CRS was in bankruptcy for some time long ago and they had to let many people go. This last cycle included not only 1.31 but the China build which may keep their doors open. All the TOE, Bde movment were designed to produce fights. The HC at one time were trying to win at the expense of fights and CRS listened and the gaming was changed to ensure fights. Newbies, before the implemtation of the mechanics would leave because they fights were small and hard to find. WW2OL cannot survive placating the squads who want to have a couple of squad nights for a few hours. The Rats have to make money, they have to keep newbies. The old days were not that fun, they did not keep newbies and almost drove the Rats out of business.
Sorry, i cannot see any "improvement" for producing fights after TOEs was implemented. The only "progress" is seen in a decline of players numbers and lately the reducing to a single AO during low pop.
That "producing fights" idea may honor the devs (for helping new player in the game) but at what costs?
Before TOEs there always was a chance to go with a "greentag" out in a tank for supply-cut (or doing manual resuply).
Where does a new player will "learn" better how to tank than in that small urban fights - or does someone realy believe, a new player will have more fun while getting killed in a tank and evend didn´t got a glue from where the enemy was firing?
Those resuply/~cutting missions was the best way to train fresh tankers - and not in an overcrowded huge battle where friendly and sometimes hostile units are plopping on and off and shells from everywhere can rip of the own unit - plus not every player is calling the latest "state of art computer" his own - smaller fights outside of town allowed players with somewhat poorer machines also to play and have fun in game.
(Just a side note: Of course "overcrowded battles will create the illusion for a new player of "thousands of players" are in the game - untill a player is logging into the game in TZ3 (Aussie) where there is just one AO at the whole map)
So that "producing fights" turned the tanking game into a camping game which isn´t that thrilling and challenging than it was before when skills (using a good spot, patience and - very important too - having an eye for the map * {will explain later} and for surviving - beeing not too "kill horny" and changing position not before it was too late) - because instead of finding smaller fights between towns now its only a rush for spawnpoints.
That also will "annoy" inf players who find tanks nothing but disturbing their inf-fights.
* With an "eye for the map" which was needed for a tanker when going on resuply-cutting is ment, that a tanker had to watch the map and made his own guess where the next fight will take place - long before the original setup prodcedure even started - or the town was called a target. The reason is simple - as soon as an AO was placed, the defenders also was setting up in defense positions (and sappers spread out from defense MSPs) - if that happened, it was too late for a tanker to go supply-cutting, because of the audio-range where the defenders could hear the own tank. Thanks to the "realistic" GPS system, the own tank for shure was marked on the map even before the ambush-position was reached. It was more "successfully" to made a good guess, where the HCs would order an attack in the next one or two ours. - Shure, the result of the current fight played a role for that guessing too. But there was another "side-effect": Every new tanker who went on supply-cutting - or also went on hunting down supply cutters - had to think (at least a bit) like an HC-player and learned that way the HC-game too.
The players who grabbed a tank for hunting down supply-cutters also needed "skills" for guessing where a good ambush position would be and where to expect supply-cutters. Flanking around and using other "noice-sourses" to cover the own audio (like planes) was essential too.
In short term - before TOEs a tanker had to think about his future action and had to play smart (if he doesn´t - and couldn´t find an action for some hours, okay, then better luck next time) - but hey, didn´t CRS was reserving the word "REALISTIC" for the game? - Does in that war on each section of the frontline there was just 24/7 action non-stop? - Not very realistic!
Instead it was much more realistic, that smaller units was deployed on tactical positions with no action for several days.
Another thing is - yes i know, its boring hard work to create more towns for using the whole map - but, hey; Rats don´t hesitate to use the whole map (from almost russian - polish border in the east, to middle england in the west, north up to at least denmark and south to italy for their commercials. How many thousands squaremiles? Nothing, absolutly nothing in compareable games even comes to a tenth of that size. But what is the first thing a player is logging in the game - or exploring the map offline? Not even a third of the whole (and i bet very interesting) map is used for playing. Furthermore - the TOEs and the "improved game" - for producing fights - was just creating more unused wasteland. Not shure for what the developer is heading - maybe for self-celebrating because of the biggest map ever in such a ww2 mmorpg? Why then just concentrating fights on some tiny spots? Okay, if the shoebox-shooter (or better to say, the matchbox-shooter) is desired, then why the devs don´t have the guts and cut the huge unused map away (might be always bring a performance increase, but on the other hand, then another "game-attractor" is coded out.
With the TOEs and brigade moving/rotation, there isn´t any supply/-cutting possible any more because of that "magically warping supply into an AOed/DOed town. New players also getting somewhat "forced" to stay at an FB for defense - for getting AQed a lot or finding themselfs in the middle of a heavy battle - not knowing what killed them. Doesn´t sound very funny.
Compared to pre TOEs i find it pretty boring - so i didn´t played much last campaign and not a single minute the current campaign. In pre TOEs i managed beeing ranked as #4 of global Top-time on map and there was a lot more players that time in game than nowadays. I started to play the game in 2005 and loved it - according to your explanation, because of the "lack of TOEs and the difficulty to find a fight, why did i played that game and stayed? (untill now when TOEs will finally drive me away?)
Another thing is - its simply a shame, that "issues", problems and what players disagree have to be dicussed outside of BGE-forums? The intention is by far not to keep new potentially players from BGE away. The reason is simply (you can read that in posts of other players here) that CRS don´t allow some kind of free-speech when critism is included. Thats why disapointed players are "forced" to complain at places where the almighty arm of CRS-censor-gods dont reach.
So, don´t blame players who doesn´t have the possibility for stating their complaints inside of BGE-forums because of mods who are hiding behind TOS and trying to put a mouth-basked on every critical voice, when those players went into other places - A BIG APLAUD to MMORPG.com ! and post what makes them unhappy in game. Before some years ago i suggested once to create something like a "troublebox" inside Playschool-forums where only the original poster and developers can read and write. With such a trouble-box CRS would be able to kill two birds with one stone:
Keeping critism covered from a wider audience and getting informed what players are thinking - but instead, we have to go into real public for debating what many players are hating in game. Thats a shame!
Well I subscribed my 2 accounts for this new patch for a month, but i'm not staying.
