I love this. The same people who claim Axis only wins through pop, the Tiger, anything but actual skill or teamwork are getting sooo butthurt when the tables are turned on them. if you can't see this as a pity map,, that's probably why you need a pity map so badly. Wake up already.
P.S. can't wait to get home from work and read this. Wonder how many similar threads on the "official" forums were already deleted lol.
I love this. The same people who claim Axis only wins through pop, the Tiger, anything but actual skill or teamwork are getting sooo butthurt when the tables are turned on them. if you can't see this as a pity map,, that's probably why you need a pity map so badly. Wake up already.
P.S. can't wait to get home from work and read this. Wonder how many similar threads on the "official" forums were already deleted lol.
Originally posted by Jsilec Originally posted by david06So Ce and Jsilec, do you think that CRS should allow Antwerp to be captured during low population?
no i dont like it personally but who am i to say what happens in other players tz
Well plenty of players have voiced their objections over the years, usually with an implied threat to unsubscribe. So DOC intervening to stop another pivotal town capture during lowpop would just be CRS taking extreme measures to stop what some believe to be a chronic and game-breaking problem.
Being(or used to be) a frequent TZ3 axis player I don't agree with that solution at all, but I think that is a simpler and more likely explanation than chalking everything up to a series of coincidences. Obviously it's bad public relations so I can see why they're trying to keep a lid on the policy but players have been demanding for ages that CRS do something about big breakthroughs during lowpop.
Well it looks like bloodhund23 is leaving the game. That's another good leader.
Now some of the allied players are complaining that there wasn't any resistance and the last phase of the map was really boring. Per CRS logic they should all be happy because they have a campaign win, and the game should be healthier because the historical win/loss ratio is a little bit closer to 1:1.
The low pop caps have been happening for a long time so tbh its just something i grew accumsted too.....low pop has gotten better this map with marty/karelean back at the helm and in hc....its not something in my control so what can i do?.....this map was an exausting effort in us getting our morale back up after the debacle of the last map and busting our ass to get the good vets to return.....allies lost 10 campaigns in row leading up to map 83 and 84 which we won.....then we managed to lose 3 more in a row and the last map was demoralizing in a way i havnt seen in years.....to go from that mess to a win is far from pity and we will be rolling hard in map 89 despite the fact that 22sas is staying axis another map and i am sure ddz and jg26 are going back axis....
Dave, he was an ex squaddie of mine and a great player.
He will be missed but I'm positive someone else will step up.
I just can't understand grown adult men getting so torn up over a game.
I'm not trying to be funny or put anyone down but in the end it's a FN game.
What draws many players to do the game is the hardcore aspect of if you are perpared to do the menial stuff you will more often than not be victorious, players play for the challenge of winning either a town or a map. When something external takes a sucess away then it negates however many hours you spent guarding, running fru's etc. Likewise he probaly was burntout anyway and twerp just tipped the balance in favour of a hiatus
Originally posted by Stug Hmmm..seems like jsilec has tried to give more evidence than people usually do around here, so hats of to jsilec.
It is a pity map in the sense people had to be douches and dump there team mates - it's a great pity.
Except that "evidence" is pretty far off reality as far as Antwerp was concerned. And comparing bdes booted in Antwerp to capping an AB in Verdun. Not really any correct points in any of his posts so far. But I'm not done reading yet.
What ce and jselic are ignoring is the fact that developer interventions to stop axis from winning another campaign, especially during lower-populated times, are perfectly in line with CRS' s stated priorities and governing philosophy.
Then there's the fact that the company has banned/deleted any discussion of the server resets at Aarschot or Antwerp. They should be able to stand behind and explain their administrative actions but instead they are trying to pretend that nothing happened.
THIS!!. I personally quit not over a town, but over a flawed set of priorities and philosophy. And lack of discussion on forums was a HUGE one.
Jsilec and CE, lot of respect for both of you. But if you want accurate info on the Antwerp/Aarschot situations I posted those in other threads. If you want to doubt the accuracy of my info please remember that I had a large part in most Allied wins since the time I joined HC. Either by being in AHC or taking a break while in OKW ).
can't believe some folks still pay and play for this lieing bunch of wasted no talent developers .... these days i only use a f2p account to log in to play if i do at all...
corrupt....bias...and terrible is this game..
and yes i was in this map from the start and called it before it begin.... pity,
What ce and jselic are ignoring is the fact that developer interventions to stop axis from winning another campaign, especially during lower-populated times, are perfectly in line with CRS' s stated priorities and governing philosophy.
Then there's the fact that the company has banned/deleted any discussion of the server resets at Aarschot or Antwerp. They should be able to stand behind and explain their administrative actions but instead they are trying to pretend that nothing happened.
