• Announcements

    • B2K

      Forum Upgrade Phase II Beginning.   06/01/2020

      The initial phase of the forum updating has been completed.  We will now be moving onto Phase II: Software update:   The current forum software is in need up an update to current version.  We have been testing the newer version, and are ready to update our live forums.    Themes: The Current WWIIOL Theme will be retired as part of the forum update.  It is non-compatible with the newer forum software.  A new WWIIOL Theme will be added after upgrade (as part of the upgade if everything goes smooth).   Once the update is completed the forums should look the same, but perform significantly better.   We will also be able to potentially expand functionality to include features and add-ons that are not available with our current version of the forum software.   There will be a few hours of downtime during the upgrade process, an exact date has not been set as we are working to align schedules.  
Jsilec

Is it boring?

172 posts in this topic

Cap almost empty towns overnight every night for weeks at a time?...cant u guys fight each other to at least pretend lowpop is a competition?

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

Cap almost empty towns overnight every night for weeks at a time?...cant u guys fight each other to at least pretend lowpop is a competition?

nothing is a competition to the axis, they love capping ghost towns. lol.
they especially love fighting AI

no wonder why we lose many maps bc of tz3, lmao

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not trying to make it a side thing i just genuinely curious how this could possibly be fun at all when your sitting there killing same handful of guys over and over again without even trying that hard or worrying about fbs/dos things that populated tzs deal with all the time....dont they want to have some competition where a player of equal or better skill can shoot back and make them have to work....it goes on for weeks or over a month and i cant help but ask since it seems its always the same cast of clowns doing this just change their ringleaders from time to time

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

Not trying to make it a side thing i just genuinely curious how this could possibly be fun at all 

its not that fun,  you know that. happens with both sides -  and I/we've been on both sides both on defending and attacking ends for years. not much to say other than the 'cast of clowns' is players or squads who log in and play tz3 cuz that's when they can or choose to play - and the best one can say is that its good practice and builds momentum/morale in other tzs. specifically this campaign was kind of weird when early on axis  actually capped towns like sedan, dinant, flavion in tz1 and prime time with no SD. 

as a former and sometimes allied squad - remember way back when Monashy formed an ad-hoc squad - 'The Block' - to specifically stop Tz3 axis rolls. worked for 4/5 campaigns.  more recently, when Augetout took over allieds it worked too - 3 in a row. we wuz part of both. -but pretty sure everyone's heard this stuff over and over. 

dunno the answer or even if there is one. been over it a million times for 20 years now. try > ?

  • tz restricted cheap subs or even ftp with all unit / all access? 
  • more marketing to asia/oceania or cheaper subs/special ftp there?
  • extreme cap timers and/or 30+minute bunker hot timers in tz3?
  • ask young active players like n8isgr8 what would bring more like him in?
  • what else?

  Part 4: Ceaseless Propaganda, Outright Lies and Distorted Facts ...

clown army guys | Funny couple pictures, Funny pictures for kids ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, n8 said:

nothing is a competition to the axis, they love capping ghost towns. lol.
they especially love fighting AI

no wonder why we lose many maps bc of tz3, lmao

NOR a one sided thing, allies do same thing when they have  tz3.  would be nice to have  option  D:  price  cut but must play  only on side up ;)

Share this post


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

its not that fun,  you know that. happens with both sides -  and I/we've been on both sides both on defending and attacking ends for years. not much to say other than the 'cast of clowns' is players or squads who log in and play tz3 cuz that's when they can or choose to play - and the best one can say is that its good practice and builds momentum/morale in other tzs. specifically this campaign was kind of weird when early on axis  actually capped towns like sedan, dinant, flavion in tz1 and prime time with no SD. 

as a former and sometimes allied squad - remember way back when Monashy formed an ad-hoc squad - 'The Block' - to specifically stop Tz3 axis rolls. worked for 4/5 campaigns.  more recently, when Augetout took over allieds it worked too - 3 in a row. we wuz part of both. -but pretty sure everyone's heard this stuff over and over. 

dunno the answer or even if there is one. been over it a million times for 20 years now. try > ?

  • tz restricted cheap subs or even ftp with all unit / all access? 
  • more marketing to asia/oceania or cheaper subs/special ftp there?
  • extreme cap timers and/or 30+minute bunker hot timers in tz3?
  • ask young active players like n8isgr8 what would bring more like him in?
  • what else?

  Part 4: Ceaseless Propaganda, Outright Lies and Distorted Facts ...

clown army guys | Funny couple pictures, Funny pictures for kids ...