The primary reason is stale tactics, it's a capture the flag game after all and how many ways can one capture the flag? You camp the spawn. After 9 years, camp the spawn to capture the flag gets boring. Need some sort of full mobile spawning capabilities and interdictable supplies (for realism otherwise axis will put a mobile AB in England, and Allies will put a mobile AB in Frankfurt at the map start). No cheesy rules like distance limitations either, I hate that about mobile spawns, it has a very narrow deploy range, very narrow.
The secondary reason i'm not staying is because it is total allied easymode. Every piece of equipment except the LMG, the 88 (only in the lower tiers), and maybe the Stug-G is allied easymode.
And TOE's have narrowed tactical options, like the other poster said, there is very little interdiction going on cause HC will just put another brigade in. Also it's no fun to get down to weenie tanks in a battle and have the enemy pop a new brigade in and now your fighting Churchills with PIIc's. The magical teleporting equipment has come to save the day. Need logistics, not magical teleporting equipment to come to save the day.
And FB ping pong is lame, nobody likes having an attack halted cause 1-4 ninjas got satchels off.
However all these problems would be moot if there were no more fixed spawn points. All problems in WWIIONLINE are because of fixed spawn points. Even the equipment imballance wouldn't matter that much if you had terrain advantage. Is there terrain advantage in places CRS placed the AB/FBses? No. If players had a choice of placing their AB/FB spawn points they would not chose where CRS has placed them. Reason #1: BECAUSE THE ENEMY KNOWS EXACTLY WHERE YOUR COMING FROM!
CRS also refuses to plug up one of their biggest holes in their "simulation". In game you will regularly see bombers and fighters pull fantastic feats, like HE111/Havocs pulling enough G forces to black out the pilot (6 g's). Medium bombers are typically rated at 3 G's before their wings fall off.
The Stuka was specifically designed to withstand 9 G's before it's wings ripped off so it can dive bomb and pull out of a dive. The added structural strength added weight which made the plane slower, slower climb rate, less maneuverable. While the Stuka is slow, with a slow climb rate, and unmaneuverable a medium bomber such as the HE111 and Havoc can pull he same maneuvers a Stuka was designed to do when in reality their wings would rip off. They have much higher bomb load.
I suspect even some of the fighters would have their wings rip off when they pull high G stunts too.
It's just unrealistic and gamey adds to a phenominon we like to call "airquake", or "a bunch of B.S." as other players would have it.
Hopefully this will help some of you re-join the fight.
More news.
1.32 Features Revealed
Written by RAFTER
Friday, 30 July 2010 08:21
It's time to lay out the feature plan for our next point release. 1.32 is currently in development and will include Player-Placed Objects and Bail-out for Aircraft along with a few other goodies.
Player-Placed Objects (PPOs)
As previously outlined in our Development Note of July 14th, we have defined the first three PPOs.
The Field Reinforcement Unit (FRU) which will allow truck drivers to drop an infantry spawn object onto the terrain and drive away to conduct other operations. The FRU will follow the same rules as current mission-based MSPs with restrictions on where the object can be placed as well as limiting the number to one per mission. Once the new FRU is placed, mission leaders can decide to destroy it and create an opportunity for a new one to be placed. This is the same as current MSPs. FRUs will take damage and can be destroyed and will provide the same resupply function as a truck.
The next two PPOs are for infantry units and for the first time, allow players to build objects on the terrain;
Infantry Fighting Position (IFP)
The IFP will be a small berm- big enough for a couple of infantry to be concealed and covered from enemy fire. One of the goals is for the object to blend in with terrain as much as possible with characteristics similar to existing berms. IFPs will have a build timer for placement and a lifespan timer for removing them from the game world when unused.
Gun Emplacement (GE)
Sappers will have the ability to build a Gun Emplacement on the terrain which will serve as an AT/AA pit offering cover from enemy fire. GE's will not provide any spawning capability but will have a resupply function similar to trucks. GE's will be destroyable by enemy fire, a build timer for placement and a lifespan timer for removing them from the game world when unused.
A server-based area grid will track these objects and limit the number of PPOs in order to manage performance issues. A HUD element will provide feedback to players on build availability. A change in this feature design from the original article should be noted; the arbitrary player limit of (2) PPOs per sortie has been deleted from the design as we believe that the combination of build timers, lifespan timers and server managed limits eliminates this requirement.
Read the original PPO article here
Bail-out for Aircraft
As one of our longest standing requests from pilots, bailing out from aircraft has remained an elusive feature. We have chosen to develop a partial answer to this request with 1.32.
The goal of this feature is providing a means for a pilot to increase the chance of having his mission scored as "Rescued" or "MIA" instead of "KIA". Pilots will have the ability to despawn while in-flight which will activate the despawn timer. Once the timer expires, the player will be dropped from his aircraft with a chute attached and will begin descending to the ground. The first-person view will be similar to what is seen as a paratrooper in descent. After touching down, the despawn function will be completed with the presentation of the after-action report. Pilots will not have the ability to continue play as infantry once touching down.
After a player bails out from the aircraft, it will continue on an uncontrolled flight path until it crashes to the ground/water. This will provide additional time for enemy aircraft to fire and potentially cause critical damage. Critical damage to the enemy aircraft will result in a mission score of "kill". Should the aircraft not be critically damaged prior the completed despawn of the pilot who bailed out, the aircraft will also despawn from the game world as seen in current play.
Along with these two features, we've got a short list of items we're working as well as some fixes/changes that are being moved from the 1.31 branch to the 1.32 branch. We will be sure publish details of other items that get officially added to the 1.32 release plan as they get the green light.
Work on 1.32 has been underway for some time and we are taking an aggressive approach to the schedule. We have not yet set a release date for 1.32 but we will post updates as available.
I came back to the game short before the update and was looking forward to the new version and i liked it
However heres where the problem started CRS descided to switch the payment provider and it turned out you cannot pay using visa electron anymore for 3 weeks i get ashured they gonna look into the problem but it never got resolved so free time ran out and my acount was shutdown been a subsrciber since 2007 member:REDRIDER19
Also i wouldnt say that the game has historical acuracy just because most ppl that still play the game wouldnt like it and we get ashured every time that the game is as historical as posible when it comes to equipment and the damage model and everything is based on historical research however they never said to us where exactly this research data comes from most probably from american propaganda magasines 1940-1945 expeciallly when it comes to shermans wich tend to survive direct hit from 88mm anti tank gun or tiger !
