Rank Considerations

[docattak]

Equating rank across the 3 allied countries has been mentioned recently. Here's another observation.

If you are axis army, all of your army points go towards your army rank. If you are allied army then your points go towards 2 countries army ranks (will be 3 when USA enters fully) - often there is only one of the 3 available when you want to play army. I don't know how the points for rank are structured for allied/axis, but it would seem that unless there is a major difference between the points needed for rank for axis compared to allied then it would be far easier to get rank for axis.

Any comments/info please.

[company0]

Equating rank across the 3 allied countries has been mentioned recently. Here's another observation.

If you are axis army, all of your army points go towards your army rank. If you are allied army then your points go towards 2 countries army ranks (will be 3 when USA enters fully) - often there is only one of the 3 available when you want to play army. I don't know how the points for rank are structured for allied/axis, but it would seem that unless there is a major difference between the points needed for rank for axis compared to allied then it would be far easier to get rank for axis.

Any comments/info please.

The ranks are equal. If your rank 5 in the british army, your rank 5 in the french, rank 5 in the US. I do not believe the points are split across 3 branches but just cumulatively added.

Edit - Whoops. Reread through that. Yes, theres a difference, but its not exactly as clearcut as you make it. Allies have 3x the equipment choice allies do (Not to mention we have to memorize 3x the sap spots )

Edited December 3, 2011 by COMPANY0

[Tigger6]

This is only the case from rank 5->6. Up to rank 5, you rank up equally in all 3. So maybe dropping the mission creation requirements to rank 5 should be sufficient.

That said, I somehow became a sucky Major in the FAF, while my real rank is a cool Captain!

[docattak]

Thanks for the info - 3x the sapping points - I was a sapper for years for axis a long time ago - don't tell me about it lol! What I meant was that allied are piling the points up in 2 (soon to be 3) areas so in effect they do a lot more than just take one army up a rank. Say 1500 needed for next rank - you might get

- 1500 - french

- 1350 - UK

- 1400 - USA

to get your next rank.

I don't know how the points compare, but if the same axis rank move was also 1500 then that would probably be wrong

Only offer it for discussion before the allies become 3 armies etc.

I made a 'flash' programme that was a game to recognise and mark sapping points on all alied armour - it was generally available for axis forces but it has long since disappeared

[company0]

Thanks for the info - 3x the sapping points - I was a sapper for years for axis a long time ago - don't tell me about it lol! What I meant was that allied are piling the points up in 2 (soon to be 3) areas so in effect they do a lot more than just take one army up a rank. Say 1500 needed for next rank - you might get

- 1500 - french

- 1350 - UK

- 1400 - USA

to get your next rank.

I don't know how the points compare, but if the same axis rank move was also 1500 then that would probably be wrong

Only offer it for discussion before the allies become 3 armies etc.

I made a 'flash' programme that was a game to recognise and mark sapping points on all alied armour - it was generally available for axis forces but it has long since disappeared

How would it be wrong? CRS eventually wants to make it side-wide points.

[docattak]

Side-wide points is what I suggested weeks ago but did not get a positive reply. In that case I have no problem whatsoever - as it stoos then I did.

Do you really mean side-wide points (i.e. only 1 army points total for the allies for example) or do you just mean that the rank will be the same for each? If your answer is yes then great - problem solved

[Tigger6]

How would it be wrong? CRS eventually wants to make it side-wide points.

This thread is about mission posting ability I believe. Not about troubles encountered attaining the rank of überunterhosenkommandoarmchairgeneral.

[company0]

Side-wide points is what I suggested weeks ago but did not get a positive reply. In that case I have no problem whatsoever - as it stoos then I did.

Do you really mean side-wide points (i.e. only 1 army points total for the allies for example) or do you just mean that the rank will be the same for each? If your answer is yes then great - problem solved

Yes to both as CRS said in your last thread.

[docattak]

Not really - I can post missions in everything I do and country I play for except except one thing. I was just trying to point out what seemed to me to be noy quite right and to see what other opinions there were and any info I didn't know about. Your comments cleared that up so I have no problem at all in this area.

In reply to your other comment, GOPHUR mentioned about the rank change to create missions dropping to 3 and equaling rank acroos the allied forces for all of the army ranks etc., but unless I misunderstood him he only mentioned equaling rank, nothing was said about, for example, when you play french army the points go to french army total etc. etc. and when 1 of the country's army rank goes up then the other allied army ranks goes up

OR whether the points just go into a communal pool for the player's single army rank.