You keep bringing up the block thing i think that lasted like a month 5 or 6 years ago it was monashy?...i dont know a single allied lowpop player atm i just know a few late ustz guys that try and stay up later and thats not to knock the allies playing in lowpop its to specifically knock the players who SHOULD know better after weeks of this every night...i mean seriously does this need to be brought up here every few months or do we all just stick our heads in the sand and act like this is not a problem?...i know catfive just unsubbed for good and 4 other longtine AEF unsubbed a few weeks ago over this...cant give a counter argument to this problem and no it does not happen nearly enough to this extent to axis in my opinion

Edited by Jsilec

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And augetout went mia because of realife halfway into in his 2nd map of cinc And we lost his 3rd were he didnt even play or was it his 3rd he went mia and 4th we lost....tbh i dont even know who the cincs are anymore because it’s inconsequential with garrisons

Edited by Jsilec

Share this post


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

And augetout went mia because of realife halfway into in his 2nd map of cinc And we lost his 3rd were he didnt even play or was it his 3rd he went mia and 4th we lost....tbh i dont even know who the cincs are anymore because it’s inconsequential with garrisons

think augetout won 3 and had to leave mid 4th. good guy, hope he's okay. I'll shut up about monashy (do I have the name wrong?) but its all I remember - and it was way more than 5 years ago -  that it stopped what was then the official Axis Breakfast Club. lasted at least 3 campaigns. sw1 was/is awesome to play with/for too in allied tz3. 

yeah, well, its more of a game issue than a side issue - since its so long lasting? time for crs to try something new/radical/different? what could it be? 

Edited by sorella

Share this post


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

Cap almost empty towns overnight every night for weeks at a time?...cant u guys fight each other to at least pretend lowpop is a competition?

Let the cat out of the bag then. The boycott is real.

You can't complain I know plenty of allied players with active sub and still post more in here than they do play. Tz3 is a indirect issue in this regard.
Last camp was a back and forth and didn't play TOO much part in what went on allies would cap towns during the main tz's and we'd cap a few during TZ3, only difference was the morale factor, and I get that. Logging in to see territory gone sucks. Now you guys aint cappin anything during your prime time it makes it look alot worse.

If y'all were logged in at normal hours logging sorties then maybe I'd feel bad. I know you are, but there are many that aren't. I see them make the odd sortie here and there. Active enough in allied discord but never spawn in...
Definitely feels like a boycott. Make tz3 seem more OP than it is in an attempt to get it shut down during that period.

It ain't much fun, no, but what do you expect people to just log out when they want their side to win? It aint gonna happen. You can't take a moral highground on an issue to which there is no player-side driven solution. You would do EXACTLY the same.

Why not just AFK a matty in town? You'll last 30 mins at least, maybe scare axis away from the roads :P 

Edited by saffroli

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tz3 has unique Issues so it should have unique resolutions....after 2am est there should be a player counter on side screen until overall pop reaches a certain level So if it is in fact. 20 v 4 gameworld then vets will have the option to even things up if they care or take a few friends...next night if its 20 v 4 the other way they can go back and so forth and so on...like i said unique issues and unique resolutions i think the playerbase should try and help before the rats have to plot some solution which they have not acknowledged in recent months...cheaper subs is not gonna be easy to follow through on lowpop only players 

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

Let the cat out of the bag then. The boycott is real.

You can't complain I know plenty of allied players with active sub and still post more in here than they do play. Tz3 is a side issue in this regard.
Last camp was a back and forth and didn't play TOO much part in what went on allies would cap towns during the main tz's and we'd cap a few during TZ3, only difference was the morale factor, and I get that. Logging in to see territory gone sucks.

If y'all were logged in at normal hours logging sorties then maybe I'd feel bad. I know you are, but there are many that aren't. I see them make the odd sortie here and there. Active enough in allied discord but never spawn in...
Definitely feels like a boycott. Make tz3 seem more OP than it is in an attempt to get it shut down during that period.

