sydspain

Tz3 should have only 1 AO

204 posts in this topic

5 hours ago, matamor said:

Axis can hardly cap one outside white night walkers no pop zone, what is the issue?

Campaign 161

Captured towns on Tz1:  Axis: 58  / Allies: 23

Captured towns on Tz2:  Axis: 65 / Allies: 27

Captured towns on Tz3:  Axis 63 / Allies; 29

Share this post


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

Campaign 161

Captured towns on Tz1:  Axis: 58  / Allies: 23

Captured towns on Tz2:  Axis: 65 / Allies: 27

Captured towns on Tz3:  Axis 63 / Allies; 29

Ty info. Perhaps some of the deep thinkers in this thread as it relates to TZ3 will actually compare real results in different TZs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To determine the issue, you have to ask what the intent of the two AO minimum was. I can only guess, that there are too many instances at least in my experience, where the map is absolutely dead. AOs have no FBs, HC takes ages to get new AO going or is not on. 

Share this post


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

Campaign 161

Captured towns on Tz1:  Axis: 58  / Allies: 23

Captured towns on Tz2:  Axis: 65 / Allies: 27

Captured towns on Tz3:  Axis 63 / Allies; 29

That was almost two months ago..:mellow:

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

Campaign 161

Captured towns on Tz1:  Axis: 58  / Allies: 23

Captured towns on Tz2:  Axis: 65 / Allies: 27

Captured towns on Tz3:  Axis 63 / Allies; 29

Where did you extract that info from, please? Can we do this for other campaigns?

Share this post


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

That was almost two months ago..:mellow:

 

1. so what? makes it invalid for analysis?
2. doubt it's much different in the last two months. 
3. doubt it was ever much different (for either side) when a side is i) overpop and/or ii) on a roll and/or iii) has its act together as they say

30 minutes ago, ZEBBEEE said:

Where did you extract that info from, please? Can we do this for other campaigns?

One can extract this info manually by using the current web map info but its a bit of work and must be kept up to date. Perhaps Wiretap or other programs have this info more easily available and/or stored. There are/were also a series of campaign videos  (up into the 70s I think) recorded in fast time showing map progress and town capture. These used to be i) posted on barracks ii) linked to the wiki and iii) available via the Campaign & Videos link on the old Battleground Tools site. Can someone resurrect this?

http://www.battlegroundtools.com/

http://www.battlegroundtools.com/documents/campaign.php

It even has the old original TZ parameters way back when we used to call them 'timeslots' (TS).

Eastern Standard Time GMT -5 

TS1       7:00AM       to      3:00PM
TS2       3:00PM       to      11:00PM
TS3       11:00PM       to      7:00AM
 

Older info may be available on the old Lagus OKW MapViewer but not currently functioning. 

Edited by sorella
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

when I spawn in and look at the state of the game "too much attacking" is not the thing that comes to mind, I don't know why players are complaining about AOs

HEAVY265 is the only HC online for axis and he won't even place the 2nd AO we're all just attacking Attigny

and why is anyone complaining about snakes and cut-offs? there is supplies in every town now

a cut-off was bad because of brigades, and there not being anything to spawn for the other time zones as all the brigades were in training

14 hours ago, catfive said:

Nope, snakes are still very possible as seen overnight. at 2 AOs per side you have 2 unattacked AOs from the underpop and 2 heavy inf attacks from the overpop. Supply is irrelevant, the side being rolled will often lose towns with 'best in tier' tanks still in the list or at best dying the moment it spawns/rolls out of veh. Snakes are still very possible if you're simply underpop down to critical levels. Sure it is a little slower but it is not only still possible but still happening

"2 unattacked AOs from the underpop"

"2 heavy inf attacks from the overpop"

"side being rolled will often lose towns with 'best in tier' tanks still in the list"

lol quit beating around the bush and just say that allies are sitting in tanks on defense while axis are attacking with infantry

a prime attack is like 15 people at most, you can shut down a FMS with a F2P bolt rifle no one should be spawning tanks

if they do get in the depots then the "underpop" team (which in TZ3 actually only has a handful fewer people) get a massive capture boost 

what is the successful AO percentage, like 5%? the team that takes shots is going to eventually score goals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@sorella

Why bring up past data when 1.36 was just released?

