So, what's in it for those of us who don't play the Infantry game?

[rob]

Just wondering if I should be excited or not? I don't play Inf due to a prosthetic left hand. I can use a joystick and an occasional mashing of buttons with "the claw" For Armor and Boats, but not so much for inf and planes...

[goldnelius]

likely not much i'm afraid: resistance and liberation (the half life 2 mod) was an entirely infantry affair. 

[jwilly]

Quote

Just wondering if I should be excited or not?

I don't know anything more of CRS's thoughts and plans than what they've told us, but:

1. Xoom has said (paraphrasing);

Development synergism...more modelers and terrain builders means more modules and object elements developed that are useable in both games. Even if the Wing 2 people only work on tasks directly focused on US and German 1944 ground stuff and Normandy and Ardennes terrain...WWIIOL's map has Normandy and Ardennes, and WWIIOL would benefit a lot from progress toward having enough T4 stuff modeled to split T4 from T3.

Revenue and overall business scale...it may be that some CP players will want to subscribe to WWIIOL because they decide, after inspection, that it's a game they'll enjoy and it's worth the subscription cost to them to have subscriber-level gameplay access; and that some WWIIOL players on the fence will choose to newly subscribe or continue an existing subscription because the "package" now includes two games that will be driven by a common commitment to the gameplay-feel that those players like. More revenue of course means more development resources, more operational solutions, and so forth.

2. Xoom has said that CP / R&L development won't change at all. I'm wondering though if, now that more developmental resources and in particular fully functional dynamic models rebuilt for Unreal 4/5 will be readily available, the CP team might be interested in new scenarios that center around combined arms actions, supply movement interdictions, recon actions and so forth. It seems to me that there's a lot of potential tactical infantry energy in appropriately armed infantry fighting desperately against a combined arms enemy, in both directions.

[XOOM]

One of the achilles heels we have is an infantry game at WWII Online that need to be improved upon. Chokepoint represents the perfect opportunity to focus on getting that right, and then when our WWII Online 2.0 endeavor matures - we can (and will) port over everything to do with infantry into that game. So Chokepoint is laying the foundation for future development - now - and working to bring more players into the WWII Online ecosystem, which we're calling the "Franchise." 

If you're someone who enjoys the vehicles of WWII Online exclusively, and are not that into infantry, than it probably won't do too much for you up front. But downstream everything we do here is really vital and the new assets being developed will be transplanted (as-needed) into 2.0 as well.

Meanwhile we are training our artists and developers how to work in this new (to us) engine. It's a pretty solid plan. Every subscription is a WWII Online subscription that benefits everything we're doing. We are one team, one franchise, and boldly marching into the future together with the community.

[rob]

It's not just infantry that need improvement, especially after all that's been given to inf and not to the other branches. Inf have multiple spawn options, unlike Armor, Hvy ATGs and AA, etc. They have camp resistant spawns, Barracks and CPs, that are not available to any other class. They aren't neglected, like the Navy with 4 Generic ships. I just don't want the rest of the us who play WWIIOL to be forgotten and neglected.

[usaf77]

On 6/9/2021 at 5:06 PM, rob said:

Just wondering if I should be excited or not? I don't play Inf due to a prosthetic left hand. I can use a joystick and an occasional mashing of buttons with "the claw" For Armor and Boats, but not so much for inf and planes...

Ive played a lot of war flight sim's, well not a lot because there arn't "a lot" but the top ones. Aces High , the IL2 series, War thunder, DCS, ...ect and they all lack something. Either its the fact your playing against strangers, or they arent a MMORPG, or they just aren't interesting flight models, or whatever. Yet I keep coming back to this old, moldy looking, WW2OL and its few airplanes modeled and Ive asked myself 'why"?

The answer is 'immersion". The flight game in WW2Ol is awesome because of its immersion. and not just that but there are a lot of skilled long time players who have both the skill and the years playing together to make it even more interesting. The only reason i dont fly more is because i have a bad back. I think the flight part is the best part of the game. I really think its a very good flight model.

And theres plenty of joysticks that let you map one handed. I bought an inexpensive Logitech one that has a bunch of buttons and I could easily use one handed.

Anyway Im just saying, minus the bad back, I could be perfectly happy flying and using vehicles full time. Thats just me, Im not trying to sell here. I just really like the flight model.

[XOOM]

7 hours ago, rob said:

It's not just infantry that need improvement, especially after all that's been given to inf and not to the other branches. Inf have multiple spawn options, unlike Armor, Hvy ATGs and AA, etc. They have camp resistant spawns, Barracks and CPs, that are not available to any other class. They aren't neglected, like the Navy with 4 Generic ships. I just don't want the rest of the us who play WWIIOL to be forgotten and neglected.

Who said anything about neglecting them? Do not go down the road of feeling forgotten or neglected, that's wholly inaccurate and contrary to everything we have announced. Production will continue on 1.0 in the form of new vehicle assets and as they start to enter UE4/5 we can start the process of refining them and improving on this system.

[jwilly]

It all looks like a coherent, fortuitous, everyone-wins plan to me.

