• Announcements

    • PITTPETE

      NEW Career Subscriptions now available   06/08/2019

      The all new highly anticipated / requested "Career Based Subscriptions" are available through www.WWIIONLINE.com/account only, starting at $9.99! There are three new subscriptions being added; 1) All Infantry at $9.99/mo, 2) All Air Forces at $9.99/mo, 3) All Ground Forces (Army Persona) at $12.99/mo. Continue reading to learn more and get back into the fight now! View the full article on battlegroundeurope.com
montyuno

Jumping the gun..... TOEs, armour, shields n such..

181 posts in this topic

There has been an enormous amount of change here over the last couple years and especially in the last few months..

What I would like to ask is everyone take a deep breath and look at things in total, big picture, the long game...

Much of what we see is good......!

Don't make rash decisions from well founded frustration..

After years of stagnation there are sure to be hurdles, bumps and worse...

Many of us have been here for years though understandable it seems a shame to bail now at possibly the cusp of great things...

I enjoy playing the mortar most, though armour (a subject for another time) is my first preference, the mortar has been rendered useless for a long time now, yep I am very very unhappy.. Even after the recent HE adjustment watching your rounds drop right in the middle of five EI aaand zip, nothing... Great... 

However I clearly see good things on the horizon.. So...

Yep agreed.. " ah need a IIIF ok .. OOH no 232s left and 2 StugBs hmmmm" That is rough...

I guess we need to look at the map a lil different and try n support Inf flags with armour flag till we see how this is or isn't working..

Yes there is much more that isn't right but there is a lot that is too...

We are seeing some new faces and some seem to be sticking around, lets not blow it..

Also we need to be a lil nicer to the new guys even though that can be rather challenging at times (understatement :D)...

Cheers Monty

 

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stagnation is the hardest to break, this is all new territory for everyone here. Trial and error, nothing is perfect the first time around.

Edited by knucks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Change isn't bad. 

It's bad when it's done too suddenly and poorly implemented with no thought to the consequences. Some of the changes are/were so obviously bad I couldn't believe they did it. 

Share this post


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

the mortar has been rendered useless for a long time now, yep I am very very unhappy.. Even after the recent HE adjustment watching your rounds drop right in the middle of five EI aaand zip, nothing... Great... 

Test somewhere with a buddy (if you don't trust offline testing with clones). Mortars now *actually work* (and nades do too), and are as realistic as can be hoped for. Again, show me the testing.

 

10 minutes ago, Mosizlak said:

Change isn't bad. 

It's bad when it's done too suddenly and poorly implemented with no thought to the consequences. Some of the changes are/were so obviously bad I couldn't believe they did it. 

The spawnlist changes this campaign are probably the single best decision I've seen made for this game in over 15 years. The problem is numbers-imbalance, exacerbated by loss of WHIPS and the (horrible) decision to cave in to Axis whining and neuter spawn delay. As I've said a million times, every other online PvP game has spawn delay timers (of up to 60 seconds!)...

2 people like this

Share this post


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

Test somewhere with a buddy (if you don't trust offline testing with clones). Mortars now *actually work* (and nades do too), and are as realistic as can be hoped for. Again, show me the testing.

 

The spawnlist changes this campaign are probably the single best decision I've seen made for this game in over 15 years. The problem is numbers-imbalance, exacerbated by loss of WHIPS and the (horrible) decision to cave in to Axis whining and neuter spawn delay. As I've said a million times, every other online PvP game has spawn delay timers (of up to 60 seconds!)...

Some of the changes, yes. Some, no. 

You can honestly say the SMG disparity was a great change? 

I'm not slagging everything, I think the armor changes are worth pursuing and testing out in the real campaign, , but the crazy disparity in SMGs was lunacy, and thank god they changed it. It was that bad. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Mosizlak said:

Some of the changes, yes. Some, no. 

You can honestly say the SMG disparity was a great change? 

I'm not slagging everything, I think the armor changes are worth pursuing and testing out in the real campaign, , but the crazy disparity in SMGs was lunacy, and thank god they changed it. It was that bad. 

Aye.  The armor concept is worth tinkering with and fine tuning (the number of Matties is still shocking to me lol). 

