sydspain

These timers are killing the fun

57 posts in this topic

Capture timers are too long for the actual population...it worked great on these two past events where we had good numbers, but with the real population of the game 6-9 minute timers are not working. Nobody wants to attack, axis and allies stays on defense all day, today we had about 7-8 hours of non ews or light ews on AOs.

On axis side we are always the same 3-4 guys driving frus and attacking, I've spend 22 hours this campaign driving opels... On defense I can not defend like I would like (checking cps), because if I do allies would be unable to cap a single cp...sometimes I have to let allies cap a spawn so we can have some action, it's really sad but (with the exception of first week of campaign and two last events)  I feel like every day is intermission.

We need 4 or 3 minutes capture timers, and maybe 20 minutes until ab can be captured instead of 10...

Edited by sydspain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck. There's a vehemently obstinate sub-population loving hours of inactivity.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm advocating for this too. Couldn't agree more.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol try to get some action yesterday at ninove and within 1 minute of ao dropping and my ms going up min distance so we can get “action” syds was sniping green tags at the ms...in other words he is causing the same problem he complaining about which is fine but a bit hypocritical....to be fair i agree with him attacking is way too much of a chore and work in higher pop times

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not hypocritical, it's the way the game is supposed to be played.

Like people complaining about killing trucks with the long timers. "Just leave them to set up" and "let them into the CP" doesn't fly in-game.

Share this post


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

Lol try to get some action yesterday at ninove and within 1 minute of ao dropping and my ms going up min distance so we can get “action” syds was sniping green tags at the ms...in other words he is causing the same problem he complaining about which is fine but a bit hypocritical....to be fair i agree with him attacking is way too much of a chore and work in higher pop times

Players doing a good defense searching for efrus with a rifle is not a problem against "action"...the same way spawning a sherman and suppress efrus like you did in Gerardsbergen is not the problem either

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree timers are an issue also maybe ews should  not go off till timers pass on ao in other words more fog of war so good players like syd arent on top of the attack before it even gets going which brings more action to the game yes and other players and noobs actually get to see the game at its finest where bullets wizzing both ways and fights happen like players capping a spawn

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that was all common with the inf spawn and 3-5min timers.

getting a town contested and fighting street to street is more of a anomaly than regular gameplay these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there is something wrong with the cap timers- absolutely should be long but only in 2:1 or greater total pop, and I don't think it's doing that.  If I understand the previous comments on the calc properly, BOTH overpop and underpop can get fast cap timers or slow, and out of sync with what we know the pop ratio situation to be.

 

Oh, and Syd beyond such an AB timer, which basically says overpop beats supply to death if cap timers are sped up, what do you propose to put the underpop on even terms?

 

 

Edited by Kilemall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps if he died when u shot him things might be different

2 people like this

Share this post


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

that was all common with the inf spawn and 3-5min timers.

getting a town contested and fighting street to street is more of a anomaly than regular gameplay these days.

It started when they removed 1 minute cap timer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree.........timers need tweaking.  

Attacking is a lot harder than turtling, even with the most recent adjustments to FMS and letting them be closer.  A closer FMS does not make an attack more successful.  The time to cap is too long right now.

Share this post


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

It started when they removed 1 minute cap timer.

im talking about the constant and relentless back and forth captures, and overrunning fighting defenders.

the 1min timers were more battles on rails, everything fell like a house of cards in a predictable pattern.

 

the inf spawn was able to simulate waves of attacks, it was easy enough to find and kill, but unlike the truck spawns destroying them didn't end the attack but allowed the defenders a break and preparation for the next wave.

 

 

this isn't a thread to talk about spawns, sorry op

 

the overpop 8min timer vs 30s is way too extreme, arcadey as hell too. its like underpop get a "very easy mode"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree... decrease capture timers. Yes, we will see more see-sawing of the spawnable CP (like we commonly did back in the day when we had faster timers). But that is not necessarily a bad thing. Increase the time for the AB bunker hot timer in severe underpop times so that you don't get crazy map rolls.

Especially with 1.36 Open Beta coming, I say we just open up the entire beta for F2P to have access to all weapons, a welcome back soldier program for the full duration of the Beta, and lets adjust the cap timers to see what happens.

Share this post


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

Players doing a good defense searching for efrus with a rifle is not a problem against "action"...the same way spawning a sherman and suppress efrus like you did in Gerardsbergen is not the problem either

It actually is a problem.  When more people focus on defense than offense, it leads to stale, boring gameplay.  

 

Why don't you like to spend most of your time attacking?  The answer to that question, whatever it is, will be pretty telling if you take a step back and think about it.  

Share this post


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

When more people focus on defense than offense, it leads to stale, boring gameplay.  

Why don't you like to spend most of your time attacking?  The answer to that question, whatever it is, will be pretty telling if you take a step back and think about it.  

These definitely are psychologically interesting statements.

In a zero sum conflict system like warfare, on average, attack and defense must be of equal objective value.

If one is stale and boring and the other is rewarding, factors other than objective value must be in play.

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

These definitely are psychologically interesting statements.

In a zero sum conflict system like warfare, on average, attack and defense must be of equal objective value.

If one is stale and boring and the other is rewarding, factors other than objective value must be in play.

If I'm running a side old school HC style, I want 70% of people on attack and 30% on defense.  That's for several reasons, attack creates content and after all is the only way to actually win, It is harder, but in general one has to EXPECT it is going to be harder, with the spawn castles if nothing else.  That's why I want so many on the attack.