Different game right now...

So how far can one go back to extract data to back up a statement?

Share this post


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

@sorella

Why bring up past data when 1.36 was just released?

Different game right now...

So how far can one go back to extract data to back up a statement?

Thanks to the brilliant > http://www.campaigncharts.com/  >> this info is available for right now if one wishes. (thanks choad!!!).  And I didn't make a statement really, just reiterated Syd's numbers on TZ captures.  I agree its a different game right now - but not that different -  in that TZ town capture numbers/ratios for or within a campaign might be similar or within a given range. 

1 hour ago, choad said:

http://www.campaigncharts.com

 

Tracks this data back to only campaign 158 i think.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorta have to agree with the one AO, especially if one side is overpop AND organized since you are attacking one town and as the AB is falling you AO the 2nd town and get opels running so that right when the AB is capped you already have a FMS set to go and players spawning to cap the town. It creates essentially an uncontrolled domino cascade of towns falling. I saw it happen last night and that was during US prime time where Allies traditionally have the population advantage.

Edited by aismov
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aismov, I usually agree with you on 99% of topics however here I must disagree. Most people in this thread and others discussing this topic over the years have always had the mindset of and from the overpop side, think about it from the underpop side for this scenario 

Let's say I am logged in during TZ3, we are outnumbered 3 to 1, we are gonna lose towns its a given. Am I just gonna to sit back in the bunker for 20 mins and wait to get overrun by 5-6 smgs, no i would not

Since I know its a given I am gonna lose some towns since we are outnumbered 3-1 why not try and cap another town away from them while their entire pb is attacking. With only 1 ao that overpop side can just put 1 guy in the spawn cp of that ao and pretty much shut down the low pop side from attacking, but if there are 2 aos it spreads the defense out even more though they drastically outnumber our low pop side. But it still makes them defend more ground thus removing players from attacking.

The 2 aos give me a better chance to set fms and perhaps cap a spawnable cp and then directing all our entire pb to that spawnable once capped. If over pop side stays on the attack, yes they will cap a town however the % increases of them also losing a town too. And with low pop quicker cap rates the chance of success increase even more.

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

Sorta have to agree with the one AO, especially if one side is overpop AND organized since you are attacking one town and as the AB is falling you AO the 2nd town and get opels running so that right when the AB is capped you already have a FMS set to go and players spawning to cap the town. It creates essentially an uncontrolled domino cascade of towns falling. I saw it happen last night and that was during US prime time where Allies traditionally have the population advantage.

there should always be action

this is also know as the "flow" in FPS games

leaders that put in the effort to have missions ready for average players to spawn at once the current mission is done is exactly what game leadership is

mandatory 10-30 minute down times after every battle just give everyone an opportunity to log off, how they became some kind of core game mechanic in WW2online is beyond me

Share this post


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

there should always be action

this is also know as the "flow" in FPS games

leaders that put in the effort to have missions ready for average players to spawn at once the current mission is done is exactly what game leadership is

mandatory 10-30 minute down times after every battle just give everyone an opportunity to log off, how they became some kind of core game mechanic in WW2online is beyond me

Oh I agree completely. But I think it becomes an issue during very low server populations where one hyper-organized group runs circles around another because they have extra numbers. I don't mind players setting up the next AO and getting FMS as the first town is falling; thats smart gameplay. I think its an issue if you have a numbers advantage and the other side can't spare the resources to even give a token defense to the town that you just AO'd.

I don't think there should be any mandatory cool down periods. I'm actually probably more extreme than most players in that I think that AO's should be eliminated completely and map movement should rather be controlled by variables like cap timers, AB timers, and the number of troops in a certain area to prevent moling and solo-caps. But letting one side decide the fate of the map in a single-server persistent world game that has hard victories/defeats (unlike say Planetside where each faction has an un-capturable territory they can always sally forth from) is also not good for the game. I think we all play this game for the tactical battles. But I also don't think anyone can honestly say that winning or losing the map doesn't matter to them outside of maybe a very small minority of players. This is a competitive game, and winning the campaign is the ultimate competition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is one of the major reason why I play allied right now but I disagree to cry in a corner waiting for Jesus coming to save allied side from crumbling. I know I make a difference but I just cant play no pop  

These 10-madness softcap run by night isn’t helping everyone by gaining game population at all, once campaign has been launched.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@kazee I would welcome you to play allied in this mini-campaign and start attacking in tz3. I for one would be with you.

