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.

Originally posted by XOOM-CRS

Originally posted by dcoy68

Originally posted by david06

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,

People had been asking for a fixed time for server reset for a long time. You can't really spin it round and say "look how we listen to people's concerns" when players have constantly asked why can't the server be reset at an exact time rather than it changing by multiple horus day to day (so it does not cause 'incidents' like this).

Also, could you clarify if the Antwerp server reset is now being clasified as a reset for server performance issues rather than a daily reset? In your post you speak about the article on the frontpage after the Antwerp incident then you say that DOC has to reset the server when performance issues arise. I have not heard DOC nor any players speak about their being server performance issues before the reset took place so would like to know if it's still considered a 'daily reset' (with a performance issue reset being "oh the servers about to/ is messing up" and a daily reset being a less urgent "lets reduce the chance of the server messing up in a few hours time")

Likewise reportely the CRS channel on TS was locked with a couple of Rats and the only player isnide being the Allied CINC . As I know you would want to lock it to stop a flood of people coming in (who would make it difficult to communicate) but why wasn't their a axis HC player there (if axis CINC wasn't around)? Did no axis HC members want to join the channel or were none invited? Can you clarify that what was communicated to the allied CINC was the same as what has been communicated to the playerbase.

So the allies finally won the pity map. Congratz to them! Let them believe it was a great victory.

At least DOC now knows what it takes for them to do it: CRS intervention and massive enemy unsubbing.

Rather a lot of bitterness here given it's a video game isn't there?

We all hate to lose but wow

 do you get these kind of heated arguments about gameplay over at BF2? or Planetside2? how bout World of Tanks?. no you dont. only with a real war do you get frustration and absolute hate for an enemy player. all these arguments show that CRS has succeded in creating a virtual war. all the elements that effect the morale of a real army effect "gamers" in Battleground Europe.

 for the record, one of the biggest "pity nerfs" that caused a sizable allied unsubbing came when the 617th Dambusters bombed an entire campaign into submission.the german flyboys didnt feel like defending factory's,or bombing them and lost a campaign because of it. germans cried, CRS pulled the teeth from the bombing campaign to ensure the german players are never without their cool toys, and the germans have been winning ever since.

the main problem is the Battleground Europe engine is designed for 1000's of players. when the population is high, one or two towns fall under big battles over an entire  evening. when the population falls low,like in the late night hours, imbalances are exaggerated and 4-5+ towns fall with little resistance. this "Pacific prime time" has always been the hours with the most movement of the map, totally frustrating the prime time players that fought hard for gains that get lost when they go to bed, all because the late night people are at a 90/10 imbalance.

this frustration leads to side switching, or just not playing untill the campaign ends.

Originally posted by Silky303

Rather a lot of bitterness here given it's a video game isn't there?

We all hate to lose but wow

Right. So why go to great lengths to give a win?  Who care its just a video game.   While I'm not one of those claiming side bias I will say Allies are given a much freer reign on the official forums.   Hell doc even joined allies in mocking Axis players over the Antwerp/Aarschot situations.

disclaimer I'm not saying forums have been that way for 12 years. But they are now.

Originally posted by hoober

So the allies finally won the pity map. Congratz to them! Let them believe it was a great victory.

At least DOC now knows what it takes for them to do it: CRS intervention and massive enemy unsubbing.

If you only knew how much help they've gotten in the past that Axis managed to overcome.    Look at the bloody battles faisco.  A scenario where  Axis has to take Valenciennes for a win and Allies have to take Bavay.   And they are positioned to stack all 3 armor bde to rush a 2 CP town.  Again one of MANY examples.   Which is what the fanbois don't want to admit.  Its easier to label us and toss insults.

Originally posted by dcoy68

Originally posted by hoober

So the allies finally won the pity map. Congratz to them! Let them believe it was a great victory.

At least DOC now knows what it takes for them to do it: CRS intervention and massive enemy unsubbing.

