• 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

when i am on allied comms are pretty good mostly defense oriented like calls for xyz spawn ei or fb being busted because we on our heels and defense just happens alot more like it or not....ofcourse they could be better but that has zero effect on the subject we are discussing....allied euro tz is strong even underpop and ustz definitely needs work but again no bearing on lowpop...i seen maps recently were we take towns in euro with great fights good morale/comms and get crushed in lowpop...I honestly not sure how this keeps getting turned around other then misdirecting the actual subject at hand 

3 people like this

Share this post


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

I honestly not sure how this keeps getting turned around other then misdirecting the actual subject at hand 

We're talking about why people don't play allied during Tz3..
It's absolutely relevant. No-one likes it really. 

First port of call shouldn't be "how do we get the axis to log out during TZ3" it should be "how do we keep allied players on during TZ3".

2 people like this

Share this post


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

when i am on allied comms are pretty good mostly defense oriented like calls for xyz spawn ei or fb being busted because we on our heels and defense just happens alot more like it or not....ofcourse they could be better but that has zero effect on the subject we are discussing....allied euro tz is strong even underpop and ustz definitely needs work but again no bearing on lowpop...i seen maps recently were we take towns in euro with great fights good morale/comms and get crushed in lowpop...I honestly not sure how this keeps getting turned around other then misdirecting the actual subject at hand 

I don't think it gets turned around you want to know why TZ3 is low pop. 

When I play depending on day I'm TZ2 going into TZ3 and sometimes by a good margin .  Cause of my job and how I am in person I cover all TZ.

Now I have been on Allied side a quite a few maps and always stay there all of the campaign win or loss . I don't all of a sudden switch cause one side get rolled or gets a certain piece of equipment. 

But the reason why I have never abandoned Axis is for that 1 major reason Comms between all players not just comms between the Squad players. And that is what stands out at me every single time I come over .

Now you can keep ignoring it and keep complaining why Allies are bleeding players and tell yourself it's because Axis keep rolling the map, have higher numbers, better equipment  what ever you want to tell yourself .

I'm tryin to shed light on the situation and have been doing so for many years been with the game since 2001.

You even argued with me in this very forum about it. 

And yet once again we are here in this very forum talking about player numbers .

I have fun playing as Allied but I miss the Comms and that is what drives me back every single time , and I played lone wolf for a long time after Africa Korps disbanded . But as a lone wolf and as a Allied means really one is alone more times then none. While on the Axis it feels still like one unit ( most times) even if one is not in a Squad and again I never ever got /get that feeling when I'm over and that's all TZ combined , now make it TZ3 with less players on and No Comms it's an exercise in frustration and then players log and it gets even more lopsided.

 

Take it at face value , dismiss it , constructive criticism,  think I'm nuts ,    I'm  just trying to help and not the only one that has made the Comms comment so there might be just something to it.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding comms, I see people saying they marked something near their position, and I look on the map, and I see no mark. This happens all the time for me. Does anyone know if there is a difference between marks made by different armies (like French vs Brit?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, tater said:

Regarding comms, I see people saying they marked something near their position, and I look on the map, and I see no mark. This happens all the time for me. Does anyone know if there is a difference between marks made by different armies (like French vs Brit?)

As far as I understand it , it's  mission specific , you are not on the mission you won't see it . Could be wrong there. But being or having 2 different fractions in one town I'm  sure it's even a bigger issue with marks not showing on map.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AHC is a mess, Allied squads are a mess.  Balance mechanisms got relaxed cause Axis guys will [censored] and moan if it's set hard. 

 

I have a simple less-pain solution to help, I'll bump it again.  I think it's an issue and won't hurt the no-pop egos too badly, but making TZ3 competitive for whatever side is way underpop is only half the story, the other half is the Allied side doesn't want to do what it takes to win.  Until that happens, all the Rats can do is give equal opportunity- which they are close, but not quite there. 

 

I'll bump it again so you can comment.

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

Regarding comms, I see people saying they marked something near their position, and I look on the map, and I see no mark. This happens all the time for me. Does anyone know if there is a difference between marks made by different armies (like French vs Brit?)

I was told that if your mission targets the area but the guy that reported a contact is on a mission targetting a flag or the FB, you won't see his report. With the Waypoints being shared soon between missions, this could probably follow. @SNIPER62 knows better 

Share this post


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

First port of call shouldn't be "how do we get the axis to log out during TZ3" it should be "how do we keep allied players on during TZ3".

bam...now thats a mic drop

3 people like this

Share this post


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

Marks are mission target specific i believe.  2 different missions, different origins .... but same tartget will see each others marks. When defending make your target the town.

