• Announcements

    • CHIMM

      ***Expected Outage Scheduled*** 7 day Notice   12/15/2019

      Next Sunday, December 22nd 2019 outage and cut-over will START AT 9AM PACIFIC TIME or 5:00 PM GMT. All services will be effected for 24 +/- hours as announced in our previous article. Game server physically relocated  Website and critical data relocated Configure the game server all critical services to new ISP's We appreciate everyone's patience and understanding during this transition, our goal is to minimize server downtime. Official communications/status will be posted via Axis and Allied Discord, and FaceBook during outage. ***Effective that day, server time will be considered Pacific Standard Time (GMT -8), not US Central (CST) as it is now.***
sydspain

WWII Online: Current state and future

248 posts in this topic

We can all argue about supply and game mechanics and FMS etc until the cows come home. However  I still think a big issue that the game faces is how to retain new players and that's something I've not really seen discussed.  World war two Online is a big nuanced game that does a really really terrible job of explaining how the game works.  There is so much to learn.  New players come in and generally don't have a clue what to do, get killed two or three times and then give up.  We have all seen greentags walking from FBs or diving a truck not understanding that they are the truck.  I think the Rats may need to look at new ways of trying to keep these new players beyond the trainers program because its clearly not working.  maybe we need tutorials that get them to Cap a CP or something to help drive some understanding of the game  but I'm not sure I have an answer to that greentag question. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First step at retaining players has to be reducing the price or maininting some sort of f2p model. Let's face it .... the game takes time to learn, and if it is too cost prohibitive to invest the time, people simply won't. Vets don't neccessarily mind paying the current premium price .... as we understand and appreciate the game. However ... if there is no one to shoot at, well then ... that becomes a problem for everyone ... vet and newbie alike. And ... that is what we are starting to see.

Edited by choad
6 people like this

Share this post


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

First step at retaining players has to be reducing the price or maininting some sort of f2p model. Let's face it .... the game takes time to learn, and if it is too cost prohibitive to invest the time, people simply won't. Vets don't neccessarily mind paying the current premium price .... as we understand and appreciate the game. However ... if there is no one to shoot at, well then ... that becomes a problem for everyone ... vet and newbie alike. And ... that is what we are starting to see.

In game voice comms. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, nc0gnet0 said:

In game voice comms. 

Yes that would help. Although many who like squad play would "turn it off" and prefer to stay on discord/teamspeak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yah.... content for noobs.... like how-to videos should be a thing...... and they should be promoted far and wide by CRS...... 

I would be willing to put some time and energy into making some

anyone else?

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

This is an assertion made without evidence, so it can be dismissed without evidence. I am not seeing any obvious problem at all.

N1ckB1C.jpg

Assume the Allies control Profondville (or vice versa) (snapshot of current map, but wanted 2 close towns to show facilities in 1). The attacker from Prof can place an MSP inside that circle (minus whatever the enemy facility limit is now X hundred meters).

So limiting. Note that nothing prevents driving a truck full of men to anyplace you like, or driving armor anyplace you like, or having ATGs have to take a tow---anyplace they like. This ONLY limits where armies of men can spring forth.

Imo, this would be a good rule set for player placed FBs.  Applying this to truck based mobile spawns is a bad idea imo.

 

What I would like to see is an inf FRU that is connected to an FMS where the FRU is placement must be within so many meters of the home FMS.  Probably no more than 200m.  

 

That way if you get flanked by an inf FRU it's because you already allowed a very loud and defenseless truck flank you.  Likewise, destroying the very easy to locate and camp FMS destroys the associated inf FRU.  

 

Forcing people to bring supply more manually to the battle is a recipe for failure.  It's too much work for too little reward.  

2 people like this

Share this post


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

How is knowing roughly where the enemy is coming from less action, exactly? It means the defense (particularly low pop) can concentrate where the enemy is. If they want to shut down the attack they don't need a half a dozen people wandering away from town in every direction to find the EFMS, those same 6 people can go in the directions that the EFMS must be (look at map, see linked towns, look in those directions only).