Unsubbed is not a boycott its unsubbed...the guys who i know fron our squad facebook group are not in any way giving ultimatums or threats they said they are leaving the game..if they come back which I sincerely hope they do then it will be because they need to see old friends or fill that urge to play....lowpop problems that sustain themselves for long periods are killer for this game like it or not...a week here or there of rolls i think is something that can be accepted...been like this since a few days or a week after wbs ended ...some nights its 5 or 6 some its just ridiculous 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jsilec said:

Unsubbed is not a boycott its unsubbed...the guys who i know fron our squad facebook group are not in any way giving ultimatums or threats they said they are leaving the game..if they come back which I sincerely hope they do then it will be because they need to see old friends or fill that urge to play....lowpop problems that sustain themselves for long periods are killer for this game like it or not...a week here or there of rolls i think is something that can be accepted...been like this since a few days or a week after wbs ended ...some nights its 5 or 6 some its just ridiculous 

boycott
verb - 
withdraw from commercial or social relations with (a country, organization, or person) as a punishment or protest.


its a boycott. :)

Frivolous banter aside. I dont want to see players leave. But I don't want to cater to whiners if I'm honest with you. TZ3 is an issue, no doubt about that. But the fundamental is, nobody wants to play allied. Once the question of why is answered, maybe then we can move on into the future. The fact of the matter is, it's denial causing the allied PB to self destruct. Minimal comms, nobody showing initiative, a far cry from the old days. Maybe that's the reason people come to axis and never go back.

Seen plenty of old allied players that I've never seen during TZ3 as an opponent come to Axis and then end up playing during TZ3 with us! So I don't think its a geographical issue, I think its a morale issue. Allies don't seem to have any left. And it's down to you guys at the core allied pb to galvanize that. Nothing to do with anybody else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I joined HC so I can't  just jump over now and help out . Not with main account.

Could use my 2nd account FTP account.  Don't have much options in spawn but it bring some leadership.

But then probably get accused of spying or something goofy like that , like I know what Axis are doing. 

I'm smart enough to not log in my main account at all for the rest of the campaign . I could even upgrade the F2p account to have more options in the spawn list. 

What's the take on that CRS? , don't want to leave HC just got in . 

Share this post


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

Tz3 has unique Issues so it should have unique resolutions....after 2am est there should be a player counter on side screen until overall pop reaches a certain level So if it is in fact. 20 v 4 gameworld then vets will have the option to even things up if they care or take a few friends...next night if its 20 v 4 the other way they can go back and so forth and so on...like i said unique issues and unique resolutions i think the playerbase should try and help before the rats have to plot some solution which they have not acknowledged in recent months...cheaper subs is not gonna be easy to follow through on lowpop only players 

Don't think it'll work unless you completely restrict a player logging in from playing the overpop side. And given the side loyalties people have in-game, think that might just drive more players away. 

Regarding people being altruistic  when it comes to the addressing the overall health of the game by combating imbalance through playing the underpop side, which, let's be honest, sucks bad for the side hugely underpop. As air pop is much easier to gauge than ground, I'll use a personal example to illustrate the problem. This was after the old JG51, the largest axis air squad then, had just quit the game and went over to Cliffs of Dover. Stuff happened that set off a chain reaction and led to them quitting. A few people stuck around but soon got disenchanted getting gangbanged everyday.

I'd fly whenever I got the time during US Primetime, and although this is anecdotal, 95% of the time it was just me and maybe a greentag to doormat if I was lucky, vs what, 7-13 allied pilots. And I am talking about all vets, on teamspeak/discord flying together with comms. Just the fact that I was flying meant they'd be out in fighters trying to kill me rather than all being in DB-7s caking a town. This went on for some number of campaigns until slowly some peeps came back and I started flying with them still majorly outnumbered but our skill and teamwork made a huge  difference (possible in the air much easier than on the ground if people develop a rapport flying together ). 

The point is, despite the fact that it was glaringly obvious how skewed the air pop was. No one on the other side gave a F about balance. They were too identified with their side for whatever reason. Could be they love the people they play with, scrutiny from their peers if they switch to even things up, or they just liked trying to gangbang me (keyword is 'trying'). 

Funny thing is, I often received PMs saying I was being a p*ssy as I would swoop in, kill 1-2 in a pass, then climb back up and disappear as they chased me. Or, if some had energy to keep me in visual range, I'd take them on a sight seeing tour of Germany until they broke off my 6. So many times I had 7 guys just tailing me at 600m for 15 minutes where I just kept running and they just kept following. It is neither fun for them or me. If they had broken off sooner, I'd have re-climbed some more, gotten some speed and tried to find them again so I could sneak up on the pack without noticing and killing as many before disappearing again. Then occasionally when I hadn't climbed as high as I should have, and they'd have left a high friend up there waiting for me, I'd have to run straight back to a German airfield while all of them tried to catch me and kill me. They hardly did though and it pissed them off even more. They'd try and kill me at the airfield but the flak would mostly get them. Again, most of them would not be pleased. 