I came back to the game short before the update and was looking forward to the new version and i liked it
However heres where the problem started CRS descided to switch the payment provider and it turned out you cannot pay using visa electron anymore for 3 weeks i get ashured they gonna look into the problem but it never got resolved so free time ran out and my acount was shutdown been a subsrciber since 2007 member:REDRIDER19
Also i wouldnt say that the game has historical acuracy just because most ppl that still play the game wouldnt like it and we get ashured every time that the game is as historical as posible when it comes to equipment and the damage model and everything is based on historical research however they never said to us where exactly this research data comes from most probably from american propaganda magasines 1940-1945 expeciallly when it comes to shermans wich tend to survive direct hit from 88mm anti tank gun or tiger !
Arrrgh yes, that switching of payment providers. That was the final nail in the cofin for me, used to pay via bitbit (electronic moneytransfer - Lastschriftverfahren - ) worked for years. It seems they don´t need my money, so they don´t get it anymore!
Historical accuracy - lol. As a "last ressort excuse" there always is a "game engine don´t support it" for CRS.
I was a builder (silver account) - bought that acc in the hope CRS finally will raise their @sses and implement new models (last tank was the Sherm76, which is almost a half dekade in game now) . But i don´t have anymore faith in CRS to bring up something interesting for axis tankers. (What can be expected from a former flyboy who cares about airgame and give a damn about the other sections?)
Well, anyways as an axis player i stopped long before to expect historical correct models - no regenerative steering for tigers - instead pretty stupid degunning. (one track moves forward, the other reverse)
Shure they must be guided by american propaganda magazines and call it "top reliable sources" - but okay, if they would go totally historical accurate, who is going to play allied?
Is there a more historically accurate MMO you can suggest covering WWII?
"Also i wouldnt say that the game has historical acuracy just because most ppl that still play the game wouldnt like it and we get ashured every time that the game is as historical as posible when it comes to equipment and the damage model and everything is based on historical research however they never said to us where exactly this research data comes from most probably from american propaganda magasines 1940-1945 expeciallly when it comes to shermans wich tend to survive direct hit from 88mm anti tank gun or tiger !"
I sure wish I could get my hands on that invincible Sherman. Mine always dies and very quickly unless it's a Sherman 76 and the shots are from long range and I'm taking hits to the front . I would contend that it is historically accurate.
Is there a more historically accurate MMO you can suggest covering WWII?
"Also i wouldnt say that the game has historical acuracy just because most ppl that still play the game wouldnt like it and we get ashured every time that the game is as historical as posible when it comes to equipment and the damage model and everything is based on historical research however they never said to us where exactly this research data comes from most probably from american propaganda magasines 1940-1945 expeciallly when it comes to shermans wich tend to survive direct hit from 88mm anti tank gun or tiger !"
I sure wish I could get my hands on that invincible Sherman. Mine always dies and very quickly unless it's a Sherman 76 and the shots are from long range and I'm taking hits to the front . I would contend that it is historically accurate.
Is there a more historically accurate MMO you can suggest covering WWII?
"Also i wouldnt say that the game has historical acuracy just because most ppl that still play the game wouldnt like it and we get ashured every time that the game is as historical as posible when it comes to equipment and the damage model and everything is based on historical research however they never said to us where exactly this research data comes from most probably from american propaganda magasines 1940-1945 expeciallly when it comes to shermans wich tend to survive direct hit from 88mm anti tank gun or tiger !"
I sure wish I could get my hands on that invincible Sherman. Mine always dies and very quickly unless it's a Sherman 76 and the shots are from long range and I'm taking hits to the front . I would contend that it is historically accurate.
Want more historicly acurate game ?
Its easy get DOC's hands off the damage model and find someone who dosent consider axis players to be nxxis that ex US army guy simply cannot get into his thick skull that American equipment was not supperior to the german one.Maybe irl 1 tiger was worth 8 shermans but thats not the case ingame. What we need is someone who dosent care wich side wins so he can really adjust the damage model based on historical data!I would take my words back but DOC will never ever show us the source of his research because the only research he does is based on how many campains allies loose
What I asked is there a more historically accurate WWII MMO .
And the answer is no.
Apparently some of you have a personal problem with the games designers and owners. I don't care about that or really want to hear about it either.
World of Tanks is 3rd person for gods sake! How can that be taken seriously. No infantry. No air. No etc. You can use your tank as a ram,!?!!? Swirling battles at point blank range with the tanks doing a round about dance...WTF.
The original poster had some very valid points and if presented continuously sans person attacks they might get addressed if enough people agree with you. Personal attacks will get you nowhere and I'm sure some are about to come my way.
One of the major complaints from day one was bailing out of a crippled aircraft. I for one did not think it was worth a seconds thought and a stupid waste of game development time. Well the pressure built in a positive manner and now in the next patch you will be able to bail out of your crippled plane.
Until someone comes up with a more realistic and historically accurate WWII MMO this is the one I will play. No other game comes even close I'm afraid.
What I asked is there a more historically accurate WWII MMO .
And the answer is no.
Apparently some of you have a personal problem with the games designers and owners. I don't care about that or really want to hear about it either.
World of Tanks is 3rd person for gods sake! How can that be taken seriously. No infantry. No air. No etc. You can use your tank as a ram,!?!!? Swirling battles at point blank range with the tanks doing a round about dance...WTF.
The original poster had some very valid points and if presented continuously sans person attacks they might get addressed if enough people agree with you. Personal attacks will get you nowhere and I'm sure some are about to come my way.
One of the major complaints from day one was bailing out of a crippled aircraft. I for one did not think it was worth a seconds thought and a stupid waste of game development time. Well the pressure built in a positive manner and now in the next patch you will be able to bail out of your crippled plane.
Until someone comes up with a more realistic and historically accurate WWII MMO this is the one I will play. No other game comes even close I'm afraid.
When you find it let me know.
Hm, yes - i think about the same when comparing BGE and World of Tanks - its like comparing apples and potatoes (or something else - english isn´t my first language).