 

50 minutes ago, ZEBBEEE said:

I was told that if your mission targets the area but the guy that reported a contact is on a mission targetting a flag or the FB, you won't see his report. With the Waypoints being shared soon between missions, this could probably follow. @SNIPER62 knows better 

yes. this. its also how air guys see target marks in town if the air mission's target is the town. although there are occasional anomalies even with marks from missions all with the exact same target (town, fb, cp) not showing up.  

hopefully the waypoint fix might also fix this - with all/any marks showing for all players on any missions to a target town, or any facility in or linked to the town - cps, abs, fbs, etc. 

Share this post


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

I was told that if your mission targets the area but the guy that reported a contact is on a mission targetting a flag or the FB, you won't see his report. With the Waypoints being shared soon between missions, this could probably follow. @SNIPER62 knows better 

It can also be that you created a new mission just after the mark was created, even if you share the mutual objective.

Share this post


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

You have a bias, that's the difference. Those coming from allies to axis and staying don't, like slickie1 have said the comms are terrible on allied side. @n8 has also said similar things.

I'm not telling you MY perspective, I'm telling you that of people that [some of which who played allied their whole time on WW2OL] moved into axis and that was their first responses.
My perspective is moot, because I've never played allied, so how the hell would I know? Needless to say I'd have confirmation bias if I went and played allied to study the comms.


As @Mosizlak said in response to @slickie1 when he said axis comms were better - "Allies comms are WORSE than this!? They must be horrendous!" to which slickies response was "They are.."

 

Lemme say that MO hates lowpop probably more then me so if your looking for his opinion i would LOVE to see it lol

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, tz3 balance remains a huge deficit to the game the other part of what makes it boring is what ZEBBEEE is talking about. He is 100% correct. Allied has no comms the week I have been back. Only two occasions in that time have we had organization and comms going on. WE may not be able to control tz3, we know that is a disaster in both directions, but lets take control of what we can. Allies are a shadow of what it used to be lets get the organization back and make our own fun again!

Share this post


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

mechanisms got relaxed cause Axis guys will [censored] and moan if it's set hard.

Please elaborate?  What got set to easy?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dre21 said:

Please elaborate?  What got set to easy?

Large group timers, coupled with a lot less spawn delay.

Problem when you've got single digit defenders is its easy for groups to get in there without being reduced down much less cleared and cap.  Affects attack and defense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am actively looking for gameplay adjustment ideas. One idea is an auto-uncontest feature for flags. A very simple mechanics which could contribute to solve some core issues:

"Unguarded contested flags could slowly uncontest itself."

Expected consequences:

It provides a bonus for defenders as it forces attackers to keep their captured flags under control and avoid solo caps on the other side of the attack ZOC that hurts the overall game experience. Mole attacks becomes therefore harder, especially in large towns.

The lower the online population, the harder for attackers. Frontline become more static as a result, except with a good coordination.

 

Extra option 1The more flags still owned by defenders (bunker, depots, city, Docks etc), the faster the auto-uncontest speed in that town (e.g. -5% per minute per defensive flag still up), and which will add up to physical re-cappers, when any.

Expected consequences: If a town has 5 flags still up, it would mean 4 minutes to loose unguarded flag(s). If there is only a bunker left, timer would be 20min.

It would make tactical planning for attackers even more important, and make large towns become elligible targets only when larger numbers are online. It also better rewards attackers with their territory control.

 

Extra Option 2: population balance gives a bonus or penalty to the auto-uncontest timer, similarly to the current capture timers: max -50%, +50%. The help would therefore be stronger for lowpop (e.g. 2.5% - 7.5% per minute per defender flag).

If a town has 5 flags still up, it would mean 8 minutes to loose an unguarded flag for extreme underpop attackers, and only 2 minutes for extreme overpop attackers. Values can be adjusted.

 

Extra Option 3: a flag being automatically uncontested could show its current % status on map to both sides. As soon as a flag has someone inside, the status is no longer visible.

Expected consequences: attackers and defenders get a situational awareness for contested and unguarded flags only. It also indirectly reveals if anyone is guarding or capping that contested flag, allowing to set priorities accordingly. Fog of war remains for new cappings.

 

thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are many comments concerning communication (or lack thereof), which is fair to some degree however this certainly isn’t the reason why ownership is changing at the rate it is.

