• Announcements

    • XOOM

      Volunteer PHP Developer wanted to revive the Gazette!   07/24/2019

      We're looking to properly revive the World@War Gazette and need a solid PHP developer to help take some work forward. If you have some skills with PHP and are looking for some experience and to bring important home page news / recognition for individual players back to WWII Online, I'd like to hear from you! Submit an inquiry to jobs@corneredrats.com with some details about your experience. You will need at least 10+ hours per week to contribute to the team. The Gazette's current status can be found here: https://www.wwiionline.com/resources#gazette
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
blggles

Split the Armor Further?

18 posts in this topic

More gruppen? So you could keep the new numbers criteria, but the Germans could spread it more, howsoever they see fit, and their tankers might stop complaining while they easily run the map. Benefit to CRS would be, if the armor ain't spread enough, then its HC's fault. :D Seems a reasonable adjustment, but then maybe I'm missing something.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The pendulum swings. In tier 2 and 3, as war production swings into high gear and doctrine changes to more supporting armor (TD) with the infantry, the German infantry brigades will pack more punch. All factions get an equal number of infantry and armor brigades. I agree that more separate armor brigades would be a nice touch. 

It's rather hard <duh> to reconcile all the accumulated complaints/suggestions/wishes from all quarters over the entire history of this game in a single go. For years people have complained about there being too many tanks in play; of never-ending supply that rotates in and out; of no room for inf-on-inf fights; of no way to get the ATG game going; of camps, campathons and campfests (usually with tanks); of lack of rear area action; of musings over tank columns... you name it. Now we did try to merge as much of that as possible with the differentiated brigades and it turns out... people really didn't want that? Or is it just the vocal minority we're hearing?

When 1.36 comes along all of this will change again. Exactly how is yet to be determined but the term "swamped with tanks" comes to mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With town based supply there will be a natural flow to the battle that hasn't really been seen by many players unless they were here for the pre-ToE era in 2006. Excluding armor precamps which are much harder to do now with depot spawning, AB table timers, etc. the general sequence of events for a town falling was something like this (not that AB capture and victory/defeat can happen at any stage, but usually it was stage 6/7 or 8, less commonly stage 3):

1) prime armor/ATG/infantry spawn to assault the town

2) battle see-saws back and forth as armor gets knocked out and more armor comes in

3) infantry-focused push as all prime tanks have been knocked out

4) lesser-tier tanks start making an appearance since hey, some tank is better than no tank

5) lesser-tier tanks are slowly knocked out as well and the last bit of prime infantry gets chewed up as well

6) prime armor usually arrives in town at this stage in the battle from a resupply convoy (from either side), assuming it wasn't interdicted in an ambush

7) prime armor get eventually knocked out, all prime infantry is eliminated and the battle is down to rifles

8) one side or the other essentially runs out of supply and the town falls

 

Personally when I think of WWIIOL battles these are the ones I enjoyed the most and what I envision when I think of a classic battle. I'm sure many players will have criticism of this but I personally enjoyed it more than the endless brigade cycling we have now. At various stages of the battle there was something for everyone. The tankers had their day in the sun early on, infantry at a point get to fight it out, guys try to resupply the front and you have the enemy trying to cut off resupply routes.

IIRC "back in the day" there was something like ~25 tanks per town. I may be mistaken but I am going off pure memory since I specifically remember for our armored columns we had to pull supply from multiple towns, one, even if it had full supply, wasn't enough. The numbers can always be adjusted up or down as needed for balance/unit pricing/player preferences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Bmbm said:

The pendulum swings. In tier 2 and 3, as war production swings into high gear and doctrine changes to more supporting armor (TD) with the infantry, the German infantry brigades will pack more punch. All factions get an equal number of infantry and armor brigades. I agree that more separate armor brigades would be a nice touch. 

It's rather hard <duh> to reconcile all the accumulated complaints/suggestions/wishes from all quarters over the entire history of this game in a single go. For years people have complained about there being too many tanks in play; of never-ending supply that rotates in and out; of no room for inf-on-inf fights; of no way to get the ATG game going; of camps, campathons and campfests (usually with tanks); of lack of rear area action; of musings over tank columns... you name it. Now we did try to merge as much of that as possible with the differentiated brigades and it turns out... people really didn't want that? Or is it just the vocal minority we're hearing?

When 1.36 comes along all of this will change again. Exactly how is yet to be determined but the term "swamped with tanks" comes to mind.

grunts (infantry) complain - its what they do. talking sins of the past here - grunts have been listened too more often than the motor pool or hangar folks. things have been changed over the years to cater towards this chorus of complaints - IMO to the detriment of the game as a whole. now those whiny brats are whining about population as a whole and that one or two squads swapping sides seems to move the map.

back in the day, the population as a whole was SIGNIFICANTLY better when AOs were 'swamped with tanks' and the cries of 'airquake' echoed these here halls. agree? disagree? not that we didn't have over pop issues then, as well as other issues - merely that we had a LOT more players when the vehicle play was strongest. 

my opinion, we need to cater to what this game engine and its technical limitations have always done best, vehicle play. infantry have received the bulk of the love over the past decade and we are where we are - again - MY OPINION and lots of "sins of the past" here but this is how I see it.

infantry are fodder, bring back strong vehicle play.