We all know, there are many other "shoebox-shooters" out there - nothing, but absolutly nothing can be competitive to BGE!
The original idea of the game is still unbeaten by any other game - thats why i really loved to play it (in the past) - i even changed my job to get more time to play. Unfortunatly, the recent changes what have been made to the game was doing nothing but decrease the fun factor by a very large part to me. Well, if i wouldn´t liked that game so much in the past, i never would spent a single second to write a statement about it. But BECAUSE it was such a great game, its very sad what does it become during the last couple of years - thats the reason i think the game still is worth to talk about.
You´re right too - personal insulting will lead to nothing, but on the other hand - excuse me for this - shure there is anger to those persons who have ruined a lot (in my pov) in the game.
I don´t agree, that some changes will beeing undone - even if frequently players will ask for it, because a major part of players who didn´t like the changes in game mostly turned their back to the game in silence - i doubt, that this people ever will raise their voice and ask the devs for turning something in the game around. In adition - it is not the case, that there isn´t from time to time a topic raised in game forums asking the devs for taking some implementions back or change it somewhat into that direction. - The major tenor from devs is that they just ignoring it (or taking knowledge but never will take that into consideration).
Really, the only thing, which can make the devs think about it will be a decrease in players numbers (the devs maybe already suffer from low subscription numbers, but they don´t accept the reasons for it; instead they are coming up with something like "bailing" in the next patch.
I cant get rid of the imagination, that (at least sometimes) the devs pride will prevent them to agree with the part of their (disliked) customers who have critisized the past changes.
I agree with much of what you say. I think the key is to offer constructive suggestions and stay away from personal attacks which will only get you ....nowhere. They are looking for feedback I'm sure but immature rants will not work. Hang in there Paulker fox holes and atg emplacements are coming. More jobs for engineers too.
I agree with much of what you say. I think the key is to offer constructive suggestions and stay away from personal attacks which will only get you ....nowhere. They are looking for feedback I'm sure but immature rants will not work. Hang in there Paulker fox holes and atg emplacements are coming. More jobs for engineers too.
Hm, "great improvement" for a tanker like me (scratching head).
If i feel take a rifle, then i go play something like "Trophy Hunter" - i simply hate rushing and getting killed and having no glue from what. Not that i would mind to get killed (lost roughly 50% of my tanks to enemy sooner or later), but inf-game is too focussed on capture points. What we have now in game is simply lacking almost totally a layer in which tanking requires skills like beeing patience, tactical thinking, beeing able to surprise the enemy by setting up in positions where not beeing expected, seeking and hide by using the terrain outside of towns (too much rush in there).
Getting an ellbow long kill list by camping a spawnpoint may make the stats whores happy, but its pretty lame. Yes, on SNs, when i was ordered to get into "surpressing a spawn" position together with an amount of other tanks, i did so, but where is the thrill? As soon as the ZOC is established (commonly when going there fast enough with an adequade force), my grandma with 96 years also can pull the trigger. Thats not what i think its worth any money to pay for playing.
But when facing ETs (enemy tanks) and they are also using the terrain (hills, valleys) and trying to get me (or i try to outflank the flankers and get them) - in other words: playing smart - this, Hairog, is simply coded out from the game as soon as the TOEs and the stupid brigade rotation/stacking hits in. Sitting in a camping position and controlling a hostile Army Base requires absolutly no thinking about what may be the next step your enemy is trying to get you.
A huge difference it was, when spotting an enemy in the middle of nowhere - outside of firing range - guessing where the ET is heading for; where does he will take position and how can i ambush him? Or - when the enemy will attack a river town, what bridge they will use to cross and what is the best position to guard that bridge? Those was questions of the old "better" days.
Bailing, PPOs never will have an impact on that kind of tanking game.
Okay, a last word about "personal insults":
I think, nobody is just starting up with insultings without a reason (besides totally morons) - on the other hand, memory goes in a two way street - its not only the devs who remember critical posts, we as customers also have more or less the ability to remind some kind of arrogant answers of devs. Its not, that after just one "unlucky" reply (if getting a reply at all) i tent to posting harsh. But if it happens some more several times, that receiving somewhat "high horsed" replies, they will fill a barrel, and if that barrel is full, another drop into it will release a wave. I do know, that immature comments will end in TOS warnings, getting ignored or banned.
I will just inform you about a fact, which is something personally between me and the dev:
I´ve bought a Silver account in 2008 (Dec) - that account is including that my avatars name will be noticed at Dinant bridge - other players who bought a builders account later than me, their name can be found on that bridge, but not mine. Not that it will affect fun or not fun in the game, but you know this are those little things (in singular not worth to be mentioned) which also fill up that barrel. Its a bit too easy just to say: Hey, we as devs don´t need getting insulted without thinking of what may have caused dissapointed customers, not to speak from a direct asking why.
I liked the game quite a bit, was sub'd to it for awhile. Would probably still be sub'd to it if money and play time were both more plentifull. But honestly, you can go out and buy a boxed FPS game with free unlimited online play for $50 and get 90 percent of the game play value with better graphics and more advanced features like the way BFBC2 handles destructable terrain. It's no surprise most people are going to go for that rather then shell out $15 a month for a sub.
Really I think the game needs to do more with persistance and with the MMO aspect if it wants to justify recurring subs. The persistance and strategy on the campaign maps is cool...but for the average grunt (which most players will be) it doesn't impact thier play experience very much. Also for a game that really shines with squad and cooperative play...it doesn't seem to do alot in terms of helping new players get involved with those aspects of play.
I played for probably 6-9 months and had absolutely no involvement with squads....and the chat and communication interfaces struck me as pretty awkward to use.
I don't want to hit the comparison too heavily but if you look at some of the mechanisms BFBC2 has for getting people into squads during a match and supporting how those squads work together, it can be a big difference for the play experience.
While I cannot disagree with most of your points - Hairog is also right.
Yeah, WWIIoL has a ton of problems - some I have argued with the Devs on the official forums to the point where I have given up...
But it is still the best PvP + RvR MMO out there.
There are other wargames that offer better graphics and smoother play - but none on the same scale and scope.
If you want to play in a 'shoebox' with 31 other players - you are spoilt for choice - but if you want to play in a WWII campaign with hundreds of others?