Please do read yesterdays observation on page 2 of this thread if you haven’t done so. A ground team of 2 (+1 green tag) will not hold a town against x4 FMS, x2 tanks and additional trucks being driven in right up until the bunker was captured. Those players could have been the best the game has to offer, however they not going to hold a town for significantly longer with that level of imbalance - and at any rate, one doubts we’ll ever see a continuous stream of ‘All-Stars’ online throughout the day on either side...

There was one other player on the Allied side defending an FB (after hours spent getting rolled), x2 HC who were afk (probably asleep when I look at their tags and the time in the world where they live) and a couple of green tags running around shooting at FB tents who didn’t respond to my messages when asked if they required guidance.

This is not an Allied or Axis thing, and frankly it’s rather disappointing that many continue to bang this drum. When the Allies were rolling Axis a few maps ago, these same voices were saying the exact opposite to what they’re saying today. I can’t see how adopting this stance (consciously or unconsciously) has any benefit other than to rile opposing players to spin this thread into another d**k-swinging competition. It’s super frustrating and adds very little.

Every MMO game ever built would of course benefit from more players, however our very own TZ3 is in urgent need, or a fundamental change to the game mechanics is required. 

At the very least, please consider preventing depot spawning from the attacking side (spawnable or warp). I’d certainly be interested in the views of CRS on this particular suggestion as it has been discussed in a previous thread not too long ago. @XOOM

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like it Zebbee, except option 3, and it's really a low pop solution. I play low and high pop and i'm often amazed that every cp is guarded during high pop, it should make very little difference during high pop timezones. Maybe capping large towns is too hard now? Make uncontest timer slower the more cps a town has or maybe option3 is a necessity.

Edited by mike100

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, ZEBBEEE said:

I am actively looking for gameplay adjustment ideas. One idea is an auto-uncontest feature for flags. A very simple mechanics which could contribute to solve some core issues:

"Unguarded contested flags could slowly uncontest itself."

Expected consequences:

It provides a bonus for defenders as it forces attackers to keep their captured flags under control and avoid solo caps on the other side of the attack ZOC that hurts the overall game experience. Mole attacks becomes therefore harder, especially in large towns.

The lower the online population, the harder for attackers. Frontline become more static as a result, except with a good coordination.

 

Extra option 1The more flags still owned by defenders (bunker, depots, city, Docks etc), the faster the auto-uncontest speed in that town (e.g. -5% per minute per defensive flag still up), and which will add up to physical re-cappers, when any.

Expected consequences: If a town has 5 flags still up, it would mean 4 minutes to loose unguarded flag(s). If there is only a bunker left, timer would be 20min.

It would make tactical planning for attackers even more important, and make large towns become elligible targets only when larger numbers are online. It also better rewards attackers with their territory control.

 

Extra Option 2: population balance gives a bonus or penalty to the auto-uncontest timer, similarly to the current capture timers: max -50%, +50%. The help would therefore be stronger for lowpop (e.g. 2.5% - 7.5% per minute per defender flag).

If a town has 5 flags still up, it would mean 8 minutes to loose an unguarded flag for extreme underpop attackers, and only 2 minutes for extreme overpop attackers. Values can be adjusted.

 

Extra Option 3: a flag being automatically uncontested could show its current % status on map to both sides. As soon as a flag has someone inside, the status is no longer visible.

Expected consequences: attackers and defenders get a situational awareness for contested and unguarded flags only. It also indirectly reveals if anyone is guarding or capping that contested flag, allowing to set priorities accordingly. Fog of war remains for new cappings.

 

thoughts?

There's some merit in this. But what about large cities? Does it work at Antwerp, Liege etc?

It also risks completely nullifying underpop attacks

Edited by Silky
1 person likes this

Share this post


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

There's some merit in this. But what about large cities? Does it work at Antwerp, Liege etc?

 

  • Like the  unguarded facilities auto-reset with timers matched to pop differential - could happen all the time and be a good thing
  • sort of like the notion of lowpop no spawn cps use of fms only but a bit weird
  • still simplest to me seems longer timer till bunkers hot during tz3 and/or lowpop- 20m (or more maybe scaled to pop differential) instead of 10m  as it would auto slowdown town rolls and give underpop defenders more recap options - or some kind of town cap /tz3 limit

currently: fastest town cap possible is 22-23 mins > 10+1 to first cap from AO set / + 10 for bunker hot/ +1 for bunker cap if packed (as it often is in tz3) - if some tz3 mechanic could slow this down from a max of almost 3 towns/hr with no defense to 1 town/hr then the tz3 damage (to morale/game/etc) might be less. fake solution to an almost fake problem. 

also not wrong to consider this a 'night fighting obstacle' - if tz3 were to be considered  ' WW2 Night Fighting'  - then it should be harder or more confusing and/or take longer to move, cap and move forward again. 