So in my doctrine effective defense stymies enemy attacks at a 2:1, should if skill is equal, and another reason for allowing the enemy some ground, I want the enemy out of the way and predictably attacking where we can manage them, it's EASIER for our attackers to get in and take things if the enemy is split and on attacks and preferably two defenses.

The turtle payoff of course is a higher attrition rate of attacking forces coupled with relative ease of spawning out your front porch and get into a battle.

 

TBH of course I have often concentrated on D if I was running the map.  But that's usually because I didn't have a squad or other HC to run the map, and the time I usually played (1030 Central on to midnight or 1) I was often cleaning up messes from risky moves during primetime and no guarantee of relief if I took chances.

 

Share this post


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

It actually is a problem.  When more people focus on defense than offense, it leads to stale, boring gameplay.  

 

Why don't you like to spend most of your time attacking?  The answer to that question, whatever it is, will be pretty telling if you take a step back and think about it.  

If you capco are trying to say that Syd prefers to defend ... nothing is further from reality, he is one of the most offensive players with whom I have played.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, goreblimey said:

Perhaps if he died when u shot him things might be different

An Allied "Deputy Chief of Staff " throwing accusations of cheating.....That's how maps are won, chapeau. 

Save your frustration to harangue your troops in the side channel. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

So in my doctrine effective defense stymies enemy attacks at a 2:1

the timers and necessary manpower often force a 4:1 or 5:1 though.

it really is a who blinks first situation, where the attackers need overwhelming superiority ignoring a DO in the process, then finding the ignored DO.

my experience in the past few months has been 4/5 towns taken with no defenders.


 

on the ratios:

1. side A's AO dies

2. side A can easily work 2 DO's and 1 AO.

3. side B's AO dies

4. side B moves to their DO's for easy wins.

5. side A's AO dies

etc

 

it just keeps spiraling into that 3 battle stalemate, unless a DO is ignored making the battle a softcap

 

 

and tz2 is suffering hard, they never had us prime time's pop, but the game was playable. the ratios fall apart completely when one side only has 1 AO.

Edited by major0noob

Share this post


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

It actually is a problem.  When more people focus on defense than offense, it leads to stale, boring gameplay.  

 

Why don't you like to spend most of your time attacking?  The answer to that question, whatever it is, will be pretty telling if you take a step back and think about it.  

 

7 hours ago, jwilly said:

These definitely are psychologically interesting statements.

In a zero sum conflict system like warfare, on average, attack and defense must be of equal objective value.

If one is stale and boring and the other is rewarding, factors other than objective value must be in play.

 

STEP BACK: 

1.  you die less when defending and can improve/magnify your K/D (for those players who play the K/D game) : you also have to physically do less: spawn, find a spot, snipe/kill / defend  >> THE REWARD:  successful defense // better KD

2. one dies proportionally more when attacking (other than in the case of a barracks/ab camp) hence k/d  usually lower; and/but one must do more: drive truck, or a tank or tow atgs, make fms, work way to town - more for players who play the cap a cp/cap a town/move the map game.  >>>THE REWARD:  cap a town

against any determined turtle defense; the attacking side must be:

> overpop or overpop at the AO
> and/or better organized and/or
> faster switchers (in the case of 2AOs)
> and/or a bit of all the above

what does it all mean? as Jwilly suggests: ask your shrink.

Image result for sexy psychiatrist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The timers are here for a reason, to replace spawn delay. This is not some kind of out of the blue mechanism that somehow made it into the game, but a result of years of discussions and complaints about SD and balance. I think two ao minimum will solve some of the problems. What always striked me most is, that you don't really have an advantage when capping with more people. Increasing the speed with more people should be changed first, if there are changes.

Edited by dpetraeus

Share this post


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

It actually is a problem.  When more people focus on defense than offense, it leads to stale, boring gameplay.  

 

Why don't you like to spend most of your time attacking?  The answer to that question, whatever it is, will be pretty telling if you take a step back and think about it.  

Well, in the case of me and my guys (the 8th Chasseurs--by the way, I'm resubscribed for another month, work permitting), we focus on defense because we are logged on during less-than-peak server times. So, attacks are usually not effective. They become frustrating as we usually capture a spawnable depot, only to be camped by the enemy and immediately recaptured due to a poor Allied response. We only focus on attack during peak server times when lots of Allies are online.

When you're down on numbers, defense is almost certainly more effective than offense. The only exception might be if you have a highly cohesive group of people--and I mean like 10 people--all on Discord, working tactically in a town. We average about 4 players at a time, which is not enough to make a huge difference.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, dpetraeus said:

The timers are here for a reason, to replace spawn delay. This is not some kind of out of the blue mechanism that somehow made it into the game, but a result of years of discussions and complaints about SD and balance. I think two ao minimum will solve some of the problems. What always striked me most is, that you don't really have an advantage when capping with more people. Increasing the speed with more people should be changed first, if there are changes.

But timers haven't replaced spawn delay; we have both. :mad:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The timers are bad by design

The whole point was to make slow and bad FPS gameplay in order to make the silly board game easier for HC to manage

When someone claims that the timers are good they are not ever referring to "good FPS gameplay" they mean that their roleplaying board game isn't upset by players actually playing a FPS (a good thing)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.