Since the defense won't have to disperse literally everywhere, the attackers might ahve to, you know, attack. The current attack paradigm:

Roll trucks.

Set FMS all over the place.

Move towards/into town. AO gets set (takes a while, this might be after the above or before, varies (I'm not HC, don't know the specifics)).

Inf all over town, either capping, or securing.

Defenders appear. If enough zerg in, the attack likely fails, or gets put on hold til they leave, then restarts. If few appear, the town rolls. If most kills happen as camping, that's not a battle.

Such battles, much wow.

I'd rather have to fight my way in to a CP, frankly. My favorite gameplay is honestly recapping a CP the enemy holds in our town that is displaced from the rest of town. It becomes an actual battle. Once in the CP... same crappy in CP play, getting there is the fun play.

there are very very few people willing to set spawns, it needs to be addressed.

Share this post


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

Exactly.

I'd wager all day long that lower sub prices and existing gameplay mechanics would bring in and retain more new players than same sub prices and new mechanics.

Even Just looking at the new guys and inactive guys who commented on this thread, a $5 sub would win back their subscription. It would win back mine too. I didnt see any of them say or allude to that same sub prices and different game mechanics would get them to resub.

/myopinion

during the WBS's, the guys that left my squad checked in. they left for the same reason they unsubbed, they got bored.

free wasn't even worth it for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fog of war : Remove the white skulls.

Anyway people keeps running in them to get killed.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well 1st thing CRS should or would have to do is get the new players to respond to text chat as we don't have VP in game and only have discord , which myself don't use I find it clunky .

We had that exact discussion right after the Steam launch , that we got tons of green tags but us VETS came here to the forum frustrated that hardly anyone would respond.

What was done about it . NOTHING sorry to say so. Players can still toggle the chat bar away.  PM messages are still just the typewriter sound. 

It was proposed ( I actually did that ) that green tags , would have the chat bar locked, that if they get a PM it actually flashes on screen and not just typewriter sound.  That if they are from another country and not speak English there be a menu that they could choose from and reply , like sorry I don't speak English but in their tongue but once they send it, it would come back to the receiver as a English sentence that one maybe be able to send that player into the right direction. 

Myself tried many times during the steam launch to contact player , just to either run into the language barrier,  and I speak 2 English and German fluently, or get no response at all . If I did get a respond I would actually stop playing and explain things the best I could and give them basic knowledge.  Like not to run out of town , how to look for action, how to read the map, what the objectives are. The short abbreviation that we use and what they ment. If they did listen they were always happy.  But unfortunately it was a rather rare occasion and in the end a frustrating endeavor trying to get new players to respond.

But to this day we got nothing that makes it easier for us VETS to help and  to retain new players.  

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If game decisions are made based on the pages of suggestions from a small handful of customers, we might be doomed.  I certainly don't have the answers, but urge those who make the decisions not to act on the whims of the most vocal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FROM ROTSECHS!

Game needs players. Allow ftp to all, every single registered account that isn't sub'd. Allow them basic stuff in all persona. Reserve rifle/smg, basic atg, basic tank, basic fighter. Allow them to cap. Allow them to contribute. It costs nothing to do it. I did 3 months ftp, learnt the game, got hooked, got frustrated looking at the better gear. I subbed. Analogy: The car dealer that won't give potential customers a test drive won't sell any cars unless they are significantly cheaper and/or better. The one next door that does, is more likely to have people buy. Rotsechs

8 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, majes99 said:

FROM ROTSECHS!

Game needs players. Allow ftp to all, every single registered account that isn't sub'd. Allow them basic stuff in all persona. Reserve rifle/smg, basic atg, basic tank, basic fighter. Allow them to cap. Allow them to contribute. It costs nothing to do it. I did 3 months ftp, learnt the game, got hooked, got frustrated looking at the better gear. I subbed. Analogy: The car dealer that won't give potential customers a test drive won't sell any cars unless they are significantly cheaper and/or better. The one next door that does, is more likely to have people buy. Rotsechs

+1. Removing FTP was a mistake from the beginning. Vets who have inactive account cannot use the 30 day free trial without creating a new account. That means, they can't even check the health of the game before putting money on the table. 