 

*edit* 9 days in 15 people have the requisite =>50 sorties to make the top tanker list, 18 for fighter list, 5 for the bomber list. 'back in the day' these lists would have been a LOT longer at this point in the campaign.

2 people like this

Share this post


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

With town based supply there will be a natural flow to the battle that hasn't really been seen by many players unless they were here for the pre-ToE era in 2006. Excluding armor precamps which are much harder to do now with depot spawning, AB table timers, etc. the general sequence of events for a town falling was something like this (not that AB capture and victory/defeat can happen at any stage, but usually it was stage 6/7 or 8, less commonly stage 3):

1) prime armor/ATG/infantry spawn to assault the town

2) battle see-saws back and forth as armor gets knocked out and more armor comes in

3) infantry-focused push as all prime tanks have been knocked out

4) lesser-tier tanks start making an appearance since hey, some tank is better than no tank

5) lesser-tier tanks are slowly knocked out as well and the last bit of prime infantry gets chewed up as well

6) prime armor usually arrives in town at this stage in the battle from a resupply convoy (from either side), assuming it wasn't interdicted in an ambush

7) prime armor get eventually knocked out, all prime infantry is eliminated and the battle is down to rifles

8) one side or the other essentially runs out of supply and the town falls

 

Personally when I think of WWIIOL battles these are the ones I enjoyed the most and what I envision when I think of a classic battle. I'm sure many players will have criticism of this but I personally enjoyed it more than the endless brigade cycling we have now. At various stages of the battle there was something for everyone. The tankers had their day in the sun early on, infantry at a point get to fight it out, guys try to resupply the front and you have the enemy trying to cut off resupply routes.

IIRC "back in the day" there was something like ~25 tanks per town. I may be mistaken but I am going off pure memory since I specifically remember for our armored columns we had to pull supply from multiple towns, one, even if it had full supply, wasn't enough. The numbers can always be adjusted up or down as needed for balance/unit pricing/player preferences.

I hated and despised the crass systemic attrition.  Count me out on that aspect of the 'good ol days'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Might just be the vocal minority, who knows. Anyways, I didn't mean more tanks, only the same number divvied a bit more. A gruppe with fewer tanks isn't after all as much of a campfest in the making. And, although I get the inf vs inf thing, one may still sympathize with gerry because fighting against a large group of Matildas ain't exactly inf vs inf.

Good luck CRS, it is tough trying to please everyone.

 

 

 

 

Edited by blggles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep at it BMBM, this isn't easy. Overall, I think the more realistic changes are great. It just seems that there are a few out there only do X when there are A,B,C,D,E,F,G.... and so on to do in game. These players seem to get upset when anything that effects them changes. It is completely impossible to please everyone. Make a plan and stick to it. In the long run, it will pay off when you are looking at the game as a whole.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree @raptor34, with the realistic TOE and changes offers something more that you just don't get in any other shooter, let alone an mmo. The difficulty is, we, the player base seem to have an unprecedented access to the devs that you just wouldn't have if this was a EA game or any other big developer. This means the few who complain about not having a big enough advantage, or want both sides to be equal equipment wise or just want to play that one specific class no matter what think they should be listened too without looking at the bugger picture, or without concidering what their side requires to win, just that they want to play smg/lmgonly, or want to have panzer every time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎24‎/‎01‎/‎2019 at 11:38 PM, raptor34 said:

Keep at it BMBM, ,,,,,,. Make a plan and stick to it. In the long run, it will pay off when you are looking at the game as a whole.  

Yeah? He already posted in this thread that they are going to have to change it all again for 1.36. 

So what was the point of making players quit, or feel, they were being unfairly treated by CRS (whether they are right or not is irrelevant, it is afterall what they "feel") and filling side chat with negative game and CRS comments? Because players who stopped playing years ago complained about there being any panzers to spawn? Complaints about "too many tanks", mean the 2019 fix is no panzers, huge non historical numbers of matties, and R35s for the french?

And T2 is here and still not a single panzer to spawn in an axis inf flag.

 

S! Ian

Share this post


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

Yeah? He already posted in this thread that they are going to have to change it all again for 1.36. 

So what was the point of making players quit, or feel, they were being unfairly treated by CRS (whether they are right or not is irrelevant, it is afterall what they "feel") and filling side chat with negative game and CRS comments? Because players who stopped playing years ago complained about there being any panzers to spawn? Complaints about "too many tanks", mean the 2019 fix is no panzers, huge non historical numbers of matties, and R35s for the french?

And T2 is here and still not a single panzer to spawn in an axis inf flag.

 

S! Ian

Again this was testing something new for 1.36  with garrisons and the movable brigades.

This has also been asked for by the playerbase for a long time. So we decided to try this. It also changes things up a bit and keeps the game from being stale and boring. 

