Howdy, Stranger!

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

Understand: We are only disappointed with the developers

135

Comments

  • TontomanTontoman Toronto, ONPosts: 196Member
    Originally posted by david06
      Originally posted by Tontoman   It wasn't the money that made me stop, but with AO's and the lower pops I was constantly logging in and not finding the combat I wanted. With two AO's up, chances were one was in the middle of a three hour camp/supply grind and the other had like 10 players. So I got tired of logging in to find nothing good, then with logging in less I got thinking what am I paying $12 for.

     

    Yeah after I started to understand the game I spent most of my time in a truck, armored car, or as infantry so I'd definitely be fine with paying $9.99/month and just missing out on a few pieces of top equipment. The problem was that I'd log on, see nothing going on, 1-3 HC struggling to put something together(not their fault, game mechanics suck) and after playing a bit I'd log off.


    You cannot just say "I will drive/walk a spawn point to town and get a battle started." Unless the defenders don't spawn in it takes several dedicated players constantly setting FRUs to town just to keep a battle going and some kind of entertainment on the server; to actually take a town you need to wait for someone's high command to screw-up, drain several brigades of equipment or get very lucky.

    ...

    Unless the rules have changed, can you even cap if HC hasn't AO'ed the city?  Been a long while. So can you even get something started if HC hasn't AOed it?

    That's was the big killer, at least before while HC worked stuff out (or hell just rebuilding supply) you could go out with a small team and kick the waspnest by capping something in a town.  Or basically do whatever with your squad.  Sometimes those small things ended up being big battles as folks saw the notices and spawned in heh.   And having small battles along with the big ones are what kept it fresh.  Knowing you're going to have to grind through brigades worth of supply every time...ug.  Failed attacks resulting in low supply and then knowing a counter was coming were some of the best stuff.  No camping, presetup defense, just way short of supply.

     

  • OtotheJOtotheJ here, NYPosts: 52Member
     
     
    Originally posted by Silky303
    Originally posted by OtotheJ
    Originally posted by Silky303
    [mod edit]

    Wanna know what I think of a grown man that moderates a dying games forum like the kestapo? Out of respect for this wonderful venue and mmopg.com I will refrain from giving an answer. 

    Be happy with the game you have. It will live on with less and less players, no further content and even the same bad ideas to put a sparkle in the eye of the last fanboi.   However, here in the outside world, people that dont quite like the flavor of the kool aid will be waiting to take your ball away when you come skipping out of your "happy place"  :)

     

    Dear Lord, cry more why don't you. I don't think this forum has seen quite enough of the 'Waaaah they took my fun away, I used to be a Mega Ultra Pwnzor until they spoiled my fun' attitude that makes you a laughing stock elsewhere

    Like I said, grown men shouldn't be acting like this. It's pathetic.

    The game changed, decisions were made you didn't like. That's life.

    I understand that you are upset not being able to moderate this forum to "fanboi mode" only posts.  To have all these shocking negative comments actually viewable must really get under your skin.  As a grown man that makes me LOL

    Mr big hero game forum moderator, in reality, you have done more damage chasing players away because they werent aloud to voice their opinion.  Those opinions you edited out for years held the keys to showing you what players actually want from the game.  This mega ultra pwnzor clown show actually brought and kept many players subscribed to this game by ...gasp.... playing it :)

  • ginzoginzo Bell Gardens, CAPosts: 23Member
    So, Silky is a mod over at Playskool?    LOL then that explains his contempt for any criticism towards the game or CRS.    
  • TontomanTontoman Toronto, ONPosts: 196Member
    Originally posted by Silky303
    Originally posted by hoober
    Originally posted by CeTheGreat
    I just don't get what the problem is I guess. If we all enjoy wwiiol than why is it such a big deal to drop $30 a month? If it saves/improves the game, what's the problem here? I'm sure we all waste $30 on pointless crap anyway. I know I do. If me not eating chillies for lunch one day a week helps wwiiol, I'm down with that.

    One problem is that unsubbing is the only way to tell CRS that you are not a happy customer.

    I'm not sure it is. Or at least I think there are ways groups of players/squads could demonstrate their unhappiness whilst retaining their willingness to engage in positive discussion.