 

But I believe the SMG idea would still have been bad even in a more balanced-pop campaign.  I saw @Bmbmsay he thinks the Allies could have done fine with those lists with balanced pop if they used LMGs to cut CPs and support their riflemen, but I'm not so sure.  

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Mosizlak said:

Some of the changes, yes. Some, no. 

You can honestly say the SMG disparity was a great change? 

I'm not slagging everything, I think the armor changes are worth pursuing and testing out in the real campaign, , but the crazy disparity in SMGs was lunacy, and thank god they changed it. It was that bad. 

What do you expect when RATs post about "fun" and say that smg play is just "bumrushing" CPs and not fun? The only actual thing that directly moves the map and wins the campaign is guarding and capturing, and it is the aspect least liked/appreciated by some of those making these key choices for all of us. We cannot help but have our own bias and preferences, but we need to guard against them and try to listen when others suggest we are wrong.

My personal bias is wanting the chance to spawn a panzer - just been in game Axis AO with three links and not one panzer available to spawn, just assault guns and 232s - now with the extra smgs instead of panzers I should have been happy for team axis, but the winning and losing of the map is secondary to me, yes winning the map is fun, but we play day after day, and no panzer fun day after day is just a waste of my time/money.

RATS who openly say their "fun" is setting up air missions to Vulch an enemy AF should not be dictating the ground game imho, and telling those who disagree to suck it up and drive from another town.

And FYI I had about 800 CAPs last map so I dont just sit in a panzer gripping my joystick :) 

 

S! Ian.

Edited by ian77
2 people like this

Share this post


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

Aye.  The armor concept is worth tinkering with and fine tuning (the number of Matties is still shocking to me lol). 

It's sad and not funny at all.

Share this post


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

Aye.  The armor concept is worth tinkering with and fine tuning (the number of Matties is still shocking to me lol). 

 

But I believe the SMG idea would still have been bad even in a more balanced-pop campaign.  I saw @Bmbmsay he thinks the Allies could have done fine with those lists with balanced pop if they used LMGs to cut CPs and support their riflemen, but I'm not so sure.  

Agree there is no way to know how this would really has played out. As someone that plays almost exclusively rifle when I go infantry a lot of what posters here were saying is "impossible" if been doing for 18 years. Yeah it's harder but not the disaster that it was made out to be. The sheer numbers was more of issue.

If the spawn tables were turned but numbers stayed the same I highly doubt the outcome would have been much different.

Case in point the Matty numbers.

If Allies had the numbers there is no way you would be able to stop an Allied division without very intricate defences and serious coordinator.

3 people like this

Share this post


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

Agree there is no way to know how this would really has played out. As someone that plays almost exclusively rifle when I go infantry a lot of what posters here were saying is "impossible" if been doing for 18 years. Yeah it's harder but not the disaster that it was made out to be. The sheer numbers was more of issue.

If the spawn tables were turned but numbers stayed the same I highly doubt the outcome would have been much different.

Case in point the Matty numbers.

If Allies had the numbers there is no way you would be able to stop an Allied division without very intricate defences and serious coordinator.

Agree as well. I'm in line with BMBM on this that with proper numbers and cooperation, the allies would be fine even without the same SMG numbers. Area capture mechanics would again reduce the need to focus so much on SMGs and put more weight on longer-ranged weapons and support. For my own experience, I'm far more likely to do well with a Bren or rifle than an SMG, it is a very limited weapon overall, other than in CQB. 

Share this post


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

Aye.  The armor concept is worth tinkering with and fine tuning (the number of Matties is still shocking to me lol). 

 

But I believe the SMG idea would still have been bad even in a more balanced-pop campaign.  I saw @Bmbmsay he thinks the Allies could have done fine with those lists with balanced pop if they used LMGs to cut CPs and support their riflemen, but I'm not so sure.  

I wonder if they guy who said that about cutting CPs with an LMG actually plays the game, cause it's ifffy at best. Sure, some CPs are extremely cut-able, while most are not. What happens when you get to those CPs? Or, shock, the attacker uses smoke? 

Just not well thought out at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and if LMGs were something you could pick up to maintain the ZoC ... IRL if the LMG gunner was hit, someone else would take over asap.

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

and if LMGs were something you could pick up to maintain the ZoC ... IRL if the LMG gunner was hit, someone else would take over asap.

Only another argument for new capabilities in a new engine development.  

