town and fewer major cutoffs, that's a good thing for retaining people.  When HC don't need to be logged on (e.g. when their side is dominating), they tend to log on more lol.  As we've seen recently, frustration seems to be the number one reason why people don't log in.  If you remove frustration causing elements of the game, it should in theory allow the game to retain more players since they have fewer reasons to log off or avoid logging in.  

 

If the first couple campaigns are good with lots of great battle, and if we get enough vets back to get the critical mass needed on both sides, then the potential for the game to bring in new customers will be huge.  

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

The fact that 1.36 means no more softcaps and less critical need for HC are its main selling points

...

But if there are fights in every town and fewer major cutoffs, that's a good thing for retaining people.  When HC don't need to be logged on (e.g. when their side is dominating), they tend to log on more lol.  As we've seen recently, frustration seems to be the number one reason why people don't log in.  If you remove frustration causing elements of the game, it should in theory allow the game to retain more players since they have fewer reasons to log off or avoid logging in.  

Completely agree.

And attrition. With 1.36 losing equipment will actually matter since you can't magically warp in a brigade for more supply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Capco said:

Today, one side simply cannot afford to have 5-10 guys going off doing their own thing

what if that's their idea of fun?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, david06 said:

what if that's their idea of fun?

Then that side loses, and they won't be interdicting jack because the town battle will be over and their setup means nothing as a new AO comes up somewhere else.

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

And attrition. With 1.36 losing equipment will actually matter since you can't magically warp in a brigade for more supply.

From my most recent MOIC experiences with the new trickle timers, the "moving brigades in as an emergency town saving tactic" is very ineffective.  You have to move the flags in at least 15 minutes before that moment occurs.  It happened twice the last time I was MOIC, at Lokeren and another town I cannot recall.  I got the brigade in the towns on time but the trickle wasn't enough supply to save either of them.  Also, in situations where your flags are bounced but you are able to recap the bunker and move the flags in, that's not always enough to liberate the town.  JWBS isn't as bad as it used to be by a long shot.  I genuinely can't remember the last time someone came on the forums frustrated as heck from what just happened to complain about JWBS.  

 

Attrition is always a double-edged sword.  In those examples, you know what side chat was filled up with as it was happening?  "No supply"  "need more supply"  "nothing to spawn in".  Lot's of angry, frustrated, and upset players even though HC was online and doing their job.  Kind of like the tankers have to deal with right now when only infantry brigades are available to spawn from.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, david06 said:

what if that's their idea of fun?

If 5-10 guys are going to ruin the fun of the game for the rest of their playerbase, whose fun is at a greater premium?  I'd argue whichever group has more dollars going into the coffers of CRS (i.e. the majority) should be catered to more. 

 

Hint:  those 5-10 guys aren't the majority.   

Share this post


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

From my most recent MOIC experiences with the new trickle timers, the "moving brigades in as an emergency town saving tactic" is very ineffective.  You have to move the flags in at least 15 minutes before that moment occurs.  It happened twice the last time I was MOIC, at Lokeren and another town I cannot recall.  I got the brigade in the towns on time but the trickle wasn't enough supply to save either of them.  Also, in situations where your flags are bounced but you are able to recap the bunker and move the flags in, that's not always enough to liberate the town.  JWBS isn't as bad as it used to be by a long shot.  I genuinely can't remember the last time someone came on the forums frustrated as heck from what just happened to complain about JWBS.  

 

Attrition is always a double-edged sword.  In those examples, you know what side chat was filled up with as it was happening?  "No supply"  "need more supply"  "nothing to spawn in".  Lot's of angry, frustrated, and upset players even though HC was online and doing their job.  Kind of like the tankers have to deal with right now when only infantry brigades are available to spawn from.  

That was precisely the POINT of putting in longer trickle times, so attackers did have a chance to finish what they had accomplished without instarescue.  If it had been done much earlier a lot of that whole issue would have been solved without coding.

 

As I understand it TBS is going to be on similar ticket timers to now.  So let's say you lost all your town supply defending Ciney, lose it, and then take it back an hour later, it won't be a 'reward' refresh of the whole spawnlist, but still be in a depleted state until the tickets 'normally' come in, meaning you could have a devastated defense for a LOT longer then before, or even with ToEs and 8 hours of no HC.

 

I have a solution to this, but I don't think people are gonna like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Capco said:

If 5-10 guys are going to ruin the fun of the game for the rest of their playerbase, whose fun is at a greater premium?  I'd argue whichever group has more dollars going into the coffers of CRS (i.e. the majority) should be catered to more. 

 

Hint:  those 5-10 guys aren't the majority.   

Hmm, wrongthink IMO.

 

By that reasoning none of that pop neutrality stuff should be in and underpop TZs/sides should just be punching toys for the overpop that is 'paying in more'.

Share this post


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

Hmm, wrongthink IMO.

 

By that reasoning none of that pop neutrality stuff should be in and underpop TZs/sides should just be punching toys for the overpop that is 'paying in more'.

That's a good point too.  I was thinking more along the lines of within a side.  I mean ideally you can cater to everyone's style of play with a] enough players for all the basic jobs to be done and b] proper balancing mechanisms in place.  Then those 5-10 guys can fly to the Alps if they really want to and it won't have a detrimental impact to their side.  

 

At this critical juncture you have to be very careful about adding in frustration causes, and a lack of easily accessible (but still finite) supply is one of them.  It's going to be a sticker shock for a lot of folks when the supply is (mostly) back in their hands again, and HC can't just move up more supply to support their attack or replenish their airfield with the click of a button.  And then on the flip side, if you make the lists too big, that also has negative consequences.  