    Collective discussions might have been a better approach than ragequitting and heading off to a neutral forum to cry like angst-ridden teenagers

    Um, just to point out some logic.

    - If you're going have a positive/constructive discussion on something, a NEUTRAL forum actually is something you want.  For reasons I hope are pretty obvious.  It's the reason they move trials if they think it won't get a fair hearing in certain areas. 

     

  • anfiach`anfiach` Steilacoom, WAPosts: 109Member
    WWIIOL died in 2008, it just didn't know it till now. Like a gut shot cowboy, it's been lingering for far too long and its health care plan was decided by Rahm Emanuel.
  • Silky303Silky303 PortsmouthPosts: 134Member
    Actually it’s quite liberating to post freely here without any mod constraints

    OJ – moderating Barracks gives me no pleasure, it’s a chore to have to wade through the steady tide of complaining whinebacks like yourself continue spreading. I understand you’re upset the game has changed, but come on man – it’s FIVE YEARS ago. Five years ago nobody knew who Obama was, nobody doubted Lance Armstrong, nobody had ever heard of Mali. You can’t keep banging on about the way things were and every opportunity. There’s no ego trip in it for me, and you’ll actually find I’m one of the only mods who will leave a reason for a closure and try and PM the thread starter to try and close any discussion without too much ill feeling, as perhaps Dcoy might testify.

    Also, I love the myth that is obviously taking hold here that the forums are moderated to silence genuine, considered posts asking in reasonable terms for discussion about game development - this presentation is absolutely false. As someone who sees most of the moderated posts, I can happily report for the record that the vast majority of threads that are moved and closed are done so because the content is biased, argumentative, antagonistic or outright offensive. Do not be fooled, don’t buy into the misleading image that’s being peddled here.

    And Ginzo, if you go back through my posting history here you’ll see I don’t counter criticism of the game, quite the reverse – I’ll happily say decisions have been made that I don’t think were ideal and that the game may never realise the heights it promise. There are aspects I’d change and there are improvements that should have been made many moons ago to address player concerns. My main gripe here is the disaffected pool of ex-playing whinebacks who want to do nothing but celebrate the struggles of the game and dominate all discussions with negativity. Personally, I think that obsession is unhealthy and pretty sad and I think the negativity is as tedious as it is unnecessarily harsh with regard to new or potential players who might come across this forum.

    SWG > Aces High > WWIIOL

  • BodkinBarberBodkinBarber BirminghamPosts: 106Member
    Originally posted by Silky303
    Actually it’s quite liberating to post freely here without any mod constraints

    OJ – moderating Barracks gives me no pleasure, it’s a chore to have to wade through the steady tide of complaining whinebacks like yourself continue spreading. I understand you’re upset the game has changed, but come on man – it’s FIVE YEARS ago. Five years ago nobody knew who Obama was, nobody doubted Lance Armstrong, nobody had ever heard of Mali. You can’t keep banging on about the way things were and every opportunity. There’s no ego trip in it for me, and you’ll actually find I’m one of the only mods who will leave a reason for a closure and try and PM the thread starter to try and close any discussion without too much ill feeling, as perhaps Dcoy might testify.

    Also, I love the myth that is obviously taking hold here that the forums are moderated to silence genuine, considered posts asking in reasonable terms for discussion about game development - this presentation is absolutely false. As someone who sees most of the moderated posts, I can happily report for the record that the vast majority of threads that are moved and closed are done so because the content is biased, argumentative, antagonistic or outright offensive. Do not be fooled, don’t buy into the misleading image that’s being peddled here.

    And Ginzo, if you go back through my posting history here you’ll see I don’t counter criticism of the game, quite the reverse – I’ll happily say decisions have been made that I don’t think were ideal and that the game may never realise the heights it promise. There are aspects I’d change and there are improvements that should have been made many moons ago to address player concerns. My main gripe here is the disaffected pool of ex-playing whinebacks who want to do nothing but celebrate the struggles of the game and dominate all discussions with negativity. Personally, I think that obsession is unhealthy and pretty sad and I think the negativity is as tedious as it is unnecessarily harsh with regard to new or potential players who might come across this forum.

    Can you fill us in on the official line CRS gives to GM's concerning:

    - Subscription prices

    - Antwerp/Aarchost server resets

    - The failure of Rapid Assault

     

    Any topics about the following seem to get closed and deleted very quickly...