That was all my last post was trying to find out.

I sound like a points horder - not so, in fact I hate stats - this is a great game that I've played since 2004 - it's best features are the tactical/strategy side which I love as well as the action side. As a logician I like to understand how things work and see if I can think of anything that looks a little wrong or could be improved (that's nor meant to sound negative, it is in fact very positive lol). I make my suggestions and then get on with my life. If they're useful then great if not, then usually someone has explained why and I'm wiser than I was.

So, nothing in the least negative intended, quite the contrary.

[company0]

Well. I'm going to take a leap here as assume GOPHUR has read and understood what your saying. If I was in the position CRS is in, I would be getting rid of the 3 separate ranks for Allies and instead make it one unified one. No seperate French, British and American ranks, just one unified Allied rank system.

[docattak]

I'm glad you agree - that is exactly what I was trying to say - it is also what was in my thread to GOPHUR. It just makes sense

[GOPHUR]

Thanks for the info - 3x the sapping points - I was a sapper for years for axis a long time ago - don't tell me about it lol! What I meant was that allied are piling the points up in 2 (soon to be 3) areas so in effect they do a lot more than just take one army up a rank. Say 1500 needed for next rank - you might get

- 1500 - french

- 1350 - UK

- 1400 - USA

to get your next rank.

I don't know how the points compare, but if the same axis rank move was also 1500 then that would probably be wrong

Only offer it for discussion before the allies become 3 armies etc.

No way. Saying the Allies are 3 armies is just like saying the axis are 2 armies and you'd have to rank separate in the north or the south.

The Axis have it "easier" as it is now but it is effectively irrelevant after rank 5 whaere vehicle ranks used to end.

To be able to post missions wherever he plays on the map an Allied player must go from rank 5 to rank 6 3 times where an Axis player only needs to do it once. Same for sniper etc.

This is why we propose eliminating country based ranks and going to side/branch based ranks.

It also allows us to better manage the prespawn complexities.

[GOPHUR]

I'm glad you agree - that is exactly what I was trying to say - it is also what was in my thread to GOPHUR. It just makes sense

I are no read gooder.

I posted this to the CM team but didn't get any positive feedback. It's just a button press away from happening if I can get some feedback saying the Allied players want this.

[docattak]

Yes I want this and several other players have mentioned it as a good positive move (but I appreciate that that is only a 3rd party response)

[rwkeen]

Yup, kind of makes sense that you earn rank for army, navy & airforce the same on both sides.

For example:-

When the Americans are in the game you'll have 3 Allied countries.

You are just short of getting the rank to spawn a SMG in the British army and are enjoying the current fight and hope to get your rank in the next 30mins.

The AO get moved and is now in a French held town.

You think, great I'll go there and get the few points I need to get that SMG. However as you're now not just a few points away from getting to use the SMG, you have the whole rank to gain! So you start killing and capping and move towards that SMG rank.

Now the AO gets moved again, this time to a American brigade.

Yup, you guessed it, most of the rank level to gain to get that damn elusive SMG.

Of course if the player was playing as German he would have got the rank for the SMG in the 2nd fight and be on his way to the next one.

OK, it's not a game killer, but having a unified Allied rank for Navy, Army & Airforce would be fair.

[fxmmauser]

You got my support CRS mention here a couple of months ago and fusing the Combat stats of allies is a must too, went allied some months ago to check what was the other side like and was disappoint finding out that despite having more kills with both personas I was not top killer because kills would not add up

There needs to be a fusion also in the main persona screen , there should be only 2 sides Axis and Allies. This would look better and present a more clean presentation for gamers and also contribute to reducing dev time if more countries were added

[JOKER007]

Gophur - I defer to whatever TOPD and XOOM have as feedback. But speaking personally, I heartily vote for one force. Officer billets and Her Majesty's various popularities versus former colonials seems to rule the forces for division of the allies. Not really what you want to use for decisions on game development.

Go one for all - it'll be good for both teams, side switchers and veterans who can always say "I remember when...".

[GOPHUR]

@Joker I think talking to you was why I wrote the ticket in the first place =]

@fx this would be a step towards fixing up the csr too but that is UNIT based and needs a bit more work.