I think many of the issues arise from the fact that WWIIoL was written more than a decade ago and even the Devs have admitted that had they known what advances would be made in that time they would have designed the game totally differently.
Not making excuses here - it's just a fact.
Even simple things (that probably made sense at the time) are now standing in the way of other advancements. Both KFS1 and DOC have admitted as much several times (not just about graphics either).
But the fact remains that no-one else has even attempted to do what WWIIoL has done - not even close.
But the fact remains that no-one else has even attempted to do what WWIIoL has done - not even close.
Considering the tiny playerbase this game has always had, why would anyone try? WW2online is part of a niche genre and there's little money to be made from it. Hardcore sims are not doing well. Maybe if the learning curve was more inclusive and the graphics more inviting you could have Modern Warfare or Halo level player numbers. But the game isn't going to change enough to ever get to that level, at least not with the present management and resources.
But the fact remains that no-one else has even attempted to do what WWIIoL has done - not even close.
Considering the tiny playerbase this game has always had, why would anyone try? WW2online is part of a niche genre and there's little money to be made from it. Hardcore sims are not doing well. Maybe if the learning curve was more inclusive and the graphics more inviting you could have Modern Warfare or Halo level player numbers. But the game isn't going to change enough to ever get to that level, at least not with the present management and resources.
Thank god for that! We don't need another Halo or Modern Warfare.
I'm fine with steady progress and great game play over graphics any day and the way they have done their business model appears to be working or else they would have been out of business long ago. I guess slow and steady progress and not taking out a massive loan works in this realm.
Curious how some want to see massive changes and arcade like play while others deride any changes in game play. Can;t please everyone all the time I guess. So far they've pleased me and that's what counts to me.
Comments
Sorry, i cannot see any "improvement" for producing fights after TOEs was implemented. The only "progress" is seen in a decline of players numbers and lately the reducing to a single AO during low pop.
That "producing fights" idea may honor the devs (for helping new player in the game) but at what costs?
Before TOEs there always was a chance to go with a "greentag" out in a tank for supply-cut (or doing manual resuply).
Where does a new player will "learn" better how to tank than in that small urban fights - or does someone realy believe, a new player will have more fun while getting killed in a tank and evend didn´t got a glue from where the enemy was firing?
Those resuply/~cutting missions was the best way to train fresh tankers - and not in an overcrowded huge battle where friendly and sometimes hostile units are plopping on and off and shells from everywhere can rip of the own unit - plus not every player is calling the latest "state of art computer" his own - smaller fights outside of town allowed players with somewhat poorer machines also to play and have fun in game.
(Just a side note: Of course "overcrowded battles will create the illusion for a new player of "thousands of players" are in the game - untill a player is logging into the game in TZ3 (Aussie) where there is just one AO at the whole map)
So that "producing fights" turned the tanking game into a camping game which isn´t that thrilling and challenging than it was before when skills (using a good spot, patience and - very important too - having an eye for the map * {will explain later} and for surviving - beeing not too "kill horny" and changing position not before it was too late) - because instead of finding smaller fights between towns now its only a rush for spawnpoints.
That also will "annoy" inf players who find tanks nothing but disturbing their inf-fights.
* With an "eye for the map" which was needed for a tanker when going on resuply-cutting is ment, that a tanker had to watch the map and made his own guess where the next fight will take place - long before the original setup prodcedure even started - or the town was called a target. The reason is simple - as soon as an AO was placed, the defenders also was setting up in defense positions (and sappers spread out from defense MSPs) - if that happened, it was too late for a tanker to go supply-cutting, because of the audio-range where the defenders could hear the own tank. Thanks to the "realistic" GPS system, the own tank for shure was marked on the map even before the ambush-position was reached. It was more "successfully" to made a good guess, where the HCs would order an attack in the next one or two ours. - Shure, the result of the current fight played a role for that guessing too. But there was another "side-effect": Every new tanker who went on supply-cutting - or also went on hunting down supply cutters - had to think (at least a bit) like an HC-player and learned that way the HC-game too.
The players who grabbed a tank for hunting down supply-cutters also needed "skills" for guessing where a good ambush position would be and where to expect supply-cutters. Flanking around and using other "noice-sourses" to cover the own audio (like planes) was essential too.
In short term - before TOEs a tanker had to think about his future action and had to play smart (if he doesn´t - and couldn´t find an action for some hours, okay, then better luck next time) - but hey, didn´t CRS was reserving the word "REALISTIC" for the game? - Does in that war on each section of the frontline there was just 24/7 action non-stop? - Not very realistic!
Instead it was much more realistic, that smaller units was deployed on tactical positions with no action for several days.
Another thing is - yes i know, its boring hard work to create more towns for using the whole map - but, hey; Rats don´t hesitate to use the whole map (from almost russian - polish border in the east, to middle england in the west, north up to at least denmark and south to italy for their commercials. How many thousands squaremiles? Nothing, absolutly nothing in compareable games even comes to a tenth of that size. But what is the first thing a player is logging in the game - or exploring the map offline? Not even a third of the whole (and i bet very interesting) map is used for playing. Furthermore - the TOEs and the "improved game" - for producing fights - was just creating more unused wasteland. Not shure for what the developer is heading - maybe for self-celebrating because of the biggest map ever in such a ww2 mmorpg? Why then just concentrating fights on some tiny spots? Okay, if the shoebox-shooter (or better to say, the matchbox-shooter) is desired, then why the devs don´t have the guts and cut the huge unused map away (might be always bring a performance increase, but on the other hand, then another "game-attractor" is coded out.
With the TOEs and brigade moving/rotation, there isn´t any supply/-cutting possible any more because of that "magically warping supply into an AOed/DOed town. New players also getting somewhat "forced" to stay at an FB for defense - for getting AQed a lot or finding themselfs in the middle of a heavy battle - not knowing what killed them. Doesn´t sound very funny.
Compared to pre TOEs i find it pretty boring - so i didn´t played much last campaign and not a single minute the current campaign. In pre TOEs i managed beeing ranked as #4 of global Top-time on map and there was a lot more players that time in game than nowadays. I started to play the game in 2005 and loved it - according to your explanation, because of the "lack of TOEs and the difficulty to find a fight, why did i played that game and stayed? (untill now when TOEs will finally drive me away?)