  • Silky303Silky303 PortsmouthPosts: 134Member
    I'm not a GM. I'm a player who happens to have mod powers. First I was an Allied mod then that was expanded to cover all forums.

    Your best bet would to email a Rat, Community Mgr Ohm might be the best bet - Ohm@playnet.com

    SWG > Aces High > WWIIOL

  • HodoHodo Raeford, NCPosts: 542Member
    Originally posted by BodkinBarber
    Originally posted by Silky303
    Actually it’s quite liberating to post freely here without any mod constraints

    OJ – moderating Barracks gives me no pleasure, it’s a chore to have to wade through the steady tide of complaining whinebacks like yourself continue spreading. I understand you’re upset the game has changed, but come on man – it’s FIVE YEARS ago. Five years ago nobody knew who Obama was, nobody doubted Lance Armstrong, nobody had ever heard of Mali. You can’t keep banging on about the way things were and every opportunity. There’s no ego trip in it for me, and you’ll actually find I’m one of the only mods who will leave a reason for a closure and try and PM the thread starter to try and close any discussion without too much ill feeling, as perhaps Dcoy might testify.

    Also, I love the myth that is obviously taking hold here that the forums are moderated to silence genuine, considered posts asking in reasonable terms for discussion about game development - this presentation is absolutely false. As someone who sees most of the moderated posts, I can happily report for the record that the vast majority of threads that are moved and closed are done so because the content is biased, argumentative, antagonistic or outright offensive. Do not be fooled, don’t buy into the misleading image that’s being peddled here.

    And Ginzo, if you go back through my posting history here you’ll see I don’t counter criticism of the game, quite the reverse – I’ll happily say decisions have been made that I don’t think were ideal and that the game may never realise the heights it promise. There are aspects I’d change and there are improvements that should have been made many moons ago to address player concerns. My main gripe here is the disaffected pool of ex-playing whinebacks who want to do nothing but celebrate the struggles of the game and dominate all discussions with negativity. Personally, I think that obsession is unhealthy and pretty sad and I think the negativity is as tedious as it is unnecessarily harsh with regard to new or potential players who might come across this forum.

    Can you fill us in on the official line CRS gives to GM's concerning:

    - Subscription prices

    - Antwerp/Aarchost server resets

    - The failure of Rapid Assault

     

    Any topics about the following seem to get closed and deleted very quickly...

    Just because he is a moderator does not mean he is privy to every bit of CRS information that they decide on.  

    BTW Silky, 5 years ago people knew who Barrack Obama was.    

     

    But I agree with the overall OP statement, I am not mad at WWIIOL, but I am disappointed in CRS.    The game launched 11 years, and 8 months ago, almost to the day.   And the game had so much promise,  but like many games that followed CRS's WWII Online aka WWII Offline, the game promised the world and failed to deliver a deserted island.   

     

    I think games like WWII Online paved the way for so many indie game companies that mad huge claims and often set unrealistic goals for themselves and then attempt to sell a half completed product as a completed product and try and push the often broken and incomplete product out on its customers.   

     

    CRS isnt much better than a shady used car salesman.   They know the car is a lemon, they know it wont make it around the block, but they will sell this POS for all its worth.   Instead of investing time and effort in fixing it and making it all it can be they cut corners, make more bad decisions and then utlimately duck away from any real trouble.      Only in the world of online gaming can a company put out an incomplete product and sell it to its customers and not be liable for shoddy work.    In anyother buisness, even prostitution, you would be held responsible for your product, and at worst liable for legal action.   

     

    Dont believe me ask Ford how that Pinto worked out for them.  

    So much crap, so little quality.

  • AsboAsbo ManchesterPosts: 812Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by hoober
    Originally posted by CeTheGreat
    I just don't get what the problem is I guess. If we all enjoy wwiiol than why is it such a big deal to drop $30 a month? If it saves/improves the game, what's the problem here? I'm sure we all waste $30 on pointless crap anyway. I know I do. If me not eating chillies for lunch one day a week helps wwiiol, I'm down with that.

    One problem is that unsubbing is the only way to tell CRS that you are not a happy customer.