Edited by sorella

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or, instead of once again putting ad hoc totally random game breaking ideas into the game  (SD, variable capture timers, severely long capture timers); one could just solve the real problem.

Lock the in game world to no more than 2 to 1 (maybe 3 to 2 later) to eliminate the extreme over pop and make it more balanced; something every other game in the world does (keeps balance).

Sure, a few players can't spawn into game world (for a couple hours a day) till someone dies (but are in game and can chat), but the trade off is no more SD or variable capture timers.

This still allows each side some over pop w/o allowing extreme over pop.

Share this post


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

I am actively looking for gameplay adjustment ideas. One idea is an auto-uncontest feature for flags. A very simple mechanics which could contribute to solve some core issues:

"Unguarded contested flags could slowly uncontest itself."

Expected consequences:

It provides a bonus for defenders as it forces attackers to keep their captured flags under control and avoid solo caps on the other side of the attack ZOC that hurts the overall game experience. Mole attacks becomes therefore harder, especially in large towns.

The lower the online population, the harder for attackers. Frontline become more static as a result, except with a good coordination.

 

Extra option 1The more flags still owned by defenders (bunker, depots, city, Docks etc), the faster the auto-uncontest speed in that town (e.g. -5% per minute per defensive flag still up), and which will add up to physical re-cappers, when any.

Expected consequences: If a town has 5 flags still up, it would mean 4 minutes to loose unguarded flag(s). If there is only a bunker left, timer would be 20min.

It would make tactical planning for attackers even more important, and make large towns become elligible targets only when larger numbers are online. It also better rewards attackers with their territory control.

 

Extra Option 2: population balance gives a bonus or penalty to the auto-uncontest timer, similarly to the current capture timers: max -50%, +50%. The help would therefore be stronger for lowpop (e.g. 2.5% - 7.5% per minute per defender flag).

If a town has 5 flags still up, it would mean 8 minutes to loose an unguarded flag for extreme underpop attackers, and only 2 minutes for extreme overpop attackers. Values can be adjusted.

 

Extra Option 3: a flag being automatically uncontested could show its current % status on map to both sides. As soon as a flag has someone inside, the status is no longer visible.

Expected consequences: attackers and defenders get a situational awareness for contested and unguarded flags only. It also indirectly reveals if anyone is guarding or capping that contested flag, allowing to set priorities accordingly. Fog of war remains for new cappings.

 

thoughts?

Great idea.  I'm just about ready to accept anything that eliminates the present seal cub clubbing currently in progress.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ZEBBEEE said:

I am actively looking for gameplay adjustment ideas. One idea is an auto-uncontest feature for flags. A very simple mechanics which could contribute to solve some core issues:

"Unguarded contested flags could slowly uncontest itself."

Expected consequences:

It provides a bonus for defenders as it forces attackers to keep their captured flags under control and avoid solo caps on the other side of the attack ZOC that hurts the overall game experience. Mole attacks becomes therefore harder, especially in large towns.

The lower the online population, the harder for attackers. Frontline become more static as a result, except with a good coordination.

 

Extra option 1The more flags still owned by defenders (bunker, depots, city, Docks etc), the faster the auto-uncontest speed in that town (e.g. -5% per minute per defensive flag still up), and which will add up to physical re-cappers, when any.

Expected consequences: If a town has 5 flags still up, it would mean 4 minutes to loose unguarded flag(s). If there is only a bunker left, timer would be 20min.

It would make tactical planning for attackers even more important, and make large towns become elligible targets only when larger numbers are online. It also better rewards attackers with their territory control.

 

Extra Option 2: population balance gives a bonus or penalty to the auto-uncontest timer, similarly to the current capture timers: max -50%, +50%. The help would therefore be stronger for lowpop (e.g. 2.5% - 7.5% per minute per defender flag).

If a town has 5 flags still up, it would mean 8 minutes to loose an unguarded flag for extreme underpop attackers, and only 2 minutes for extreme overpop attackers. Values can be adjusted.