 

BUT... I am not sure if its "just" the beta we are playing but in my TZ3 normal playing time lately I have logged on to find ONE AO active. Axis HC are choosing to ignore the other AO.

I logon sometimes to find easily enough players to start an attack BUT the population is "happy" to sit in "defence".

Key players, veteren players with years of experience are happy to defend and pad their stats. Some, of course, do the "right" thing and try to defend spawnables and bunkers actively, by finding enemy spawns, fms etc and TAKE THEM DOWN.

 

OTHERS choose to sit back and snipe, and worse actively encourage new players to do so. That is their right of course - they can play the game any way they like. Meanwhile I Login to find Boom totally cutoff and down to the bunker with the allies fighting hard to maintain control of the farmhouse bunker. No-one, and I mean NO-ONE was trying to recap. Greentags around, NOT ONE would respond to pms to help me cap spawnables. Some of them moved AWAY from cps I was asking on target and side for help with - so they are actively choosing to  NOT help. Note quite a few of these were NOT greentags as well - vet players who are choosing to maintain the camp. 

I have to question if some of these are axis second accounts logged in to see our movements - it was really that blatantly obvious. I capped alone TWO spawnables, killing LOADS of axis players by myself, one spawn twice. The axis players were rolling in waves once they found me capping...how DARE I BREAK THEIR CAMP?  Over a good 15-20 mins I killed the enemy and kept capping spawns  - ALL ALONE, with probably 6-15 allied players at peak in the town.

Is the playerbase  HAPPY to get rolled in TZ3? Are they happy to extend the losing run of campaign wins?

In the end all this negative gameplay does is KILL the game in this tz, one side gains more players and extends the roll. I can see that with 2 aos active in the real campaign that tz3 will be a roll fest, but saying that I am happy to try it - if only to show CRS how we "allies" are choosing to play the game.

Please note: I logged into the game after we were totally camped with three axis spawns, tiger camping the AB, and ems all around the town and  251s rolling through town killing infantry. I understand that players give up - but ACTIVELY giving them the cps without a fight when we had ample supply left to retake it is WRONG, and will kill this game in the end. I implore the gms to watch the gameplay in tz3 and prove me wrong.

 

CHOOSE - FIGHT OR ???

 

 

Share this post


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

there should always be action

this is also know as the "flow" in FPS games

leaders that put in the effort to have missions ready for average players to spawn at once the current mission is done is exactly what game leadership is

mandatory 10-30 minute down times after every battle just give everyone an opportunity to log off, how they became some kind of core game mechanic in WW2online is beyond me

I should point out that there is no '10-30 downtimes' unless you are allowing/requiring other players to do attack set up for you, and if on the defensive side, you are allowing/requiring others to do the necessary cleanup in the aftermatch of a serious attack (blow FBs, rebuild AI, etc).

While the game allows each player to choose the level at which they will participate, I don't think it can be credibly said that they also have the ability to whine when other players don't do the things you choose not to do, quickly enough.

 

S!

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, kazee said:

The people that think 2 aos is bad have not been paying attention or watching the map closely the past 72 hours. Its not the aos thats the problem its how you play the game

I was a bit worried that the strategic element of the game might lose some flavor with town based supply but wow was I wrong. This game is now 3 times better on a strategic level what we had prior to 1.36, simply amazing...now if we can just get people to listen. 

2 AOs is a gift for TZ3, you just must change your mentality and how you play. 

If have seen several opportunities the past 72 hours where 5-6 guys could cap a 3-4 cp town during PRIMETIME.  

This game completely opened up to a whole new level

If i played tz3 low pop i sure know how i would play and the guys doing it still have no adapted years and years later.