     This is what I did 2 years ago and have no intension of coming back they are full of BS. It now seems that because so many have cancelled they getting cold feet as they cannot pay their bills. IMHO this game needs to lie down and die if they cannot be honest and up front to their loyal subscribers. I get the impression that the hero thing is to keep them in the black otherwise they will die....

    Good luck to you loyal people and I hope they provide you with everything that you are hoping for but I would not hold your breather and $30pm IMHO is far to much when so many games are going F2P now but only time will tell where this leads.

    Bandit

    Asbo

  • keitholikeitholi biddeford, MEPosts: 140Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Silky303
    Actually it’s quite liberating to post freely here without any mod constraints

    OJ – moderating Barracks gives me no pleasure, it’s a chore to have to wade through the steady tide of complaining whinebacks like yourself continue spreading. I understand you’re upset the game has changed, but come on man – it’s FIVE YEARS ago. Five years ago nobody knew who Obama was, nobody doubted Lance Armstrong, nobody had ever heard of Mali. You can’t keep banging on about the way things were and every opportunity. There’s no ego trip in it for me, and you’ll actually find I’m one of the only mods who will leave a reason for a closure and try and PM the thread starter to try and close any discussion without too much ill feeling, as perhaps Dcoy might testify.

    Also, I love the myth that is obviously taking hold here that the forums are moderated to silence genuine, considered posts asking in reasonable terms for discussion about game development - this presentation is absolutely false. As someone who sees most of the moderated posts, I can happily report for the record that the vast majority of threads that are moved and closed are done so because the content is biased, argumentative, antagonistic or outright offensive. Do not be fooled, don’t buy into the misleading image that’s being peddled here.

    And Ginzo, if you go back through my posting history here you’ll see I don’t counter criticism of the game, quite the reverse – I’ll happily say decisions have been made that I don’t think were ideal and that the game may never realise the heights it promise. There are aspects I’d change and there are improvements that should have been made many moons ago to address player concerns. My main gripe here is the disaffected pool of ex-playing whinebacks who want to do nothing but celebrate the struggles of the game and dominate all discussions with negativity. Personally, I think that obsession is unhealthy and pretty sad and I think the negativity is as tedious as it is unnecessarily harsh with regard to new or potential players who might come across this forum.

    Ahhh sounds like your just pissed off that you are unable to silence the dissent. I have watched how you and DOC speak to the players and former players here and I find it disturbing. You treat any opinion that isnt pure fanboyism like it was spoken by some petulant child.

     

    Your companies ineptitude speaks for itself and to come here and try to squash peoples freedom to express their opinion is laughtastic. I get all warm and glowy watching you and the other Moderators squirm that you can't do anything about it and try to shame people into coming back into your heavily moderated boards instead of posting here. Do you know the single most common thing said among developers of failed games when the dust has settled and the servers are shut down.... "We should have listened more to the players."

  • Silky303Silky303 PortsmouthPosts: 134Member
    Sorry to spoil your fun Keith but CRS isn't my company and I'm not annoyed at not being able to stifle dissent, I just think the dissent is laughably angsty

    I'm quite content I can't edit posts here, but that doesn't mean I won't challenge men acting like children when I see it

    SWG > Aces High > WWIIOL

  • Silky303Silky303 PortsmouthPosts: 134Member
    Hodo - at the end of the day it's choice

    I play this game and I enjoy it. There are major and minor changes that can/should/might/must be made but hey - at the end of the day, if this car takes me for an enjoyable ride a few hours a week, I'm happy to pay £whatever for the fun

    Each of us is free to sub or unsub

    SWG > Aces High > WWIIOL

  • HodoHodo Raeford, NCPosts: 542Member
    Originally posted by Silky303
    Hodo - at the end of the day it's choice

    I play this game and I enjoy it. There are major and minor changes that can/should/might/must be made but hey - at the end of the day, if this car takes me for an enjoyable ride a few hours a week, I'm happy to pay £whatever for the fun

    Each of us is free to sub or unsub

    The thing is the game is a choice.   But so is giving money to a homeless crackhead holding a sign "will not buy drugs with money".     I like the concept of the game, I loved the original concept more.   The game changed to much and became something it wasnt intended to be.    CRS promised to have dozens of features with in the first year of release, some of those features are just now making it into the game 11+ years later.    Others are not making it into the game at all.   Now CRS asks for money for another product that has very little to do with the original game.    There hasnt been a signifigant addition to the game in some time.  

