Balance is the biggest problem.

[DrJuggalonizo]

Ive been playing off and on since the release in 2001. Every time i've come back to see whats new. Balance between sides is what turns me away every time.

Id like to know if anything at all is in plan for this or is this just how the game will be played. Does the dev team have a solution. I know the dev team is small but this is the sole reason the game gets unplayable to me.

[GIJoe597]

Please define "balance"?

Are you typing about weapons? They are historical, some balance is made by quantity available each side. That is the appeal to many, the accuracy, otherwise it would be just another cookie cutter pvp game.

Are you typing about player numbers per side? That is simply what each person decides to play. Some prefer the evil side, some prefer the righteous side. You need both. Further limiting what individuals can select will not help the game in any way. They do try to mitigate it with spawn delays.

I can only type for myself but there is no mechanic that would make me play the evil side. I would log off if I was forced to play them.

[DrJuggalonizo]

Im only talking about numbers per side. When you log in and 2 people are online playing one side and the other side has well over 20 people. To me that's the definition on unplayable. No possible way to have any kind of real defense. And then you got idiots that still want to do AOs when we are losing towns in less than 20 minutes with little to no resistance. "Lets set up and AO so we lose towns faster." I dont care if there are only 20 people online total something has to happen. 2 minutes spawn delay for the over populated side does absolutely nothing. Has to be more done has to be a better way.

Just thinking out loud but maybe The over populated side doesn't get as much equipment. I know that sounds stupid even to me.

I know this is suppose to be a simulation of the war. No one on either side will say its enjoyable to be over ran within 10 minutes. If they say they like it. Take the koolaid from them.

[JellySoda]

Make sense.

For me this game really shine with the friends using the combined forces
but this means a lot of fellas ( +subscription! )

The weakest joint is a fpp combat. Feels blocky and environment is empty.
Also is hard to find someone and the UI isn't modern
.

[GIJoe597]

Originally posted by JellySoda:

For me this game really shine with the friends using the combined forces
but this means a lot of fellas ( +subscription! )

As I have been typing and saying for years. When the population is adequate there is no other game which comes close to WWII Online when using combined arms.

I even fondly remember the long factory bombing raids of yesteryear. Meeting at an airfield, taking of with the slow climb. Several bombers flying in formation across the map. Tension very high hoping you do not run into 109's.

Sometimes the target is obscured by clouds, so after flying for perhaps half an hour you either try to deadeye an alternate target or go home.

Just like war movies.

[JellySoda]

Agree with Joe.

Looks like you're a birdy person.
I am at different place because for the `Shock Team` our squad needs
at least 5 inf + HT + AT Gun/Tank

[kingonads]

Originally posted by DrJuggalonizo:

Ive been playing off and on since the release in 2001. Every time i've come back to see whats new. Balance between sides is what turns me away every time.

Id like to know if anything at all is in plan for this or is this just how the game will be played. Does the dev team have a solution. I know the dev team is small but this is the sole reason the game gets unplayable to me.

Unfortunate side effect of basing your game on reality. Balance isnt a thing in warfare.

[DrJuggalonizo]

Unfortunate side effect of basing your game on reality. Balance isnt a thing in warfare. [/quote]

It has nothing to do with real life. When there is about 50 people online and only 2 on one side. That's not warfare that is just unfair. There is absolutely no excuse for that bad of balance. I'm not looking for excuses. Just maybe a solution or maybe someone to say hey we are working on that.

[GIJoe597]

I already typed there is nothing to be done about it. That is player choice. Forcing players to only play one side or the other would not go over well. If this was a generic shooter with both sides being equal in all aspects it would not matter. However since this is based on factual history with clearly defined differences, that is a non starter.

If you have a suggestion on a better way than spawn delays or locking people out of their chosen side I am sure the Rats would like to read it.

[DrJuggalonizo]

Originally posted by GIJoe597:

I already typed there is nothing to be done about it. That is player choice. Forcing players to only play one side or the other would not go over well. If this was a generic shooter with both sides being equal in all aspects it would not matter. However since this is based on factual history with clearly defined differences, that is a non starter.

If you have a suggestion on a better way than spawn delays or locking people out of their chosen side I am sure the Rats would like to read it?

So what you are trying to say is i should take your response as gold and leave it alone. Why the hell do all you idiots think ever aspect of this game has to be "realistic". I did not suggests force people to play one side or the other. So you can stop saying that ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ over and over. Your response is some people prefer the "Some prefer the evil side, some prefer the righteous side." is probably the dumbest ♥♥♥♥ i've heard. Its a video game no good or evil side. And i gave a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ suggestion that didn't have to do with forcing player to pick a side. I have not seen a suggestion from you. Just trolling ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥.

[GIJoe597]

If you consider reasoned thought trolling, so be it. Have a good day.