 

I'm very curious to see how they craft the spawnlists for 1.36.  The Allied town ownership change mechanism is going to be interesting as well. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Capco said:

As we've seen recently, frustration seems to be the number one reason why people don't log in.  If you remove frustration causing elements of the game, it should in theory allow the game to retain more players since they have fewer reasons to log off or avoid logging in.  

this gets spun to "no, the frustrating element is fun" too much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not interested in history.
If I'm going to pay for a play I want to have equipment on the list
Could it be that in history, axis bombs only killed allies and vice versa?
Did the projectiles only kill enemies?
I do not accept to speak in history with FF disabled
...and I think volunteer developers does not work...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, kareca said:

I'm not interested in history.
If I'm going to pay for a play I want to have equipment on the list
Could it be that in history, axis bombs only killed allies and vice versa?
Did the projectiles only kill enemies?
I do not accept to speak in history with FF disabled
...and I think volunteer developers does not work...

Hi Kareca.  

 

As one of the main tankers in this game, what do you think is a good amount of tanks to have in the supply lists?  If we have too few tanks, people like you can't spawn what they like, but if we have too many, then other players get upset because they cannot seem to make a difference in the battle no matter how many tanks they kill.

 

What is a fair number of available tanks for a spawn list in your opinion? 

 

S!

Share this post


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

If 5-10 guys are going to ruin the fun of the game for the rest of their playerbase, whose fun is at a greater premium?  I'd argue whichever group has more dollars going into the coffers of CRS (i.e. the majority) should be catered to more. 

 

Hint:  those 5-10 guys aren't the majority.   

Or in the alternative those 5 - 10 guys can just not log in or go play something else rather than have someone else dictate how they play the game they are paying for. How does that help your side in the long run?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, kareca said:

...and I think volunteer developers does not work...

If there were no volunteer devs........this game would have most likey closed its doors.  Be grateful there are people passionate enough to step up and help........and doing it for nothing but the game itself.

Image result for mic drop gif

Edited by bmw
5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, MikeAZ said:

blowing up unguarded fbs.

Thats like shooting deer at your birdfeeder...........:lol:

Edited by bmw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, MikeAZ said:

blowing up unguarded fbs.

and its different from capping unguarded spawns or abs how? 

4 minutes ago, bmw said:

Thats like shooting deer at your birdfeeder...........:lol:

agree. one should be shooting deer at a deerfeeder, really. 

Related image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, minky said:

Or in the alternative those 5 - 10 guys can just not log in or go play something else rather than have someone else dictate how they play the game they are paying for. How does that help your side in the long run?

If the choice is between those 5-10 guys logging out because they can't do something that might have no positive impact to their side, and everyone else logging out because their fun is being ruined by the absence of people who aren't team players in a team game, which is preferential?  

 

Until the game has enough population and good enough balance mechanisms to support such things, tough choices like that have to be made.  With the global cap timers that we have now, it's better for the rest of the playerbase if those 5-10 guys (who might be doing nothing positive on their sight-seeing trip to the Alps) aren't logged in at all, because then your cap timers will reflect the actual number of combatants available to your side. 

 

Maybe something like local cap timers and local spawn delay, that way non-combatants can still do their own thing without negatively affecting combatants on their side?  

 

If CRS catered to the "do my own thing when I want where I want it even when it's detrimental to my team" crowd instead appealing to as many players as possible, they would have gone defunct 15 years ago.  "Death of a thousand cuts" is unfortunately the lesser of two evils in that sense.  

Share this post


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

If 5-10 guys are going to ruin the fun of the game for the rest of their playerbase, whose fun is at a greater premium?  I'd argue whichever group has more dollars going into the coffers of CRS (i.e. the majority) should be catered to more. 

 

Hint:  those 5-10 guys aren't the majority.   

How are five guys driving around the rear lines ruining anyone's fun? Who's fun is being ruined?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, david06 said:

How are five guys driving around the rear lines ruining anyone's fun? Who's fun is being ruined?

They count towards the players spawned in on their side.  The amount of players spawned in is what triggers the balancing mechanisms that are currently in place:  spawn delay, and variable cap timers (and also the amount of AOs available).  

 

If 10% of your playerbase is doing something unrelated to the current AOs, that negatively affects the rest of your side.  The battles become more frustrating and less fun for everyone else when 10% of the players on your team aren't team playing.  The balancing mechanisms don't work as well as they would, since they assume everyone spawned into the game world is participating in the battles in some fashion.  

 

It's the equivalent of having 11 men on the field in football, except one of the 11 players is day dreaming instead of contributing to the play like the rest of his team is.  

 

The only exception I can think of is (successful) RDP bombing, since the impact of that extends to all supply (and therefore all AOs).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Over the years, I had tons of fun in wwiiol, both in the air, and on the ground. One thing is common to all of those moments. Being on TS (discord) with friends that were enjoying the game at the same time. 

 

Share this post


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

They count towards the players spawned in on their side.  The amount of players spawned in is what triggers the balancing mechanisms that are currently in place:  spawn delay, and variable cap timers (and also the amount of AOs available).  

 

If 10% of your playerbase is doing something unrelated to the current AOs, that negatively affects the rest of your side.  The battles become more frustrating and less fun for everyone else when 10% of the players on your team aren't team playing.  The balancing mechanisms don't work as well as they would, since they assume everyone spawned into the game world is participating in the battles in some fashion.  

 

It's the equivalent of having 11 men on the field in football, except one of the 11 players is day dreaming instead of contributing to the play like the rest of his team is.  

 

The only exception I can think of is (successful) RDP bombing, since the impact of that extends to all supply (and therefore all AOs).  

what's your plan for growing the game if five people not doing what you want them to ruins your fun?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.