     

    CRS has become that homeless tweeker who is standing there twitching uncontrollably looking for that next free handout so they can get their fix.

    So much crap, so little quality.

  • Silky303Silky303 PortsmouthPosts: 134Member
    That's one way of looking at it I suppose

    Another would be that the basic game delivers a decent PvP experience and routinely gives exciting combat, tense and rewarding battles and exhilarating play. As long as it can give me that, I'll pay for it - despite having misgivings about game mechanics that could be better, systems that could work smarter or aspects that could be improved for the benefit of all players

    I wonder if there isn't a Star Wars prequels element to this - the promise in the concept was so great that every aspect that fell short of what can be imagined is seen as a negative

    SWG > Aces High > WWIIOL

  • HodoHodo Raeford, NCPosts: 542Member
    Originally posted by Silky303
    That's one way of looking at it I suppose

    Another would be that the basic game delivers a decent PvP experience and routinely gives exciting combat, tense and rewarding battles and exhilarating play. As long as it can give me that, I'll pay for it - despite having misgivings about game mechanics that could be better, systems that could work smarter or aspects that could be improved for the benefit of all players

    I wonder if there isn't a Star Wars prequels element to this - the promise in the concept was so great that every aspect that fell short of what can be imagined is seen as a negative

     

    I felt the same way about Ultima Online back in the day.   Then the Trammel Patch came out.   Same for SWG, then the Combat Upgrade patch came out.   

     

    I understand games must change and evolve the problem is, is when they de-evolve into simpler games for the simple minded masses in hopes of getting more money.      The best games I have ever played have been games that stuck to the original concept and design.   To this day I still think Roma Victor by Red Bedlam had the best concept for a sandbox game,  WWIIOL pre-UMS patch was the best persistant online FPS, and Multiplayer Battletech 3025 by EA was the best Battletech/Mechwarrior MMO in history.  

     

    But people who compare WWII Online to Planetside 2 are fools, PS2 is a far better game, but not a sim.    It IS A GAME, it is fun, it is simple it doesnt claim to be more.    Comparing WWIIOL to PS2, is like comparing Need for Speed to GTR2 (not Grand Torismo).

    So much crap, so little quality.

  • anfiach`anfiach` Steilacoom, WAPosts: 109Member
    Originally posted by Silky303
    That's one way of looking at it I suppose

    Another would be that the basic game delivers a decent PvP experience and routinely gives exciting combat, tense and rewarding battles and exhilarating play. As long as it can give me that, I'll pay for it - despite having misgivings about game mechanics that could be better, systems that could work smarter or aspects that could be improved for the benefit of all players

    I wonder if there isn't a Star Wars prequels element to this - the promise in the concept was so great that every aspect that fell short of what can be imagined is seen as a negative

    I wanna know what time zone this is when Prime Time only brings one active AO (or so I've seen this week)

  • ZbusZbus shelby, NCPosts: 116Member
    Originally posted by Silky303
    Actually it’s quite liberating to post freely here without any mod constraints

    OJ – moderating Barracks gives me no pleasure, it’s a chore to have to wade through the steady tide of complaining whinebacks like yourself continue spreading. I understand you’re upset the game has changed, but come on man – it’s FIVE YEARS ago. Five years ago nobody knew who Obama was, nobody doubted Lance Armstrong, nobody had ever heard of Mali. You can’t keep banging on about the way things were and every opportunity. There’s no ego trip in it for me, and you’ll actually find I’m one of the only mods who will leave a reason for a closure and try and PM the thread starter to try and close any discussion without too much ill feeling, as perhaps Dcoy might testify.

    Also, I love the myth that is obviously taking hold here that the forums are moderated to silence genuine, considered posts asking in reasonable terms for discussion about game development - this presentation is absolutely false. As someone who sees most of the moderated posts, I can happily report for the record that the vast majority of threads that are moved and closed are done so because the content is biased, argumentative, antagonistic or outright offensive. Do not be fooled, don’t buy into the misleading image that’s being peddled here.