You give me 5 guys in THIS thread (matamor, choad, moz, gore and c5/csm etc) and I will cap towns TZ3 low pop everyday. Sure our side will lose some during that shift but they always do, so change your mentality. 

Having lived it for years and been VERY aware of Karellean's critical contributions to keeping it a game, I don't buy all this.  Oh ya, big fun on the overpop side not having action stop just cause your last FB to the one AO is blown or delay in AO on/going to next, but it's utterly brutal to an underpop side.  Hence a lot of my bits going on about pop neutrality.

 

BTW K the PN stuff works better then you seem to think it does, I think you just have to adjust to how many attackers are tied up taking depots and gnashing teeth waiting on the timers.  A creative bunch can drive attackers mad and delay for hours, and a couple guys from underpop on their AOs can break up a lot of that cohesive zerging.  But it does take a lot more effort for the underpop to remain competitive- lack of leadership and/or a bunch of greentags or uncooperatives and it falls apart and is not fun fast.

On the other hand Kazee underpop does not have that bunker flip option of crushing an enemy with their fastcap attacks while the no-AB bounce doesn't work well for the underpop as yes they can continue fighting until the town is gone but the overpop can camp every depot in turn and cut off anyone trying to get out to recap and there isn't enough people to spare driving in a rescue FMS or blow FBs fast enough.   Oftentimes for a 1 AO regimen its defend the town or go FB, with 2 AOs likely not enough for ANY.

 

Note I say overpop/underpop and not Allied/Axis- same thing happened when Joker007 and/or the Anzacs would roll TZ3, everyone understood that campaigns were won in that TZ and the same thing happened to the Axis in reverse, after being worked over by the Anzac team for a few weeks no Axis heroes could be found and the Allies rolled.  I'm ashamed to admit how many campaigns were won on that and frankly the primetime Allies got sloppy during those periods.

 

But here I am on the Axis side and there is screaming 'oh its SOOO unfair these timers  waaaarg', which is just more wanting that overpop roll at no consideration or sportsmanship, and I thoroughly don't respect it.  I do agree that there is something wrong with CRS' current formula, and I'd love to get into it if I didn't anticipate thread kamikazes, but if it's not exactly cap timers, it's gotta be something.

 

My theory is that the AO cap should be predicated on X number of players on the underpop side, never exceeding their ability to defend those AOs, NOT the horror show of AO count derived from proximity AOs.  That's WORSE by far then just the minimum 2 AOs.

 

Ultimately I don't give a damn about AO count per se, after all I was proposing NAOs which could be the equivalent of 18 AOs up at once and is way more open and less HC intensive (AOs can't shift for two hours), but that WWIIOL is a fair opportunity GAME at all times for all sides at all numbers.   Show me a set of game mechanics that achieve fair opportunity that is more palatable to the overpop and I'll likely be on board.

 

Oh and yes snakes DO matter.  That's flatout BS from those pushing that line.

3 people like this

Share this post


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

 

These 10-madness softcap run by night isn’t helping everyone by gaining game population at all, once campaign has been launched.

So all the players who wanted garrisons instead of TOEs now call capping a fully defensible garrisoned town a softcap?  Or is a softcap now any cap that happens in TZ3? Or any cap when someone is underpop? Or just any cap if its the other side? Or any cap that doesn't allow for stat-padding? 

We need a glossary of y'alls definitions. 

I was told 18 years ago when I first played that 'numbers move the map - everything else is chrome'. It was and is still true. Hence the need for some form of Pop Neutrality - as outlined in Kilemall's post above and elsewhere.

47 minutes ago, augetout said:

 

While the game allows each player to choose the level at which they will participate, I don't think it can be credibly said that they also have the ability to whine when other players don't do the things you choose not to do, quickly enough.

/+10.   But sadly Augetout they do whine. This thread is proof. Ouf. J'en ai marre. Austerlitz bordel. 

Edited by sorella

Share this post


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

@kazee I would welcome you to play allied in this mini-campaign and start attacking in tz3. I for one would be with you.