[stankyus]

14 hours ago, XOOM said:

One of the achilles heels we have is an infantry game at WWII Online that need to be improved upon. Chokepoint represents the perfect opportunity to focus on getting that right, and then when our WWII Online 2.0 endeavor matures - we can (and will) port over everything to do with infantry into that game. So Chokepoint is laying the foundation for future development - now - and working to bring more players into the WWII Online ecosystem, which we're calling the "Franchise." 

If you're someone who enjoys the vehicles of WWII Online exclusively, and are not that into infantry, than it probably won't do too much for you up front. But downstream everything we do here is really vital and the new assets being developed will be transplanted (as-needed) into 2.0 as well.

Meanwhile we are training our artists and developers how to work in this new (to us) engine. It's a pretty solid plan. Every subscription is a WWII Online subscription that benefits everything we're doing. We are one team, one franchise, and boldly marching into the future together with the community.

Would it be fair to conclude that the ultimate goal is to extract what works best for chokepoint and BGE into a much better large format higher resolution game that blends the best of the two.... ultimately creating a high resolution environment based on the large terrain of ww2ol creating a multi dimensional large format game that includes air, armor and infantry?  That thought is woodsy territory to say the least. Regardless of terrain resolution just the difference between our engine a UE WOULD change the game fundamentally in a massive positive direction IMHO.

[XOOM]

3 minutes ago, stankyus said:

Would it be fair to conclude that the ultimate goal is to extract what works best for chokepoint and BGE into a much better large format higher resolution game that blends the best of the two.... ultimately creating a high resolution environment based on the large terrain of ww2ol creating a multi dimensional large format game that includes air, armor and infantry?  That thought is woodsy territory to say the least. Regardless of terrain resolution just the difference between our engine a UE WOULD change the game fundamentally in a massive positive direction IMHO.

Yes it can easily be said that Chokepoint is acting as the development and testing grounds for new content for 2.0. It will also train our artists and team members how to interact with and work on the Unreal Engine with folks there to support and guide them through some of the initial hurdles.

It really is a massively good idea in so many respects. As time goes on more and more good reasons come out of it, more than I had originally anticipated in fact.

[rob]

Had you let some of us know about this sooner, we might have been able to suggest and show you that many things other than Infantry were carried by glider. Things like:

[B2K]

22 minutes ago, rob said:

Had you let some of us know about this sooner, we might have been able to suggest and show you that many things other than Infantry were carried by glider. Things like:

we are aware of these.. Chokepoint is being developed as an infantry centric game.  At some point in the future other equipment types may be introduced (or may not be).  

[jwilly]

Probably not in Normandy, but certainly by the time of Bulge, American counterattack/reinforcement unit troops arriving from the west and south had plenty of supply...which permitted them to use bazooka rockets for anything they wanted, including as longer ranged flat-trajectory rifle-grenade-substitutes against infantry strongpoints and other soft targets. It was commonplace to fire bazooka rockets against doors or walls to project a bit of hot stuff, and maybe a bit of fear, toward anyone on the far side.

Of course, CP doesn't model British troops, but the British forces arriving from the north were liberally armed with PIATs, and PIAT natively had HE and WP (nominally smoke, in practice anti-personnel and incendiary) rounds that were in liberal supply.

CP has been specific in modeling 82nd Ariborne actions on the American side. I don't know if the complex supply situation in the Elsenborn area provided them with enough bazookas that they could use them as infantry-artillery, given how many tanks they had to face.

Pending further consideration of that latter question, maybe the Bulge scenario could include bazookas for the Americans, nominally in case they encounter tanks, but realistically available for whatever was needed?

***

The fact that 82nd Airborne faced off mostly against SS divisions in the initial part of their Bulge fighting...until Patton arrived at Bastogne...is also relevant to German infantry-weaponry modeling for CP. While Germany always was short of panzerschreck ammo and often was short of panzerfausts, the SS did have a better supply in 1944 of their 61mm HEAT RG, along with the re-purposed AT rifle used to fire that RG. Maybe that weapon could be provided to German forces for potential anti-soft-target use...?

Edited July 9, 2021 by jwilly

[jwilly]

Infantry shooters are all about intensive combat. Maximized weapon-effects violence via realistic physics is a good design feature.

WWIIOL used to include code to detect supersonic and subsonic ordnance passing close to infantrymen, and provide "crack" and "vippp" sound effects with the right directionality for that passage. AFAIK, R&L hasn't had such effects.

It was done in WWIIOL only for bullets because realistic numbers of fragments weren't being generated then, but of course it should apply to both bullets and fragments. CP has lots of those events. And, WWIIOL has all the relevant data on realistic numbers of fragments.

And, WWIIOL used to include code that modeled dynamic visual explosion-shockwaves in free air. CP of course doesn't have as many explosions...especially large ones...as WWIIOL due to its focus to date on bullet weapons and grenades, but there still could be opportunities to add immersion, even if the effect is only visual and immersive because the explosions are deliberately located so as to not cause casualties.