THIS!!. I personally quit not over a town, but over a flawed set of priorities and philosophy. And lack of discussion on forums was a HUGE one.
Dcoy,
I personally spent some time and answered questions for you (and 74 others) on Teamspeak as best as I could shortly after this incident. What followed was an article a couple days later and a reset plan for expectations. We have re-iterated several times our requirement to reset the server if performance issues exist.
We did engage in further discussions in the Axis area specifically, to include the Game Manager, myself, and the Community Manager (which reminds me I need my title changed on these forums).
Since, the Game Manager has been following that schedule I say again "religiously" and doing his best to provide informed resets to the customers.
What ce and jselic are ignoring is the fact that developer interventions to stop axis from winning another campaign, especially during lower-populated times, are perfectly in line with CRS' s stated priorities and governing philosophy.
Then there's the fact that the company has banned/deleted any discussion of the server resets at Aarschot or Antwerp. They should be able to stand behind and explain their administrative actions but instead they are trying to pretend that nothing happened.
THIS!!. I personally quit not over a town, but over a flawed set of priorities and philosophy. And lack of discussion on forums was a HUGE one.
Dcoy,
I personally spent some time and answered questions for you (and 74 others) on Teamspeak as best as I could shortly after this incident. What followed was an article a couple days later and a reset plan for expectations. We have re-iterated several times our requirement to reset the server if performance issues exist.
We did engage in further discussions in the Axis area specifically, to include the Game Manager, myself, and the Community Manager (which reminds me I need my title changed on these forums).
Since, the Game Manager has been following that schedule I say again "religiously" and doing his best to provide informed resets to the customers.
Best Regards,
Xoom, yes you did. And as I said than. I respect you for stepping up into another tough situation. I'm glad player feedback was considered. I just hate that it had to come to this for it to be considered. We've been asking for resets to change for a long time. The problem was it was the winning side doing most of the asking imho.
Someone mentioned the Oyaji situation and AHC. That along with some nerfs came on the heals of Axis winning 7 of 8? I think it was. I really do understand the desire to "balance" win/loss ratios to some extent. And do I have the answer for doing it without driving away tons of subs? No, but i just know "this" isn't working.
Antwerp was the turning point for this map, plain and simple. If Axis would of capped it they would of won another map. However, DOC in his infinite wisdom decides he "needed" to reboot the server when there were 2 cp's left in town after a 5+ hour fight. Once that happened the map moved quickly to the east after many on the AXIS side protested the ridiculous timing of the reboot and either quit or refused to log back in. If the Allied "players" cannot see this as clearly a pity map after that happening...I don't know what to tell you. Even Ray Charles could of seen the outcome of map 88 after what happened in Antwerp. Too bad the majority of Allies can't. Denial is not a river in Africa.
Former GM and associate game designer for SOE and Square Enix. (2001-2008)
Dcoy i was not on for aarschott so i wont pretend to know what happened but i was on for antwerp so i know what i saw and you cant tell me that you guys were capping that town for certain.....like i already said i not comparing verdun to antwerp i was showing that resets happen no matter what the progrssion of any town capture.....happened to us in liege awhile back and ciney but i dont like stating things without evidence so i wont hang my argument on that....me and ny75 were also in leuven while twerp was going on and 3 of us capped the spawnable and were capping the bunker till 22sas was forced to come clear us out.....antwerp would have been a fun libb thats for sure .....
Also when oyaji was removed the allies had won 3 maps in a row and 5 our of 6.....i was 23rd co during this time and asked thrance to be next co of 23rd but then he had to take cinc during that whole mess and the rest is history....the following 10 maps were axis wins.....shit happens
No disrespect to Oyaji, but he was not even close to being ready for cinc. He had no real idea on bde deployments or MOIC abilities. He could write a mean email,but in game skills lacked massivly. Nice guy for sure,but his departure certainly didnt hurt the side.
@Dcoy - Dude we have done many maps together. I know your methods and how you approach a map,but for you to back this Antwerp debacle is insane. I respect you brother,but your really starting to develop this "Hate All" axis mentality.
Comments
So Ce and Jsilec, do you think that CRS should allow Antwerp to be captured during low population?
I love this. The same people who claim Axis only wins through pop, the Tiger, anything but actual skill or teamwork are getting sooo butthurt when the tables are turned on them. if you can't see this as a pity map,, that's probably why you need a pity map so badly. Wake up already.
P.S. can't wait to get home from work and read this. Wonder how many similar threads on the "official" forums were already deleted lol.
no i dont like it personally but who am i to say what happens in other players tz
these arent official so flame away
Your laughing at yourself, you don't have any
I will not argue that statement.