 

BUT... I am not sure if its "just" the beta we are playing but in my TZ3 normal playing time lately I have logged on to find ONE AO active. Axis HC are choosing to ignore the other AO.

I logon sometimes to find easily enough players to start an attack BUT the population is "happy" to sit in "defence".

Key players, veteren players with years of experience are happy to defend and pad their stats. Some, of course, do the "right" thing and try to defend spawnables and bunkers actively, by finding enemy spawns, fms etc and TAKE THEM DOWN.

 

OTHERS choose to sit back and snipe, and worse actively encourage new players to do so. That is their right of course - they can play the game any way they like. Meanwhile I Login to find Boom totally cutoff and down to the bunker with the allies fighting hard to maintain control of the farmhouse bunker. No-one, and I mean NO-ONE was trying to recap. Greentags around, NOT ONE would respond to pms to help me cap spawnables. Some of them moved AWAY from cps I was asking on target and side for help with - so they are actively choosing to  NOT help. Note quite a few of these were NOT greentags as well - vet players who are choosing to maintain the camp. 

I have to question if some of these are axis second accounts logged in to see our movements - it was really that blatantly obvious. I capped alone TWO spawnables, killing LOADS of axis players by myself, one spawn twice. The axis players were rolling in waves once they found me capping...how DARE I BREAK THEIR CAMP?  Over a good 15-20 mins I killed the enemy and kept capping spawns  - ALL ALONE, with probably 6-15 allied players at peak in the town.

Is the playerbase  HAPPY to get rolled in TZ3? Are they happy to extend the losing run of campaign wins?

In the end all this negative gameplay does is KILL the game in this tz, one side gains more players and extends the roll. I can see that with 2 aos active in the real campaign that tz3 will be a roll fest, but saying that I am happy to try it - if only to show CRS how we "allies" are choosing to play the game.

Please note: I logged into the game after we were totally camped with three axis spawns, tiger camping the AB, and ems all around the town and  251s rolling through town killing infantry. I understand that players give up - but ACTIVELY giving them the cps without a fight when we had ample supply left to retake it is WRONG, and will kill this game in the end. I implore the gms to watch the gameplay in tz3 and prove me wrong.

 

CHOOSE - FIGHT OR ???

 

 

S! Dropbear, well said and I could even picture myself in a battle like that

However, you perfectly explained for us all...those players would rather sit back and snipe, pad stats, happy defending etc etc. Thank you for saying this and proving my point that is the reason for the rolls during this TZ3. They are choosing their own demise. And that is why i said " Am I just gonna to sit back in the bunker for 20 mins and wait to get overrun by 5-6 smgs, no i would not"

I will say it again as I did on this page...this low pop shift will lose towns regardless, get on the attack and try to cap one yourself and make it a push, lose 1 gain 1. Yes I know easier said than done especially if the low pop pb is going to pad stats etc

All I know is the 1 ao during this TZ has not achieved anything, lets try a change see what happens. But after reading your post i fear the problem is the pb during this tz not the rules or game mechanics at all.

26 minutes ago, Kilemall said:

 

BTW K the PN stuff works better then you seem to think it does, I think you just have to adjust to how many attackers are tied up taking depots and gnashing teeth waiting on the timers.  A creative bunch can drive attackers mad and delay for hours, and a couple guys from underpop on their AOs can break up a lot of that cohesive zerging.  But it does take a lot more effort for the underpop to remain competitive- lack of leadership and/or a bunch of greentags or uncooperatives and it falls apart and is not fun fast.

O

Please read my post on this page and it will answer some of your points.

That is exactly my point, a few guys attacking can "break up alot of that cohesive zerging" 5-6 guys that cap a spawn, 3 hold it and the other 3 take bunker...wtf is the overpop side gonna do ?? Either they have to cut their attacking force by a drastic number to go defend and reclaim bunker or they risk losing that town while they are OVERPOP

36 minutes ago, Kilemall said:

On the other hand Kazee underpop does not have that bunker flip option of crushing an enemy with their fastcap attacks while the no-AB bounce doesn't work well for the underpop as yes they can continue fighting until the town is gone but the overpop can camp every depot in turn and cut off anyone trying to get out to recap and there isn't enough people to spare driving in a rescue FMS or blow FBs fast enough.   Oftentimes for a 1 AO regimen its defend the town or go FB, with 2 AOs likely not enough for ANY.