Another thing is - its simply a shame, that "issues", problems and what players disagree have to be dicussed outside of BGE-forums? The intention is by far not to keep new potentially players from BGE away. The reason is simply (you can read that in posts of other players here) that CRS don´t allow some kind of free-speech when critism is included. Thats why disapointed players are "forced" to complain at places where the almighty arm of CRS-censor-gods dont reach.
So, don´t blame players who doesn´t have the possibility for stating their complaints inside of BGE-forums because of mods who are hiding behind TOS and trying to put a mouth-basked on every critical voice, when those players went into other places - A BIG APLAUD to MMORPG.com ! and post what makes them unhappy in game. Before some years ago i suggested once to create something like a "troublebox" inside Playschool-forums where only the original poster and developers can read and write. With such a trouble-box CRS would be able to kill two birds with one stone:
Keeping critism covered from a wider audience and getting informed what players are thinking - but instead, we have to go into real public for debating what many players are hating in game. Thats a shame!
Well I subscribed my 2 accounts for this new patch for a month, but i'm not staying.
The primary reason is stale tactics, it's a capture the flag game after all and how many ways can one capture the flag? You camp the spawn. After 9 years, camp the spawn to capture the flag gets boring. Need some sort of full mobile spawning capabilities and interdictable supplies (for realism otherwise axis will put a mobile AB in England, and Allies will put a mobile AB in Frankfurt at the map start). No cheesy rules like distance limitations either, I hate that about mobile spawns, it has a very narrow deploy range, very narrow.
The secondary reason i'm not staying is because it is total allied easymode. Every piece of equipment except the LMG, the 88 (only in the lower tiers), and maybe the Stug-G is allied easymode.
And TOE's have narrowed tactical options, like the other poster said, there is very little interdiction going on cause HC will just put another brigade in. Also it's no fun to get down to weenie tanks in a battle and have the enemy pop a new brigade in and now your fighting Churchills with PIIc's. The magical teleporting equipment has come to save the day. Need logistics, not magical teleporting equipment to come to save the day.
And FB ping pong is lame, nobody likes having an attack halted cause 1-4 ninjas got satchels off.
However all these problems would be moot if there were no more fixed spawn points. All problems in WWIIONLINE are because of fixed spawn points. Even the equipment imballance wouldn't matter that much if you had terrain advantage. Is there terrain advantage in places CRS placed the AB/FBses? No. If players had a choice of placing their AB/FB spawn points they would not chose where CRS has placed them. Reason #1: BECAUSE THE ENEMY KNOWS EXACTLY WHERE YOUR COMING FROM!
CRS also refuses to plug up one of their biggest holes in their "simulation". In game you will regularly see bombers and fighters pull fantastic feats, like HE111/Havocs pulling enough G forces to black out the pilot (6 g's). Medium bombers are typically rated at 3 G's before their wings fall off.
The Stuka was specifically designed to withstand 9 G's before it's wings ripped off so it can dive bomb and pull out of a dive. The added structural strength added weight which made the plane slower, slower climb rate, less maneuverable. While the Stuka is slow, with a slow climb rate, and unmaneuverable a medium bomber such as the HE111 and Havoc can pull he same maneuvers a Stuka was designed to do when in reality their wings would rip off. They have much higher bomb load.
I suspect even some of the fighters would have their wings rip off when they pull high G stunts too.
It's just unrealistic and gamey adds to a phenominon we like to call "airquake", or "a bunch of B.S." as other players would have it.
Hopefully this will help some of you re-join the fight.
More news.
1.32 Features Revealed
Written by RAFTER
Friday, 30 July 2010 08:21
It's time to lay out the feature plan for our next point release. 1.32 is currently in development and will include Player-Placed Objects and Bail-out for Aircraft along with a few other goodies.
Player-Placed Objects (PPOs)
As previously outlined in our Development Note of July 14th, we have defined the first three PPOs.
The Field Reinforcement Unit (FRU) which will allow truck drivers to drop an infantry spawn object onto the terrain and drive away to conduct other operations. The FRU will follow the same rules as current mission-based MSPs with restrictions on where the object can be placed as well as limiting the number to one per mission. Once the new FRU is placed, mission leaders can decide to destroy it and create an opportunity for a new one to be placed. This is the same as current MSPs. FRUs will take damage and can be destroyed and will provide the same resupply function as a truck.
The next two PPOs are for infantry units and for the first time, allow players to build objects on the terrain;
Infantry Fighting Position (IFP)
The IFP will be a small berm- big enough for a couple of infantry to be concealed and covered from enemy fire. One of the goals is for the object to blend in with terrain as much as possible with characteristics similar to existing berms. IFPs will have a build timer for placement and a lifespan timer for removing them from the game world when unused.
Gun Emplacement (GE)
Sappers will have the ability to build a Gun Emplacement on the terrain which will serve as an AT/AA pit offering cover from enemy fire. GE's will not provide any spawning capability but will have a resupply function similar to trucks. GE's will be destroyable by enemy fire, a build timer for placement and a lifespan timer for removing them from the game world when unused.
A server-based area grid will track these objects and limit the number of PPOs in order to manage performance issues. A HUD element will provide feedback to players on build availability. A change in this feature design from the original article should be noted; the arbitrary player limit of (2) PPOs per sortie has been deleted from the design as we believe that the combination of build timers, lifespan timers and server managed limits eliminates this requirement.
Read the original PPO article here
Bail-out for Aircraft
As one of our longest standing requests from pilots, bailing out from aircraft has remained an elusive feature. We have chosen to develop a partial answer to this request with 1.32.
The goal of this feature is providing a means for a pilot to increase the chance of having his mission scored as "Rescued" or "MIA" instead of "KIA". Pilots will have the ability to despawn while in-flight which will activate the despawn timer. Once the timer expires, the player will be dropped from his aircraft with a chute attached and will begin descending to the ground. The first-person view will be similar to what is seen as a paratrooper in descent. After touching down, the despawn function will be completed with the presentation of the after-action report. Pilots will not have the ability to continue play as infantry once touching down.