Again we are monitoring both sides of the equation on both sides. 

4 people like this

Share this post


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

And T2 is here and still not a single panzer to spawn in an axis inf flag.

The T0 Germans believed in concentrating their tanks in tank divisions. Infantry divisions had self propelled guns, i.e. StuGs, which were armored SP versions of the standard infantry iG18 cannon.

The T0 British and French believed in having slow, heavily armored tanks for the infantry and fast, lightly armored tanks for the cavalry. They hadn't fully come around yet to recognizing that specialized tank divisions were more than infantry breakthrough support or cavalry for recon and breakthrough exploitation. 

The mid-war Germans moved somewhat away from their early philosophy, putting tanks in more types of formations. 

The late-war British moved somewhat away from their early philosophy, converging their infantry and cavalry tanks into a common type.

I appreciate that this is a game, but isn't it supposed to be about WWII? The reason the early British and French don't have dive bombers, or 800rpm LMGs, or 88mm-gun tanks is because historically they didn't. That seems like a workable design principle to me.

Edited by jwilly
3 people like this

Share this post


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

The T0 Germans believed in concentrating their tanks in tank divisions. Infantry divisions had self propelled guns, i.e. StuGs, which were armored SP versions of the standard infantry iG18 cannon.

The T0 British and French believed in having slow, heavily armored tanks for the infantry and fast, lightly armored tanks for the cavalry. They hadn't fully come around yet to recognizing that specialized tank divisions were more than infantry breakthrough support or cavalry for recon and breakthrough exploitation. 

The mid-war Germans moved somewhat away from their early philosophy, putting tanks in more types of formations. 

The late-war British moved somewhat away from their early philosophy, converging their infantry and cavalry tanks into a common type.

I appreciate that this is a game, but isn't it supposed to be about WWII? The reason the early British and French don't have dive bombers, or 800rpm LMGs, or 88mm-gun tanks is because historically they didn't. That seems like a workable design principle to me.

Spot on.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

La belle France needs her dive bombers: LN-401, Vought Vindicator. Just give the Germans plenty of aaa to help make us forget again.

Heck, even the Breguet 691 could dive at 70 degrees or so. I remember a history of them taking out a temporary bridge doing just that.

Des bombardiers en pique pour tous.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, blggles said:

La belle France needs her dive bombers: LN-401, Vought Vindicator. Just give the Germans plenty of aaa to help make us forget again.

Heck, even the Breguet 691 could dive at 70 degrees or so. I remember a history of them taking out a temporary bridge doing just that.

Des bombardiers en pique pour tous.

I didn't mean to give short shrift to the planes that did exist and could have been available in greater numbers and more used in those roles...but historically they were little used, and not really doctrinally integrated.

Same as historically the French would have had S40 tanks if the attack had come in the Fall, and B1(ter) tanks if it'd come in the Winter...and the British would have fielded towed 6 pounders and 6 pounder armed cruisers if the attack had come in the late Fall.

The point however was in regard to German, French and British doctrine and organizations as of May.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats fair enough. When you can't model everything, the normative, the iconic, and the useful development wise, must be prioritized. Its a bit sad though, as someone who has played mostly French, from a gameplay perspective the eclectic nature of the French kit is a significant part of its 'charm'. A little bit of this, a little bit of that. A nation caught between the past and future. Though all armies and air forces had a certain variety of secondary platforms, the hodge podge seems more essentially French for that moment in time, and so having a little bit of this and a little bit of that in their forces seems to more properly capture their state of affairs, and the challenge they faced. 

 

Edited by blggles

Share this post


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

Thats fair enough. When you can't model everything, the normative, the iconic, and the useful development wise, must be prioritized. Its a bit sad though, as someone who has played mostly French, from a gameplay perspective the eclectic nature of the French kit is a significant part of its 'charm'. A little bit of this, a little bit of that. A nation caught between the past and future. Though all armies and air forces had a certain variety of secondary platforms, the hodge podge seems more essentially French for that moment in time, and so having a little bit of this and a little bit of that in their forces seems to more properly capture their state of affairs, and the challenge they faced. 

 

Agree. It’s one of the reasons I find WW2OL so interesting, what other game (other than strategy games) covers the 1940s Battle of France? The French in particular are under represented. If it was up to me I’d model everything I could and do a proper simulation of the Battle of France. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/24/2019 at 0:56 PM, Kilemall said:

I hated and despised the crass systemic attrition.  Count me out on that aspect of the 'good ol days'.

I hated the fun gameplay and massive battles too. Near zero in game population with no hope of attrition is much better. 

Share this post


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

I hated the fun gameplay and massive battles too. Near zero in game population with no hope of attrition is much better. 

One of these days you guys are gonna get that a lot of what drove those huge populations was that there was nothing like it in existence, and the stupid attrition model was boring by 2004 because the battles always ran the same way.

I do agree that there is a market for people showing up and doing the same thing over and over to set up and Pearl Harbor hapless defenders, but I don't have to respect it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.