Edited by gretnine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, majes99 said:

FROM ROTSECHS!

Game needs players. Allow ftp to all, every single registered account that isn't sub'd. Allow them basic stuff in all persona. Reserve rifle/smg, basic atg, basic tank, basic fighter. Allow them to cap. Allow them to contribute. It costs nothing to do it. I did 3 months ftp, learnt the game, got hooked, got frustrated looking at the better gear. I subbed. Analogy: The car dealer that won't give potential customers a test drive won't sell any cars unless they are significantly cheaper and/or better. The one next door that does, is more likely to have people buy. Rotsechs

already posted that one idea...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tweaking has been tried, failed(FMS's, weapons, bombs etc)

Historical has been tried, failed (RDP, tiers etc)

The only thing that brought in some new players was FTP, give them basic equipement, show them the possibilities if you Sub.

I'm repeating myself

Stop the tiers, put in the toys, let the WAR do its thing.

At this point I'd be willing to 'FIX' or give back the lazer LMG to the Axis, if that would bring a few back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a perfect world, we should get rid of FBs, have capture points scattered all over map in the form of houses, bridges and farms etc. Less trucks, more action. More diverse cities, diverse terrain. BF1942, Heroes and Generals type of terrain. But I know that's not possible unless the game is completely remade from the core. I just want the best for the game. 

4 people like this

Share this post


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

Heh, funny, but not quite :)

I'm often in CPs for 3 reasons:

1) The enemy always comes there eventually - guaranteed combat - as little as it is.

2) Few others are in CPs, so I do it.

3) I've tried guarding from outside, but when I guard N, enemy comes in S, when I guard E, enemy comes in W - only way to guard is to be in CP.

Now, with on sides MS - I could most likely guard from out CP a lot more - and be more in the game fighting.

 

I don't know how many times ive seen you sit on a cp and let people cap or call for help when cp is 90% caped because you refuse to try and clear the cp lol

 

3 people like this

Share this post


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

I don't know how many times ive seen you sit on a cp and let people cap or call for help when cp is 90% caped because you refuse to try and clear the cp lol

 

the "guard duty" game sucks. 2 years ago lancers charged ourselves with FB guarding (back at 12-hit FB's)

the participation in the missions was awful, and it carried into the AO/DO ops. the ZoC, search and destroy, killing, and CP capture missions; suffered lower participation and we were noticeably just plain worse at playing the game from loosing passion to play.

 

i don't blame him for not clearing, guarding gets to you mentally. enough of it can ruin the passion for other aspects of the game.

 

 

the truck spawn forced it onto the attackers. DO guarding is easier now, but there's nowhere to enjoy the other aspects of the game anymore. everything's guard duty.

a lot's been said about the attackers responsibilities attacking "properly": HC/ZoC/combined arms task force/recon/etc.

go in-game and observe the participation and passion for the pre-FMS & post-FMS forms of guard duty (the "proper attack"): there's none.

Edited by major0noob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, tater said:

This is an assertion made without evidence, so it can be dismissed without evidence. I am not seeing any obvious problem at all.

N1ckB1C.jpg

Assume the Allies control Profondville (or vice versa) (snapshot of current map, but wanted 2 close towns to show facilities in 1). The attacker from Prof can place an MSP inside that circle (minus whatever the enemy facility limit is now X hundred meters).

So limiting. Note that nothing prevents driving a truck full of men to anyplace you like, or driving armor anyplace you like, or having ATGs have to take a tow---anyplace they like. This ONLY limits where armies of men can spring forth.

I thought about this last night as I went to bed.  Thinking of how to implement in game code wise.

Tat is right!  This circle from prof to anhee is tthe answer.

Currently, the FMS has 2 range restrictions, no further than 3k for target, no closer than 400m to target.

(there are other restricts, terrain, links, etc - but that doesn't concern us)

Adding an 'on sides' or 'frontline' abstraction is trivial!