After a player bails out from the aircraft, it will continue on an uncontrolled flight path until it crashes to the ground/water. This will provide additional time for enemy aircraft to fire and potentially cause critical damage. Critical damage to the enemy aircraft will result in a mission score of "kill". Should the aircraft not be critically damaged prior the completed despawn of the pilot who bailed out, the aircraft will also despawn from the game world as seen in current play.
Along with these two features, we've got a short list of items we're working as well as some fixes/changes that are being moved from the 1.31 branch to the 1.32 branch. We will be sure publish details of other items that get officially added to the 1.32 release plan as they get the green light.
Work on 1.32 has been underway for some time and we are taking an aggressive approach to the schedule. We have not yet set a release date for 1.32 but we will post updates as available.
CRS ditched realism at the same time they ditched ww2online to rename it Battleground Europe.
They destroyed everything that was related to realism or player power.
Now you got instant armys spawning off trucks and most buildings you cant go anywhere but first floor.
Cant jump over anything, always have to go around stuff.
Very poor mechanics, biased to death towards fast medium bombers.
CRS nerfed the axis so much so that the allies dont all quit they even forgot to un-nerf the 109 last patch.
There is always gonna be the retired grandpa thinking this game is a simulation.
Name a better one.
WW2Lol
You can get hurt in that one.
I came back to the game short before the update and was looking forward to the new version and i liked it
However heres where the problem started CRS descided to switch the payment provider and it turned out you cannot pay using visa electron anymore for 3 weeks i get ashured they gonna look into the problem but it never got resolved so free time ran out and my acount was shutdown been a subsrciber since 2007 member:REDRIDER19
Also i wouldnt say that the game has historical acuracy just because most ppl that still play the game wouldnt like it and we get ashured every time that the game is as historical as posible when it comes to equipment and the damage model and everything is based on historical research however they never said to us where exactly this research data comes from most probably from american propaganda magasines 1940-1945 expeciallly when it comes to shermans wich tend to survive direct hit from 88mm anti tank gun or tiger !
Arrrgh yes, that switching of payment providers. That was the final nail in the cofin for me, used to pay via bitbit (electronic moneytransfer - Lastschriftverfahren - ) worked for years. It seems they don´t need my money, so they don´t get it anymore!
Historical accuracy - lol. As a "last ressort excuse" there always is a "game engine don´t support it" for CRS.
I was a builder (silver account) - bought that acc in the hope CRS finally will raise their @sses and implement new models (last tank was the Sherm76, which is almost a half dekade in game now) . But i don´t have anymore faith in CRS to bring up something interesting for axis tankers. (What can be expected from a former flyboy who cares about airgame and give a damn about the other sections?)
Well, anyways as an axis player i stopped long before to expect historical correct models - no regenerative steering for tigers - instead pretty stupid degunning. (one track moves forward, the other reverse)
Shure they must be guided by american propaganda magazines and call it "top reliable sources" - but okay, if they would go totally historical accurate, who is going to play allied?
Is there a more historically accurate MMO you can suggest covering WWII?
"Also i wouldnt say that the game has historical acuracy just because most ppl that still play the game wouldnt like it and we get ashured every time that the game is as historical as posible when it comes to equipment and the damage model and everything is based on historical research however they never said to us where exactly this research data comes from most probably from american propaganda magasines 1940-1945 expeciallly when it comes to shermans wich tend to survive direct hit from 88mm anti tank gun or tiger !"
I sure wish I could get my hands on that invincible Sherman. Mine always dies and very quickly unless it's a Sherman 76 and the shots are from long range and I'm taking hits to the front . I would contend that it is historically accurate.
Sherm is no matty
I would say more acurate would be world of tanks for me atm ww2online is not more acurate than battlefield heroes
What I asked is there a more historically accurate WWII MMO .
And the answer is no.
Apparently some of you have a personal problem with the games designers and owners. I don't care about that or really want to hear about it either.
World of Tanks is 3rd person for gods sake! How can that be taken seriously. No infantry. No air. No etc. You can use your tank as a ram,!?!!? Swirling battles at point blank range with the tanks doing a round about dance...WTF.
The original poster had some very valid points and if presented continuously sans person attacks they might get addressed if enough people agree with you. Personal attacks will get you nowhere and I'm sure some are about to come my way.
One of the major complaints from day one was bailing out of a crippled aircraft. I for one did not think it was worth a seconds thought and a stupid waste of game development time. Well the pressure built in a positive manner and now in the next patch you will be able to bail out of your crippled plane.
Until someone comes up with a more realistic and historically accurate WWII MMO this is the one I will play. No other game comes even close I'm afraid.
When you find it let me know.
Hm, yes - i think about the same when comparing BGE and World of Tanks - its like comparing apples and potatoes (or something else - english isn´t my first language).
We all know, there are many other "shoebox-shooters" out there - nothing, but absolutly nothing can be competitive to BGE!
The original idea of the game is still unbeaten by any other game - thats why i really loved to play it (in the past) - i even changed my job to get more time to play. Unfortunatly, the recent changes what have been made to the game was doing nothing but decrease the fun factor by a very large part to me. Well, if i wouldn´t liked that game so much in the past, i never would spent a single second to write a statement about it. But BECAUSE it was such a great game, its very sad what does it become during the last couple of years - thats the reason i think the game still is worth to talk about.
You´re right too - personal insulting will lead to nothing, but on the other hand - excuse me for this - shure there is anger to those persons who have ruined a lot (in my pov) in the game.
I don´t agree, that some changes will beeing undone - even if frequently players will ask for it, because a major part of players who didn´t like the changes in game mostly turned their back to the game in silence - i doubt, that this people ever will raise their voice and ask the devs for turning something in the game around. In adition - it is not the case, that there isn´t from time to time a topic raised in game forums asking the devs for taking some implementions back or change it somewhat into that direction. - The major tenor from devs is that they just ignoring it (or taking knowledge but never will take that into consideration).
Really, the only thing, which can make the devs think about it will be a decrease in players numbers (the devs maybe already suffer from low subscription numbers, but they don´t accept the reasons for it; instead they are coming up with something like "bailing" in the next patch.
I cant get rid of the imagination, that (at least sometimes) the devs pride will prevent them to agree with the part of their (disliked) customers who have critisized the past changes.
