Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

What would happen if...

bigtime102bigtime102 Toronto, ONMember Posts: 169 Uncommon

They got rid of HC and let squads pick targets?

Comments

  • pittpetepittpete poughkeepsie, NYMember Posts: 233
    Might get a lot of old-timers back

    image

  • OtotheJOtotheJ here, NYMember Posts: 52

    Thinking all the squads/players would sing cumbayah and work with hc to PLAY the game was a very poor plan well before it was implemented.  They alienated a large segment of players in doing so and further caused themselves many issues like you see today with infighting among hc players and the playerbase in general.  Many people have had enough and left over just this mechanic. This does not even touch the major issue of having no hc online to make the game playable at times or move supply. When your game doesnt even have anyone on to actually place attack objectives or move supply this hc system has run its course. Furthermore, you had better hope the hc running things playing level is the best you have and its far from that today. 

    Surprisingly, I also think the hc should remain in game. They just should not be the only option for players to rely on to play.  A system where any player can assemble people and place ao's to compliment the hc system would be ideal actually.  You wil find people coming out of the woodwork to set up attacks and the ones who deliver will not only provide way better gameplay but the players will follow them.  This causes a chain reaction of delivering the people you want leading and giving the game some really nice variety in command styles. 

    The only issue you will have is some butt hurt hc people trying to tell everyone where to go and the players choosing other options. This all played out before and the hc was a joke in comparison to sqauds

    Take the para unit for example, its one of the best units for immersive squad play in the game, should have squads that just do this that have huge numbers and they arent even touched most of the time. Allowing any player to group up with 20 paras on a mission should allow them to place thier own ao.  Thats just the tip of a huge game improvement that would attract more players than anything they have dev'ed in the last 3 years.  Para centric missions that say allowed them to drop one town behind the line and being para capturable only or if they capped the linking behind the lines cp no supply could move up to the main attack. are examples of high quaility game mechanics 

    This was always a thinking mans game.  When you put everyone in a box and said "P1 flood" you lost most of your players.

  • pittpetepittpete poughkeepsie, NYMember Posts: 233

    This was always a thinking mans game.  When you put everyone in a box and said "P1 flood" you lost most of your players.

    Can't argue with this.

    I wish they could for 1 map just take away AO's and Brigades.

    Make every FRONTLINE town capturable.

    It either works or doesnt.

    image

  • Company0Company0 Oklahoma City, OKMember Posts: 36
    Originally posted by pittpete
    This was always a thinking mans game.  When you put everyone in a box and said "P1 flood" you lost most of your players. Can't argue with this. I wish they could for 1 map just take away AO's and Brigades. Make every FRONTLINE town capturable. It either works or doesnt.

    It'd be an interesting test, one that I personally would like to watch. Would need plenty of announcement beforehand though, otherwise some of the squads might not make it back.

  • argelargel WashingtonMember Posts: 34
    Even though I don't think it's the right way for the long term of the game, I agree that putting it back in the short term may just entice enough old-timers back to get 1.35 done and then CRS could take a fresh look at what was possible with a stable subscriber base.
Sign In or Register to comment.