    And Ginzo, if you go back through my posting history here you’ll see I don’t counter criticism of the game, quite the reverse – I’ll happily say decisions have been made that I don’t think were ideal and that the game may never realise the heights it promise. There are aspects I’d change and there are improvements that should have been made many moons ago to address player concerns. My main gripe here is the disaffected pool of ex-playing whinebacks who want to do nothing but celebrate the struggles of the game and dominate all discussions with negativity. Personally, I think that obsession is unhealthy and pretty sad and I think the negativity is as tedious as it is unnecessarily harsh with regard to new or potential players who might come across this forum.

    Ahh so Moding the Barracks gives you no pleasure Silky good to know. I guess you must get your pleasure from other places like say insulting players like OJ as complaining whinebacks for no other reason than you dont like his opinion or because you have heard it before.

    Really dude head back over to PS most of us vets know you for exactly what you are which is a super fanboy of a system of play that has failed from the time it was put into the game up to know. And yeah I know you where HC and have argued for keeping that craptastic system of play even with the ship sinking around you and your last few supporters.

    OJ has you pegged you know it and anyone who has run into you in the game or its fourms knows it. Your just ticked you cant stifle the decent here as well. You trying to play it off like thats not your true intent fails because your actions say alot more than your words ever could.

  • AbyssussAbyssuss Banja LukaPosts: 85Member

    It's ironic that some people posting in here protecting CRS actually puts people off, I recommened this game to try for free to a certain community forum, and guess what? yup, they went here first and read the surly attitudes from a certain barracks mod and a certain CRS member. I guess people who try the game don't like reading they are "freeloaders" and "baggage".

    I did try, and yes I will keep my sub running, dispite the fact I think majority of the "vets" are a bunch of elitist jerks.

  • Silky303Silky303 PortsmouthPosts: 134Member
    Originally posted by Zbus Ahh so Moding the Barracks gives you no pleasure Silky good to know. I guess you must get your pleasure from other places like say insulting players like OJ as complaining whinebacks for no other reason than you dont like his opinion or because you have heard it before. Really dude head back over to PS most of us vets know you for exactly what you are which is a super fanboy of a system of play that has failed from the time it was put into the game up to know. And yeah I know you where HC and have argued for keeping that craptastic system of play even with the ship sinking around you and your last few supporters. OJ has you pegged you know it and anyone who has run into you in the game or its fourms knows it. Your just ticked you cant stifle the decent here as well. You trying to play it off like thats not your true intent fails because your actions say alot more than your words ever could.

    Hang on, so the beauty of a neutral board is that dissatisfied and ex-players can criticise the game and the dev team openly, but you're now upset that I'm critical of OJ? Doesn't that stink of double standards?

    I think I'm justly critical of OJ because he's made the point - repeatedly - that he wants the game to revert to 2006. He's had it explained to him - repeatedly - that this isn't technically possible or feasible. And yet he still continues to dogmatically push this message, in numerous ways - sometimes critcally, sometimes reasonably, sometimes antagonistically. His more abrasive comments see him get moderated - his reasonable comments are allowed to stand and can be found throughout the Barracks. I might find his message tedious, but it's only moderated when it's abrasive or repeated in such a way to constitute spam.

    The message that many players feel the official forums are over-moderated is clear, and it's up to me to relay that back to new head mod Thrance as he looks to reboot the mod team, something I'll do because I actually want to see ex-players like OJ live up to their hype and deliver leadership in-game, because that makes the game more fun to play.

     

    SWG > Aces High > WWIIOL

  • TontomanTontoman Toronto, ONPosts: 196Member
    Originally posted by Silky303
    That's one way of looking at it I suppose

    Another would be that the basic game delivers a decent PvP experience and routinely gives exciting combat, tense and rewarding battles and exhilarating play. As long as it can give me that, I'll pay for it - despite having misgivings about game mechanics that could be better, systems that could work smarter or aspects that could be improved for the benefit of all players

    I wonder if there isn't a Star Wars prequels element to this - the promise in the concept was so great that every aspect that fell short of what can be imagined is seen as a negative

    Yes and no.  After the initial problems and after WWIIOL became stable and very playable it was popular, so those initial release expectations don't come into it.  With later development, mainly the big gameplay changes of Depots/AOs etc, it's not that it fell short, it's that it went backwards.  That's WWIIOL and Star Wars, and in similar ways.    Maybe the eye candy is a bit better (no cast iron trees, more foliage, more weapons), but the story (gameplay) died along the way.  We started off with Darth Vader, we ended up with Jar Jar Binks