However, some of the few times I decided to turn back and oblige them in a dogfight, the guy I was fighting would call in all his friends and it would go from a fun fight to a gangbang where I was playing dodge the spitfire in 1 minute.

If, say 4 or even 3 of them had switched sides to make it 8 vs 3 or 4, the whole thing would have been so much fun for both sides and I wouldn't have had to fly so conservatively and they wouldn't have had to spend time chasing me for half an hour non-stop.

Just giving this example of the time because it is the most extreme example I know. Not turning this into an Axis side this vs Allied side that. But, why these people didn't switch over when I knew and they knew it would create a more fun game environment? Was it their preference for the equipment they were used to? Scrutiny from their friends? Side loyalties? All of the above?

I dunno, but they knew the numbers on their side vs the opponents (us) and they still kept on playing. If a compulsory play hugely underpop side rule  was introduced at the time, would they have done so? Or, would it have caused people to feel like they couldn't play what they wanted to given that they were paying to play whatever the hell they wanted to play? Just an example of mine to maybe figure out a solution. Simply stated, the pop imbalance even if publicised or known has never prompted people to play for the side that needs the numbers.

e: From what I hear, it is the other way around atm in-game with LW having an advantage, but I dunno if it is this skewed. Although, if the tier system was the way it is now, it would have certainly make things for me easier in the air as a LW pilot. If I came back and started flying LW right now, would I justify those many months of being gangbanged by Allied pilots as a rationale for thinking that it is okay that I am doing the same to them right now? That it is just payback for that time? Why should I switch over and help the people who didn't care when they were the ones with the numbers? Might be this justification that players make that keeps the imbalance train going. One duration with one side, Then another duration with the other... Could be.

 

 

Tl; dr: Just read the thing you lazy plebs, it takes less than a min

Edited by zippy33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** Don't think it'll work unless you completely restrict a player logging in from playing the overpop side

Don't have to be that extreme, some over pop is good imo.

Maybe limit it to 2 to 1?   Or 3 to 2.

That way each side can get some over pop but not have extreme over pop.

 

Regarding is it boring, well, yes and no.  It is fun to take towns.  Especially when you play all day and not one town falls.

 

The problem is, the way the game plays today, you pretty much can't take a town unless you have huge over pop.

With 7+ minute capture timers, literally impossible to take a town, UNLESS you have 3 to 1 or 4 to 1 odds.

 

Sure, now and then allies get their tanks in great position and can camp/attrit a town fast; but axis can't do that.

And both sides on occasion can do the nice bait and switch, get a town hot... sneak into 2nd town and fast switch; once in a while.

 

What's the solution to allied low pop, idk; been the same for both sides forever it seems at times.

Share this post


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

Don't have to be that extreme, some over pop is good imo.

Maybe limit it to 2 to 1?   Or 3 to 2.

That way each side can get some over pop but not have extreme over pop.

Overpop is only good if the situation on the ground should be overpop.

If a town has 1 unit of supply (calling a BDE and a garrison a unit of supply), and it is attacked by 2 units of supply, then 2:1 odds is not only fine, it's what the attack SHOULD look like.

If the overpop side manages to attack 4 units of supply with 1 unit of supply, yet they still have 2:1 player odds, they still can win, even though 1 attacking 4 should almost certainly lose. if they were overpop exactly the wrong way, 4:1 vs defenders, but the defenders had 4X supply, they should operationally be guaranteed to lose, yet in ww2ol they would without question win.

Note that during low pop, it might not matter since every defense in ww2ol requires a minimum number of players to have any chance at all of working (something like a player per CP).

 

20 minutes ago, delems said:

The problem is, the way the game plays today, you pretty much can't take a town unless you have huge over pop.

With 7+ minute capture timers, literally impossible to take a town, UNLESS you have 3 to 1 or 4 to 1 odds.

The game mechanics are broken. Have been for a long time.

The point nature of captures is a huge issue.

20 minutes ago, delems said:

Sure, now and then allies get their tanks in great position and can camp/attrit a town fast; but axis can't do that.

And both sides on occasion can do the nice bait and switch, get a town hot... sneak into 2nd town and fast switch; once in a while.

This is also a flaw in game design. Having to switch is a false choice. If town A has 3 units of supply, and town B has 3 units of supply, both should be equally protected against attack, yet all that matters is which has players in it.

Attrit a town fast? LOL. Most successful attacks (on both sides) involve effectively taking the town before there are even any defenders around, regardless of supply. It;s a lousy game mechanic.