 

Extra Option 3: a flag being automatically uncontested could show its current % status on map to both sides. As soon as a flag has someone inside, the status is no longer visible.

Expected consequences: attackers and defenders get a situational awareness for contested and unguarded flags only. It also indirectly reveals if anyone is guarding or capping that contested flag, allowing to set priorities accordingly. Fog of war remains for new cappings.

 

thoughts?

This is a great idea.

Encourages guarding, too, which short of a total rework of game mechanics is actually required play, even if it's terrible.

It means having a real ZOC at some level, since you either need a guard or you need a spawn point (FMS) close to each facility.

 

Share this post


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

There's some merit in this. But what about large cities? Does it work at Antwerp, Liege etc?

It also risks completely nullifying underpop attacks

Antwerp and brussels are no longer “big” cities they have been broken up which makes aquiring them a bit easier...on the bright side it has brought the fights back to these spots were in the past the axis usually tried to go around them....liege is still the same though

Share this post


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

Antwerp and brussels are no longer “big” cities they have been broken up which makes aquiring them a bit easier...on the bright side it has brought the fights back to these spots were in the past the axis usually tried to go around them....liege is still the same though

Oh yeah thanks for reminding me 

Share this post


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

There are many comments concerning communication (or lack thereof), which is fair to some degree however this certainly isn’t the reason why ownership is changing at the rate it is.

Please do read yesterdays observation on page 2 of this thread if you haven’t done so. A ground team of 2 (+1 green tag) will not hold a town against x4 FMS, x2 tanks and additional trucks being driven in right up until the bunker was captured. Those players could have been the best the game has to offer, however they not going to hold a town for significantly longer with that level of imbalance - and at any rate, one doubts we’ll ever see a continuous stream of ‘All-Stars’ online throughout the day on either side...

There was one other player on the Allied side defending an FB (after hours spent getting rolled), x2 HC who were afk (probably asleep when I look at their tags and the time in the world where they live) and a couple of green tags running around shooting at FB tents who didn’t respond to my messages when asked if they required guidance.

This is not an Allied or Axis thing, and frankly it’s rather disappointing that many continue to bang this drum. When the Allies were rolling Axis a few maps ago, these same voices were saying the exact opposite to what they’re saying today. I can’t see how adopting this stance (consciously or unconsciously) has any benefit other than to rile opposing players to spin this thread into another d**k-swinging competition. It’s super frustrating and adds very little.

Every MMO game ever built would of course benefit from more players, however our very own TZ3 is in urgent need, or a fundamental change to the game mechanics is required. 

At the very least, please consider preventing depot spawning from the attacking side (spawnable or warp). I’d certainly be interested in the views of CRS on this particular suggestion as it has been discussed in a previous thread not too long ago. @XOOM

You say it has no merit.  And it's a side vs side bashing.

Well let me fill you in , a few maps ago when the Axis where getting rolled and comms were pretty much dead guess what this player did?

 

I stayed a bit till I had my fill of  NO comms and I logged out with one difference I didn't log into Allies and my game participation for that map was so so . So why is it so far fetched that this is exactly what is happening on the other side ? 

It's not a d#ick swing competition.  It's not the 1st time that this has been brought up by players , players that went Axis to Allies to come back to Axis just for that reason , Allies come Axis never to go back for that reason .

Others left the game completely cause they only wanted to play one side but with No comms in our game it's almost pointless cause Comms is a big factor to be successful.  If I want to play no Comms games I log into WOWship or WarThunder and drive around in a Tank.

Or any other game where the objective is to more or less just kill till the other side or runs out of equipment or one side holds the objective long enough.

 

I also think the player base has come up with enough ideas over the years to try different things out to keep players from switching sides when one side doesn't look so desirable.  

Myself came up with the pick your side idea , where it's Axis ,Allies only or the Axis Allies underpop option , and that player is the only one that can switch back and forth but always only to the underpop side or stay if one side goes OP while he is online ( in other words he is not forced ) but to this day we still have the same log in mechanism. 

Also you mentioned Greentags and no response also here the player base has come up with countless ideas especially after the Steam launch and the aftermath of it. To this day we have not seen a good way to get Greentags to respond nor do we know if they even have the HUD chat bar up is up , or they toggled it away .

Compared to all the player tags I see in game and always  the same names I see in the forums . There might be the concensus that many players just play and don't even care anymore with giving in forum feedback.

Maybe take a in game survey why players don't come into the forum anymore.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.