Jump to content
Welcome to the virtual battlefield, Guest!

World War II Online is a Massively Multiplayer Online First Person Shooter based in Western Europe between 1939 and 1943. Through land, sea, and air combat using a ultra-realistic game engine, combined with a strategic layer, in the largest game world ever created - We offer the best WWII simulation experience around.

sydspain

Tz3 should have only 1 AO

Recommended Posts

sydspain

Doesn't make any sense to have 15 people online and 4 objectives...having two AOs on tz3 makes it too easy to roll for the overpop side

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kgarner

yeah i agree..... its better to funnel light pop into a single place..... there isn't enough players to be scattered over 2 ao's 2 do's 2-7 fb's 15-25 cps 4-10 bunkers...... just doesn't make sense.  More attention needs to be made to cohesiveness .... right now there are so many objectives its hard to get enough people together to focus on anything specific.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kgarner

or more than likely..... all the allies will be attacking in 1 town..... all the axis will be attacking in 1 town....... and none of the PB will even kill eachother :-o 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ZEBBEEE

15 players online could ideally be fighting in a single AO, indeed: most populated side attacking, least populated side defending.

That could become possible with population triggered AOs.

However it is just a matter of communication and coordination. Proximity based AOs won’t solve that issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
undercova

just confirms my thread

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kilemall
On 4/9/2019 at 5:01 AM, undercova said:

just confirms my thread

 

I would agree that Frankfurt runs are more viable, but so are Zees flanking to UK factories, the functional equivalent, and Frankfurt is just 1 factory loss, hurts more when it was lost for brigade reentry, now that is less of an issue too.

 

And I think one of the things about the limited division supply is that long snakes are more vulnerable to being cut unless the snake side puts most of their divisions into the snake- if they don't one division should be sufficient to cap the snake head or cut it, if they do that opens up opportunities elsewhere and Frankfurt is more a morale risk not a real supply problem.

 

Which begs the question, what is the resupply timer for this test?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kilemall

Oh, and ya, 2 AOs in zeropop is an overpop gift without stringent PN, which I think is flawed ATM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mosizlak

Again, this situation was solved already, and the Rats are putting the problem right back into the game, for some insane reason. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Which begs the question, what is the resupply timer for this test?

12 hrs in beta, so unchanged.

 

21 hours ago, Kilemall said:

Oh, and ya, 2 AOs in zeropop is an overpop gift without stringent PN, which I think is flawed ATM.

Yeah I was surprised by the 2nd AO as well. I think that in very low pop when their is no neutrality this will make rolls worse.

Edited by aismov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Silky

I guess the thinking is that if you remove the map catastrophe element from overpop tz3 roll, it’s less of a problem 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aismov

I guess lets try it out for at least a tier or two when the real campaign starts and see what happens. I don't think you can completely trust what happens currently in beta now since most players are just messing around with units and not really playing "for the win."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aismov

It's still BETA, but it's running as a mock real campaign.

One thing that I was thinking about that will help late night rolls in the change where capping the bunker really does nothing except shut down tank spawning. I think this is a bigger deal than we all think since before all you needed to do was cap the bunker and rush the linking CP and [censored] down any enemy spawning in town since you booted the brigade flag.

Now you need to capture everything.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
delems

Much as at times I think we should only have 1 AO too- we need to keep 2 AOs at all times minimum.

Let's grow into it?

Now, we might make it harder to move to 3 AOs; but 2 AOs minimum creates even playing field 24x7.

Share this post


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

Now, we might make it harder to move to 3 AOs; but 2 AOs minimum creates even playing field 24x7.

You're going to have to justify that one.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
delems

Actually - maybe 2 AOs doesn't mean as much now as before.

The problem with 1 AO limit before was axis got 1 AO 21 hours day; then the 3 hours game went to 2 AOs, allies were op and they would soft cap flanks.

Something axis could never do when they were over pop as there was just 1 AO.

But, with no soft cap flanking / cleaning up towns needed anymore....

Maybe, just maybe, having 1 AO during axis op and 2 AOs during allied op won't matter as much.

Though, it will still allow allies to fast switch when they op but not allow axis to do it.

I say stay with 2 AOs minimum and let's grow our pop into it.

Edited by delems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kilemall

Big difference between the two- PN as presently constituted seems to work better with larger populations.

Share this post


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

Big difference between the two- PN as presently constituted seems to work better with larger populations.

Yep. Its much easier to defend if you are 80 vs. 100 rather than 16 vs 20. It a certain population level the marginal benefit of one extra infantry player becomes relatively low. You can even say it can be counter productive if you think to the times you have the numbers but there are 5+ infantry stacking the bunker to defend it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
catfive
On 4/11/2019 at 9:08 PM, Silky said:

I guess the thinking is that if you remove the map catastrophe element from overpop tz3 roll, it’s less of a problem 

 

 

There is some value in that comment I believe. Sure it means an overpop TZ3 is definitely capping towns but not walking through 10 of them in a snake any longer most likely (or is this still possible under 1.36?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jet2019

I fear you still do not understand how low tz3 population currently is. In my prime time (GMT +10), we have 5 to maybe 10 players online most nights other than the weekends.

The algorithms CRS uses clearly fail at these extreme low pop numbers, BUT, the worst part is a lot are dual accounts.  They try to be in two places at once AND artificially inflate our real numbers. 

How do you propose we get more players in tz3 when we struggle to defend one town, let alone the two proposed for the real campaign. A new player will always gravitate to the "winning" side in the timezone they play in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kilemall
20 minutes ago, catfive said:

There is some value in that comment I believe. Sure it means an overpop TZ3 is definitely capping towns but not walking through 10 of them in a snake any longer most likely (or is this still possible under 1.36?)

Of course it's possible, the difference is that the snake is more defensible with the ability to spawn in at the head of the snake in each town, and counterattack supply on either side of the snake rather then only specific towns the cutting divisions have got to.

 

Flip side is snake people get a fresh new spawnlist at each new town along the way.

Edited by Kilemall
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
delems

We need to keep growing our pop - stay at 2 AOs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mosizlak

No, 2 AOs during ultra low pop is a disaster, proven time and time again. 

You'll lose more people than you gain. You can't "grow into it" when the bulk of you players log in and see half the map gone because 15 people beat up on 5. 

"Grow into it" is a fairy tale, wishful thinking at it's worst. 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jet2019

Please @delems I have fought with and against you. I fear this is delusional thinking at best, and in the long run will hurt CRS more. 

Share this post


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

No, 2 AOs during ultra low pop is a disaster, proven time and time again. 

You'll lose more people than you gain. You can't "grow into it" when the bulk of you players log in and see half the map gone because 15 people beat up on 5. 

"Grow into it" is a fairy tale, wishful thinking at it's worst. 

 

agree. either: 

1. go Proximity AOs only Tz3 with stringent number requirement for AOs (ie. 10/20 players to 'earn' a tz3 AO overpop/scale for underpop)
2. one AO Tz3 and/or 
3. incent players to play TZ3 (all unit access / double rank points for underpop/even a lowprice tz3 time restricted sub) 

Share this post


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

3. incent players to play TZ3 (all unit access / double rank points for underpop/even a lowprice tz3 time restricted sub) 

Not a bad idea actually. Should get some serious looking into. Not sure if that is technically possible without someone manually having to flip a switch at 1 AM eastern time though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...