Share this post


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

and if LMGs were something you could pick up to maintain the ZoC ... IRL if the LMG gunner was hit, someone else would take over asap.

Plus there's no suppression from LMG fire. Other games do it well, this one doesn't at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

shouldn't require a new engine. honestly, the 64bit re-write will allow the coders to get quite intimate with the dark inner workings of Unity 1.0. Things that had no inline comments/documentation, likely are getting them. Places where things could improve will be discovered. Point being, once you spend all the time making the executable run in 64bit, with all that entails, puts you in a really good position to make significant updates down the road. really is no reason ww2ol 2.0 can't be running on an updated (significantly) version of what we have now.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Mosizlak said:

I wonder if they guy who said that about cutting CPs with an LMG actually plays the game, cause it's ifffy at best. Sure, some CPs are extremely cut-able, while most are not. What happens when you get to those CPs? Or, shock, the attacker uses smoke? 

Just not well thought out at all. 

By his own admission he doesnt like the "smg bumrushing CPs" aspect of the game because he isnt very good at it, and so he doesnt play it. fair play to him, that is real honesty. S!

Just another example of someone on these forums who does not play a particular aspect of the game, but they love dictating how others who do play that part of the game should go about doing it - only this guy is a RAT and has the power to change our game.

I am amazed the disciples of "driving in a lorryload of inf was so much more fun" did not tell the allies to spawn smgs at a back town and drive them to the DO!  (It goes without saying that setting an FMS from a back town would be downright blasphemy!! :) )

 

S! ian

Edited by ian77
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Mosizlak said:

Plus there's no suppression from LMG fire. Other games do it well, this one doesn't at all. 

If you got real suppression, derived from actual troop tests and including HE, you would complain to the ends of time. You would be forced to go to ground duck and cover against your will - frequently. In reality that's exactly what would happen as there is no respawn...you have but one life...but I'm going to play the community's own words back - 'it's a game, I want fun, and I don't want to be constrained in game play.' 

Im sitting on real world suppression data...

If I ever used it the rage would be enormous...and no...I haven't seen a game yet that does suppression that mirrors the actual test data...anywhere. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, scotsman said:

If you got real suppression, derived from actual troop tests and including HE, you would complain to the ends of time. You would be forced to go to ground duck and cover against your will - frequently. In reality that's exactly what would happen as there is no respawn...you have but one life...but I'm going to play the community's own words back - 'it's a game, I want fun, and I don't want to be constrained in game play.' 

Im sitting on real world suppression data...

If I ever used it the rage would be enormous...and no...I haven't seen a game yet that does suppression that mirrors the actual test data...anywhere. 

 

Share this post


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

I am amazed the disciples of "driving in a lorryload of inf was so much more fun" did not tell the allies to spawn smgs at a back town and drive them to the DO!  (It goes without saying that setting an FMS from a back town would be downright blasphemy!! :) )

They did, or tried.
You know, no one took up the offer? aside from a few green tags that spawned rifles, probably due to being lost.
Perhaps you could have maybe logged in and helped out? Jokur would have probably appreciated it

Share this post


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

because real life combat isn't fun. games need to be fun.

Then you and Moz need to have a chat...one guy saying we should have it and another not...which way should crs go?

Share this post


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

 

See madrebel' comment - it's a game and that isn't fun - so who is right? 

Share this post


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

because real life combat isn't fun. games need to be fun.

Death and suppression in about equal measures were the historical functions of the LMG weapon class, and all artillery and mortar weapons.

If you were in the field of fire of such a weapon, you were either suppressed or dead.

Make the weapons work realistically. Then players that don't want realistic effects (either death or suppression) applied to them, shouldn't put themselves in front of those weapons.

Share this post


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

See madrebel' comment - it's a game and that isn't fun - so who is right? 

That's an easy one...me.  S!

Share this post


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

Death and suppression in about equal measures were the historical functions of the LMG weapon class, and all artillery and mortar weapons.

If you were in the field of fire of such a weapon, you were either suppressed or dead.

Make the weapons work realistically. Then players that don't want realistic effects (either death or suppression) applied to them, shouldn't put themselves in front of those weapons.

no. make the ballistics correct. make the HE correct. do NOT punish players with otherwise realistic supression effects ... because nobody would be left playing the damn game.

pull your head out - video games a form of escapist entertainment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.