Simply add one more range restriction check on the FMS.

Let's say anhee is 4k from prof; then just add the check the FMS must be within 4k of origin town.

Wala, instant, simple frontline mechanism, easy to code (town distances are known) and easy for players to visualize/use.

Might be even really easy to test during an intermission?

 

Edited by delems

Share this post


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

I thought about this last night as I went to bed.  Thinking of how to implement in game code wise.

Tat is right!  This circle from prof to anhee is tthe answer.

Currently, the FMS has 2 range restrictions, no further than 3k for target, no closer than 400m to target.

(there are other restricts, terrain, links, etc - but that doesn't concern us)

Adding an 'on sides' or 'frontline' abstraction is trivial!

Simply add one more range restriction check on the FMS.

Let's say anhee is 4k from prof; then just add the check the FMS must be within 4k of origin town.

Wala, instant, simple frontline mechanism, easy to code (town distances are known) and easy for players to visualize/use.

Might be even really easy to test during an intermission?

 

 

FMS has restriction as to terrain type/nearby object type/distance from orgin/distance from target/distance from enemy held flag

If you mean a special case logic that says your distance to orgin must be same or less than origin to target distance then that may be a option (it has been suggested)

Now if you mean code every FB to town distance or every town to town distance then you are talking something like 2000 lines of new code and testing every town from every direction.

And while on FMS'... A FMS target has to be something that has a ownership, has to flagged and able to change owners. This is why a bridge target will not work for a FMS, it has no ownership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, majes99 said:

FROM ROTSECHS!

Game needs players. Allow ftp to all, every single registered account that isn't sub'd. Allow them basic stuff in all persona. Reserve rifle/smg, basic atg, basic tank, basic fighter. Allow them to cap. Allow them to contribute. It costs nothing to do it. I did 3 months ftp, learnt the game, got hooked, got frustrated looking at the better gear. I subbed. Analogy: The car dealer that won't give potential customers a test drive won't sell any cars unless they are significantly cheaper and/or better. The one next door that does, is more likely to have people buy. Rotsechs

At least I would be in game till CRS got their new billing thing going. After all I have read now with people being charged twice , or only get 2 weeks of game time before being asked again to pay , cause of the billing cycle  , just to have Pete reimburse then a double charge ( I think his time is more needed getting the new system up and running then running and checking after double charges) 

Also I think CRS would /should know what cost them players.

Let's look at it quick .

The introduction of Garrisons , see how many players let their subscription laps.

The LMG fix see howany players you lost there.

The taking outhe of the branches like Delems beloved KM , apparently his Squad pretty much said ADIOS , just because there us no more KM as a unit on the map . 

Taking out the Allied Brit Grenadier is another one , just give them a few but cut back on Sappers cause as most can recall these Britgrenadier are deadly to Axis tanks also give them a advantage of hiding in buildings and take panzers out without them having to expose themselves. 

Just a few that come to my mind , I bet there are more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point fixing or changing game mechanics and gameplay only affect those who already sub.  While maybe needed.....it certainly is NOT a priority now.  The priority is to get new and old players back.  Only way to do that is LOWER the sub price for NEW accounts and OLD accounts that have not subbed in over say 1-2 years.

Come Nov 2 my sub is up.  At the current state I am not resubbing.  Lack of players and battles are just not there for me.  Ill login and sometimes its just dead.  I dont want 10 vs 10 small firefights and searching for ei.....I can do that elsewhere for $0

SUBS NEED TO BE LOWERED FOR NEW & OLD PLAYERS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I mentioned a couple days ago, today I’d be closing the thread to review what feedback you found to be most valuable for us to take in. Thank you for your contributions everyone. I’ll be spending some time personally to comb over this stuff and figure out what we can do to make things a bit improved.

In the interim, I would ask for you to have some faith that WWII Online development continues, we understand player numbers need to go up, and we have some changes coming to this next campaign (announced soon) to get you access to more equipment and remove an item currently impacting game play.

I’ll get back to you soon with a more thorough write up after I’ve been able to absorb this feedback.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.