  • ZbusZbus shelby, NCPosts: 116Member
    Originally posted by Silky303
    Originally posted by Zbus Ahh so Moding the Barracks gives you no pleasure Silky good to know. I guess you must get your pleasure from other places like say insulting players like OJ as complaining whinebacks for no other reason than you dont like his opinion or because you have heard it before. Really dude head back over to PS most of us vets know you for exactly what you are which is a super fanboy of a system of play that has failed from the time it was put into the game up to know. And yeah I know you where HC and have argued for keeping that craptastic system of play even with the ship sinking around you and your last few supporters. OJ has you pegged you know it and anyone who has run into you in the game or its fourms knows it. Your just ticked you cant stifle the decent here as well. You trying to play it off like thats not your true intent fails because your actions say alot more than your words ever could.

    Hang on, so the beauty of a neutral board is that dissatisfied and ex-players can criticise the game and the dev team openly, but you're now upset that I'm critical of OJ? Doesn't that stink of double standards?

    I think I'm justly critical of OJ because he's made the point - repeatedly - that he wants the game to revert to 2006. He's had it explained to him - repeatedly - that this isn't technically possible or feasible. And yet he still continues to dogmatically push this message, in numerous ways - sometimes critcally, sometimes reasonably, sometimes antagonistically. His more abrasive comments see him get moderated - his reasonable comments are allowed to stand and can be found throughout the Barracks. I might find his message tedious, but it's only moderated when it's abrasive or repeated in such a way to constitute spam.

    The message that many players feel the official forums are over-moderated is clear, and it's up to me to relay that back to new head mod Thrance as he looks to reboot the mod team, something I'll do because I actually want to see ex-players like OJ live up to their hype and deliver leadership in-game, because that makes the game more fun to play.

     

    Im pointing out as a Mod on PS you did the exact same thing you are doing here. You know not listening to the complaints or calling players whiners etc.... because they dont fall in line with your view or CRS view of how the game path shoulld be going. Is that clear enough for you.  But hey why argue who is correct in this matter when we can just look the games current state and its steady decline since HC/AO/TOE for the truth of the matter.

    By the way i was in game in 2006 the Dev's said nothing about not being able to revert the patch. Doc did say on many posts that he would not revert the change because its not the path he wanted. Big diffrence thier sparky. But I guess its nice to pull the SWG theme of its not possible or we lost that copy of the build  because well it worked out so good for them.

    OJ does not have to live up to the hype like him or hate him he delivered leadership and fun addictive play to his squad which was one of the biggest in the game.  But lets be honest even if he did come back he would need the tools to be able to pull off such a feat which honestly are not in the current system. You may want to ask him some time about tactics and supply and proper planning because from what I saw of your HC lead attacks they had more to do with cat herding than a well executed attack. 

    I cringe every time when I think about what this current system of play did to a great squad like the 101st. Besides just a member drop off the last time I played the whole squad had become a HC lap dog doing nothing without consent first. No out of the box thinking, no leadership, no squad identity at all. Sad sad sad. 

  • hooberhoober SPosts: 25Member

    Of course they could go back to earlier versions of the game.

    But that would mean that they actually listened to the players, so they just not gonna do it. I take it that for some reason they dont want a lot of players and they dont want active squads in their game.

  • Silky303Silky303 PortsmouthPosts: 134Member
    Zbus - fair enough, you liked the game as it was in 2006. It's changed, you don't like the spawn mechanics and restriction on where/when attacks can occur. I get that.

    But to hold a grudge for 7 years and still  get angry? I stopped getting angry at SWG CU changes after maybe 3 months, now I just lament what was lost. But I don't get angry. 

    SWG > Aces High > WWIIOL

  • Bloodhun23Bloodhun23 Toronto, ONPosts: 2Member

    Ya the developers are very poor. Unprofessional, abuse players and way too much game intervention. I'm happy I never have to deal with them ever again. The players are great and I feel bad they have to tolerate those conditions. I hope for their sake they stick together and find different games.

    A friend of mine showed me this forum link. Kinda neat.

     

    S! Bloodhun23

    Former Axis CinC

Sign In or Register to comment.