I agree with much of what you say. I think the key is to offer constructive suggestions and stay away from personal attacks which will only get you ....nowhere. They are looking for feedback I'm sure but immature rants will not work. Hang in there Paulker fox holes and atg emplacements are coming. More jobs for engineers too.
Hm, "great improvement" for a tanker like me (scratching head).
If i feel take a rifle, then i go play something like "Trophy Hunter" - i simply hate rushing and getting killed and having no glue from what. Not that i would mind to get killed (lost roughly 50% of my tanks to enemy sooner or later), but inf-game is too focussed on capture points. What we have now in game is simply lacking almost totally a layer in which tanking requires skills like beeing patience, tactical thinking, beeing able to surprise the enemy by setting up in positions where not beeing expected, seeking and hide by using the terrain outside of towns (too much rush in there).
Getting an ellbow long kill list by camping a spawnpoint may make the stats whores happy, but its pretty lame. Yes, on SNs, when i was ordered to get into "surpressing a spawn" position together with an amount of other tanks, i did so, but where is the thrill? As soon as the ZOC is established (commonly when going there fast enough with an adequade force), my grandma with 96 years also can pull the trigger. Thats not what i think its worth any money to pay for playing.
But when facing ETs (enemy tanks) and they are also using the terrain (hills, valleys) and trying to get me (or i try to outflank the flankers and get them) - in other words: playing smart - this, Hairog, is simply coded out from the game as soon as the TOEs and the stupid brigade rotation/stacking hits in. Sitting in a camping position and controlling a hostile Army Base requires absolutly no thinking about what may be the next step your enemy is trying to get you.
A huge difference it was, when spotting an enemy in the middle of nowhere - outside of firing range - guessing where the ET is heading for; where does he will take position and how can i ambush him? Or - when the enemy will attack a river town, what bridge they will use to cross and what is the best position to guard that bridge? Those was questions of the old "better" days.
Bailing, PPOs never will have an impact on that kind of tanking game.
Okay, a last word about "personal insults":
I think, nobody is just starting up with insultings without a reason (besides totally morons) - on the other hand, memory goes in a two way street - its not only the devs who remember critical posts, we as customers also have more or less the ability to remind some kind of arrogant answers of devs. Its not, that after just one "unlucky" reply (if getting a reply at all) i tent to posting harsh. But if it happens some more several times, that receiving somewhat "high horsed" replies, they will fill a barrel, and if that barrel is full, another drop into it will release a wave. I do know, that immature comments will end in TOS warnings, getting ignored or banned.
I will just inform you about a fact, which is something personally between me and the dev:
I´ve bought a Silver account in 2008 (Dec) - that account is including that my avatars name will be noticed at Dinant bridge - other players who bought a builders account later than me, their name can be found on that bridge, but not mine. Not that it will affect fun or not fun in the game, but you know this are those little things (in singular not worth to be mentioned) which also fill up that barrel. Its a bit too easy just to say: Hey, we as devs don´t need getting insulted without thinking of what may have caused dissapointed customers, not to speak from a direct asking why.
I liked the game quite a bit, was sub'd to it for awhile. Would probably still be sub'd to it if money and play time were both more plentifull. But honestly, you can go out and buy a boxed FPS game with free unlimited online play for $50 and get 90 percent of the game play value with better graphics and more advanced features like the way BFBC2 handles destructable terrain. It's no surprise most people are going to go for that rather then shell out $15 a month for a sub.
Really I think the game needs to do more with persistance and with the MMO aspect if it wants to justify recurring subs. The persistance and strategy on the campaign maps is cool...but for the average grunt (which most players will be) it doesn't impact thier play experience very much. Also for a game that really shines with squad and cooperative play...it doesn't seem to do alot in terms of helping new players get involved with those aspects of play.
I played for probably 6-9 months and had absolutely no involvement with squads....and the chat and communication interfaces struck me as pretty awkward to use.
I don't want to hit the comparison too heavily but if you look at some of the mechanisms BFBC2 has for getting people into squads during a match and supporting how those squads work together, it can be a big difference for the play experience.
What i dislike ?
- false promises they made since the beginning
- constant nerfs of axis equipement without revealing it
- questionnable ballistics/damage models
- insane ammount of missing features
- buggy game with tons of exploits that are never fixed
- very bad player management
- doubtfull hierarchy and power control
- awfull graphics
- worst warfare mechanics i have ever seen.
- no game management
- ridiculous gameplay mechanics
- massive lag, performance problems, latency issues.
- ridiculously small playerbase, not possible to have fun 24/7
I'm still waiting for someone to suggest an alternative that comes even close.
@Atak,
While I cannot disagree with most of your points - Hairog is also right.
Yeah, WWIIoL has a ton of problems - some I have argued with the Devs on the official forums to the point where I have given up...
But it is still the best PvP + RvR MMO out there.
There are other wargames that offer better graphics and smoother play - but none on the same scale and scope.
If you want to play in a 'shoebox' with 31 other players - you are spoilt for choice - but if you want to play in a WWII campaign with hundreds of others?
I think many of the issues arise from the fact that WWIIoL was written more than a decade ago and even the Devs have admitted that had they known what advances would be made in that time they would have designed the game totally differently.
Not making excuses here - it's just a fact.
Even simple things (that probably made sense at the time) are now standing in the way of other advancements. Both KFS1 and DOC have admitted as much several times (not just about graphics either).
But the fact remains that no-one else has even attempted to do what WWIIoL has done - not even close.
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
I couldn't have said it better myself.
Just the fact that you can have a discussion directly with the developer is very different. You may not sway them but you can try.
Considering the tiny playerbase this game has always had, why would anyone try? WW2online is part of a niche genre and there's little money to be made from it. Hardcore sims are not doing well. Maybe if the learning curve was more inclusive and the graphics more inviting you could have Modern Warfare or Halo level player numbers. But the game isn't going to change enough to ever get to that level, at least not with the present management and resources.
Thank god for that! We don't need another Halo or Modern Warfare.
I'm fine with steady progress and great game play over graphics any day and the way they have done their business model appears to be working or else they would have been out of business long ago. I guess slow and steady progress and not taking out a massive loan works in this realm.
Curious how some want to see massive changes and arcade like play while others deride any changes in game play. Can;t please everyone all the time I guess. So far they've pleased me and that's what counts to me.