[Quarren King of Q]

as far as simulations and various gun factors and usage goes. yeah the game is lacking in simulation and recreation. its neat to play with x or y but simulation is rudimentary. i have noticed some issues myself as well. including with tanking gun control. acceleration of mouse issue which the devs have also stated they are aware is a issue with the game they cant do much about. i have seen inbalance with vehicles favoring the " im the correct side of history" side. for example. the matilda. anyways. as a person that got into machines and some various details passionately. especially tankery. i learned alot about aviation as well, including various sources and knowledge. including interviews. so yeah saying the game is a recreation and is super realistic is pretty disingenuous and feels dismissive . i think that is where your frustration comes from which i can understand. in another post somone asked about the mouse acceleration issues. this one guy went on long talks about how the game simulates gun weight and stuff. till a literal dev stepped in adn was like. yeah its a real issue we cant really resolve untill re rebuild and remake the game. thankfully the guy was relaxed and was like oh my bad lol =] anyways side stuff aside. its not just you. the game is neat but its more of a tacical arcade experience. . like yes there are some interesting ideas. oh what if we have to have point sto spawn and stuff. that adds weight and gravity to the campain map which is what it does. but its not a single example of real realism in regads to simulation or recreational stuff.

anyways i can understand why people appreciate some genuine authentic feeling. or atleast the experience worthy. i get it. it feels cool having planes swarm in to cover you when going in and stuff. but as someone to spent a long time getting into this stuff and studying the vehicles how they work and stuff. its alright. i dont hate it i like it i want to see some more out of it. some changes for balance i can understand like speed etc. i look forward to the improvements and potential. but i feel it sometimes regarding balance and sometimes it does feel like a wall coming at ya. so i understand that as well. i am not particulatly biased. i want to enjoy the game. it felt great a year ago getting my friend to come in a bomber and bomb a town. anyways i would like to mess with it some more sometime =] hit me up or other stuff.

[kingonads]

Originally posted by DrJuggalonizo:

Originally posted by GIJoe597:

I already typed there is nothing to be done about it. That is player choice. Forcing players to only play one side or the other would not go over well. If this was a generic shooter with both sides being equal in all aspects it would not matter. However since this is based on factual history with clearly defined differences, that is a non starter.

If you have a suggestion on a better way than spawn delays or locking people out of their chosen side I am sure the Rats would like to read it?

So what you are trying to say is i should take your response as gold and leave it alone. Why the hell do all you idiots think ever aspect of this game has to be "realistic". I did not suggests force people to play one side or the other. So you can stop saying that ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ over and over. Your response is some people prefer the "Some prefer the evil side, some prefer the righteous side." is probably the dumbest ♥♥♥♥ i've heard. Its a video game no good or evil side. And i gave a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ suggestion that didn't have to do with forcing player to pick a side. I have not seen a suggestion from you. Just trolling ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥.

I dont see where he said "Evil side or righteous side." in his statement towards you. They just stated that some people dont want to be locked into one side or another. Sounded pretty simple to me. I mean like Planetside 2... I chose the TR because well I liked the color of their uniforms and their guns had lots of dakka.

In WWII Online i played as Axis way back on launch because when I tried Allies I found a very vocal part of the community were racist and hateful. And did not experience that on the Axis side. It had nothing to do with the equipment or even "factual history".

But I can tell you are still rather immature and will probably take my response as trolling or attacking you personally. But meh, thats like you man...

[JellySoda]

Never spot any signals of immature behaviour in this game. In this game can only survive patient and senior players, so there is no place for that kind of the people.
Because they choosing more fast peaced games.

To the point the WWII Online could be unfair and feel unbalanced but this is how the game works. It especialy take place when your base is attacked and you die after few seconds - that's mean you need to change your Objective/Mission and spawn point.

[DrJuggalonizo]

Originally posted by kingonads:

Originally posted by DrJuggalonizo:

So what you are trying to say is i should take your response as gold and leave it alone. Why the hell do all you idiots think ever aspect of this game has to be "realistic". I did not suggests force people to play one side or the other. So you can stop saying that ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ over and over. Your response is some people prefer the "Some prefer the evil side, some prefer the righteous side." is probably the dumbest ♥♥♥♥ i've heard. Its a video game no good or evil side. And i gave a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ suggestion that didn't have to do with forcing player to pick a side. I have not seen a suggestion from you. Just trolling ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥.

I dont see where he said "Evil side or righteous side." in his statement towards you. They just stated that some people dont want to be locked into one side or another. Sounded pretty simple to me. I mean like Planetside 2... I chose the TR because well I liked the color of their uniforms and their guns had lots of dakka.

In WWII Online i played as Axis way back on launch because when I tried Allies I found a very vocal part of the community were racist and hateful. And did not experience that on the Axis side. It had nothing to do with the equipment or even "factual history".

But I can tell you are still rather immature and will probably take my response as trolling or attacking you personally. But meh, thats like you man...

You are ignorant. Read the very first post not my post but his. Then look up the definition of ignorant. Place your name in the definition. He literally says both. For the immature part you making a false statement and not actually reading what was said is something children do.

[DrJuggalonizo]

Originally posted by JellySoda:

Never spot any signals of immature behaviour in this game. In this game can only survive patient and senior players, so there is no place for that kind of the people.
Because they choosing more fast peaced games.

To the point the WWII Online could be unfair and feel unbalanced but this is how the game works. It especialy take place when your base is attacked and you die after few seconds - that's mean you need to change your Objective/Mission and spawn point.

I wish people would read. Ive played this game since the beginning on and off. 40 people on one side and 2 on the other side is unplayable. Changing the objective would do absolutely nothing to help. There is no game in the world where "thats how the game works." which is your statement. Is anywhere close to true. Im the guy that will sit in a cap point making sure it doesnt get captured without at least knowing for 4 hours. Im the guy that actually plays the game the way its suppose to be played. I dont just hop on the offensive mission because they are fun. I defend and attack.


and to be clear. my whole post is 40 versus 2 nothing else.