20 minutes ago, delems said:

What's the solution to allied low pop, idk; been the same for both sides forever it seems at times.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is  rubbish...if one side's population CHOOSES to play massively overpoplated WHO is actively destroying the game?

Yes, it is true that players can choose a side  but the same people are fighting ai for whole campaigns in the timezone they can play.  They CHOOSE to do this.

..They COULD choose to even the population and actually FIGHT!.

@XOOMwhen you choose to address this is when the allies will start logging back in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only players that can fix lowpop are those in lowpop so if you think a certain side is doing bad because of a lack of comms then maybe go to that side and share your knowledge and or help the other side ESPECIALLY when your capping 10 towns in a night with minimal opposition ffs

Edited by Jsilec

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jsilec said:

The only players that can fix lowpop are those in lowpop so if you think a certain side is doing bad because of a lack of comms then maybe go to that side and share your knowledge and or help the other side ESPECIALLY when your capping 10 towns in a night with minimal opposition ffs

But those same people want me to make their capture timers faster?... And this is why the balanced capture timers exist, among our other present mechanisms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, XOOM said:

But those same people want me to make their capture timers faster?... And this is why the balanced capture timers exist, among our other present mechanisms.

The mechanisms work pretty good in the higher pop tzs with occasional oddball cap timers but its managable and light spawn delay is definitely the way to go....i just dont think these mechanisms work in lowpop and i dont want to see more extreme solutions to lowpop end up whacking us over the heads in highpop....i would love to see lowpop get things figured out on their own or some sort of “guilt” system where they can see the % they are overpop over a 20-30 minute period as a player logs in...ideally noone wants to swap sides but with the swaths of map being grabbed most nights these should be a solution somewhere outside of the norm comms and morale argument....like if i log in and see my side is 375% overpop without producing actual numbers then maybe over a month of seeing that i would say to a few friends lets go over and help make things a bit competitive 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, lowpop is a special animal. Any possible defense has to have a minimum number of players. 1 per bunker, 1 per CP? That's assuming those few people all do what they need to (actually guard).

There is not really a good way to deal with this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** want me to make their capture timers faster

Capture timers are atrocious imo right now. (and they are not as published from map 163, they have changed)

And my proof is simple.  Right now, 4 AOs, only 1 even has EWS on it.

 

Now, back when we accidentally set capture timers to 30 seconds, every AO was CONTESTED..... not just had EWS..... was contested.

That is game play, that is action.  Is 30 seconds too fast, idk, maybe; but I'd say it is way better than 7+ minutes, in regards to game action.

 

The other issue is FBs, it stops action on map.  Need to remove all FBs and just have a PPO FB system, then two towns could actually attack each other face to face and have a meeting engagement.  Half the players don't even have engr, the half that do don't seem to know how to bust FBs or want to.  FBs are poor game play imo; maybe there is a way to make them interesting for everyone, not just 3 ninjas hoping there is no guard?

Share this post


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

This is  rubbish...if one side's population CHOOSES to play massively overpoplated WHO is actively destroying the game?

Yes, it is true that players can choose a side  but the same people are fighting ai for whole campaigns in the timezone they can play.  They CHOOSE to do this.

..They COULD choose to even the population and actually FIGHT!.

@XOOMwhen you choose to address this is when the allies will start logging back in.

But I thought the LMG fix was supposed to be the patch that brought back the player base?

 

Maybe only count Ground troops ,  and not count players that sit in Planes .

Maybe that will bring the numbers a bit more even keel.

2 people like this

Share this post


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

*** want me to make their capture timers faster

Capture timers are atrocious imo right now. (and they are not as published from map 163, they have changed)

And my proof is simple.  Right now, 4 AOs, only 1 even has EWS on it.

 

Now, back when we accidentally set capture timers to 30 seconds, every AO was CONTESTED..... not just had EWS..... was contested.

That is game play, that is action.  Is 30 seconds too fast, idk, maybe; but I'd say it is way better than 7+ minutes, in regards to game action.

 

The other issue is FBs, it stops action on map.  Need to remove all FBs and just have a PPO FB system, then two towns could actually attack each other face to face and have a meeting engagement.  Half the players don't even have engr, the half that do don't seem to know how to bust FBs or want to.  FBs are poor game play imo; maybe there is a way to make them interesting for everyone, not just 3 ninjas hoping there is no guard?

You have enough threads up for those issues i not sure how that pertains to a lowpop solution 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.