Well plenty of players have voiced their objections over the years, usually with an implied threat to unsubscribe. So DOC intervening to stop another pivotal town capture during lowpop would just be CRS taking extreme measures to stop what some believe to be a chronic and game-breaking problem.
Being(or used to be) a frequent TZ3 axis player I don't agree with that solution at all, but I think that is a simpler and more likely explanation than chalking everything up to a series of coincidences. Obviously it's bad public relations so I can see why they're trying to keep a lid on the policy but players have been demanding for ages that CRS do something about big breakthroughs during lowpop.
Well it looks like bloodhund23 is leaving the game. That's another good leader.
Now some of the allied players are complaining that there wasn't any resistance and the last phase of the map was really boring. Per CRS logic they should all be happy because they have a campaign win, and the game should be healthier because the historical win/loss ratio is a little bit closer to 1:1.
Dave, he was an ex squaddie of mine and a great player.
He will be missed but I'm positive someone else will step up.
I just can't understand grown adult men getting so torn up over a game.
I'm not trying to be funny or put anyone down but in the end it's a FN game.
What draws many players to do the game is the hardcore aspect of if you are perpared to do the menial stuff you will more often than not be victorious, players play for the challenge of winning either a town or a map. When something external takes a sucess away then it negates however many hours you spent guarding, running fru's etc. Likewise he probaly was burntout anyway and twerp just tipped the balance in favour of a hiatus
I guess so Bodkin.
I mean don't get me wrong, I play to win.
I'd rather cap a cp and hold it then run around getting kills.
If we cap a town and I get 1 kill I'm usually fine with it as long as we capped the town.
I do understand where if someone puts the time in and then something like this happenned they could be angry.
It would just make me twice as determined the next time.
If it continued to happen constantlt, then I guess extreme measures must be taken.
I like these forums here now because players can get their frustrations out w/o the heavy moderation hand.
IMO they are very quick to make threads dissappear over there when some just need to vent.
The my way or the highway attitude isn't going to keep on flying and hopefully what is being said in here CRS takes as constructive criticism.
Except that "evidence" is pretty far off reality as far as Antwerp was concerned. And comparing bdes booted in Antwerp to capping an AB in Verdun. Not really any correct points in any of his posts so far. But I'm not done reading yet.
THIS!!. I personally quit not over a town, but over a flawed set of priorities and philosophy. And lack of discussion on forums was a HUGE one.
Jsilec and CE, lot of respect for both of you. But if you want accurate info on the Antwerp/Aarschot situations I posted those in other threads. If you want to doubt the accuracy of my info please remember that I had a large part in most Allied wins since the time I joined HC. Either by being in AHC or taking a break while in OKW ).
Dcoy u need to come back..
Best map mover late night going...
It was a pity map ..plain and simple...
can't believe some folks still pay and play for this lieing bunch of wasted no talent developers .... these days i only use a f2p account to log in to play if i do at all...
corrupt....bias...and terrible is this game..
and yes i was in this map from the start and called it before it begin.... pity,
Dcoy,
I personally spent some time and answered questions for you (and 74 others) on Teamspeak as best as I could shortly after this incident. What followed was an article a couple days later and a reset plan for expectations. We have re-iterated several times our requirement to reset the server if performance issues exist.
We did engage in further discussions in the Axis area specifically, to include the Game Manager, myself, and the Community Manager (which reminds me I need my title changed on these forums).
Since, the Game Manager has been following that schedule I say again "religiously" and doing his best to provide informed resets to the customers.
Best Regards,
Xoom@Playnet.com
Cornered Rat Software
Xoom, yes you did. And as I said than. I respect you for stepping up into another tough situation. I'm glad player feedback was considered. I just hate that it had to come to this for it to be considered. We've been asking for resets to change for a long time. The problem was it was the winning side doing most of the asking imho.
Someone mentioned the Oyaji situation and AHC. That along with some nerfs came on the heals of Axis winning 7 of 8? I think it was. I really do understand the desire to "balance" win/loss ratios to some extent. And do I have the answer for doing it without driving away tons of subs? No, but i just know "this" isn't working.
No disrespect to Oyaji, but he was not even close to being ready for cinc. He had no real idea on bde deployments or MOIC abilities. He could write a mean email,but in game skills lacked massivly. Nice guy for sure,but his departure certainly didnt hurt the side.
@Dcoy - Dude we have done many maps together. I know your methods and how you approach a map,but for you to back this Antwerp debacle is insane. I respect you brother,but your really starting to develop this "Hate All" axis mentality.