"camp every depot and cutoff anyone" What if there was no one to camp ? What if the low pop players are out attacking the 2 aos instead of waiting to get camped. 

"blow fbs" are you saying tz3 low pop should be trying to blow fbs ? Let's say this takes 3-4 guys, why would i go blow any fb when I can drive those same guys to a spawnable cp, probably drop them off at front door since over pop is all attack and cap that spawn and in return forcing over pop attacking force to react to us

51 minutes ago, Kilemall said:

Note I say overpop/underpop and not Allied/Axis- 

Agreed, I have said same thing throughout this thread

 

52 minutes ago, Kilemall said:

But here I am on the Axis side and there is screaming 'oh its SOOO unfair these timers  waaaarg', which is just more wanting that overpop roll at no consideration or sportsmanship, and I thoroughly don't respect it. 

Agree with u again there

 

53 minutes ago, Kilemall said:

My theory is that the AO cap should be predicated on X number of players on the underpop side, never exceeding their ability to defend those AOs, NOT the horror show of AO count derived from proximity AOs.  That's WORSE by far then just the minimum 2 AOs.

Once again get the 'defend those aos' out of your mindset during this TZ for low pop side...re-read my posts in here and let them sink in

Proximity aos could be bad for low pop tz3 i fear that is correct, low pop needs diversion to succeed. That is why i think having 2 aos up for them helps

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The two aos will only help if the underpop side changes its mentality and has leadership...the years of underpop have taken their toll. Great leaders like goreblimey or mundagurri are ignored  and are left to try to gather what is left to "slow them down" until the next wave of players log in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It makes little difference 4 expert vets can hold a town vs 20 noobs any day if and I mean if you spawn in to defend town soon as ews goes off. If you wait you lose.

I have no problem holding a town my self until another player comes to the aid of the town. It really isn't that hard and since I know where people set efms 99.9 % of the time no matter the town if I get out early when ews goes off you will lose your efms. Then all I have to do is respawn back into the spawn cp and wait.

Edited by sgthenning
1 person likes this

Share this post


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

I should point out that there is no '10-30 downtimes' unless you are allowing/requiring other players to do attack set up for you, and if on the defensive side, you are allowing/requiring others to do the necessary cleanup in the aftermatch of a serious attack (blow FBs, rebuild AI, etc).

While the game allows each player to choose the level at which they will participate, I don't think it can be credibly said that they also have the ability to whine when other players don't do the things you choose not to do, quickly enough.

 

S!

there is a hard timer for placing an AO, and also a timer until depot radios go hot so the main objective in the game is impossible to complete for a period of time

during a 1-AO period this makes for a mandatory wait after a town is captured, and no amount of "teamwork" a.k.a. inane side-tasks will make the wait go away

even if you had a flight of paratroopers ready you would have to tell them all to sit around and wait

this waiting does nothing but give everyone online an opportunity to log off and kills the flow of battle

and no one plays to fix AI pits or place boxes on static tents, if they do then please notify CRS to put some screencaps on the Steam frontpage I'm sure it will make great marketing material for a MMOFPS lol
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you have to multi task and know what to do I see so many people wandering around like they don't know what to do. MMM Town has AO on it is the ai down if so fix it. Did the ai go off after you fixed it mmm ei that direction should investigate and see if there is a efms out that way. Must be ei in town I should check the spawn cp. Am I alone in the town if so call for help. I mean seriously you all act like you cant think.

2 people like this

Share this post


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

It makes little difference 4 expert vets and hold a town vs 20 noobs any day if and I mean if you spawn in to defend town soon as ews goes off. If you wait you lose.

I have no problem holding a town my self until another player comes to the aid of the town. It really isn't that hard and since I know where people set efms 99.9 % of the time no matter the town if I get out early when ews goes off you will lose your efms. Then all I have to do is respawn back into the spawn cp and wait.

I don't know what game these people are playing when they talk about getting rolled by a team of 12 inf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.