 

If you only knew how much help they've gotten in the past that Axis managed to overcome.    Look at the bloody battles faisco.  A scenario where  Axis has to take Valenciennes for a win and Allies have to take Bavay.   And they are positioned to stack all 3 armor bde to rush a 2 CP town.  Again one of MANY examples.   Which is what the fanbois don't want to admit.  Its easier to label us and toss insults.

bloody battles?...noone cared about them tbh....your old teamates are pittying us again today but hey its all because you left isnt it dcoy? 

I had a blast this past map.  Running around with the 101st and getting into lots of great fights.  When I logged in Friday night I was surprised to see the map had reset.  To be honest, I did not play that night for more than a half hour.  I just didn't have the energy to head right back into the fray.  

I did play for 12 hours on Saturday...oh those sweet days off that don't come around enough....and had a ton of fun.  I saw some instances around Aarschot where the Axis where throwing human wave attacks at us.  I'm getting off the track here.  Saturday rocked.

Pitty map and conspiracy?  YES!  I'll jump into that debate with my own contribution.

It's like what Lenin said... you look for the person who will benefit, and, uh, uh...

---

Originally posted by Karu403
 do you get these kind of heated arguments about gameplay over at BF2? or Planetside2? how bout World of Tanks?. no you dont. only with a real war do you get frustration and absolute hate for an enemy player. all these arguments show that CRS has succeded in creating a virtual war. all the elements that effect the morale of a real army effect "gamers" in Battleground Europe.

---

People are angry because CRS intervened directly in a battle to stop a team from winning, and are now lying about it(not doing a very good job of it, either). It has nothing to do with the intensity of the battle or any of that nonsense.

It's pure disgust directed towards a company many of us were foolish enough to support the last few years during their financial problems. They ask for money and tout their openness with their community in one breath, then blatantly rig the game and lie about it in the next.

Originally posted by Jsilec

Originally posted by dcoy68

Originally posted by hoober

So the allies finally won the pity map. Congratz to them! Let them believe it was a great victory.

At least DOC now knows what it takes for them to do it: CRS intervention and massive enemy unsubbing.

 

If you only knew how much help they've gotten in the past that Axis managed to overcome.    Look at the bloody battles faisco.  A scenario where  Axis has to take Valenciennes for a win and Allies have to take Bavay.   And they are positioned to stack all 3 armor bde to rush a 2 CP town.  Again one of MANY examples.   Which is what the fanbois don't want to admit.  Its easier to label us and toss insults.

bloody battles?...noone cared about them tbh....your old teamates are pittying us again today but hey its all because you left isnt it dcoy? 

So because "no one cared about them" CRS didn't try to stack for one side to win?  They didn't ban people, almost entirely Axis players who didn't like the BB format, or RA and were vocal about it?  Drink more of the Kool-Aid man. 

Yeah its all because I left....    Sorry if I don't think its overstepping my bounds to say the side I played on benefitted from my presence.

P.S. I can't wait for a member of Senior OKW step up and tell how they were asked to hold back from breakthough moves.

Originally posted by dcoy68

So because "no one cared about them" CRS didn't try to stack for one side to win?  They didn't ban people, almost entirely Axis players who didn't like the BB format, or RA and were vocal about it?  Drink more of the Kool-Aid man. 

 

Yeah its all because I left....    Sorry if I don't think its overstepping my bounds to say the side I played on benefitted from my presence.

 

P.S. I can't wait for a member of Senior OKW step up and tell how they were asked to hold back from breakthough moves.

the game has had many instances where things were changed to benefit a particular side....you were not around when the rdp wars happened and the whole system was changed because axis lost 4 maps in a row while allied bombers bombed the factories flat every day...back then when factories dont produce then tier progression was slowed so we had tier 0 vs tier 2.....axis side screamed mass threatned unsub and things were changed and rightfully so.....its not a unique thing and ofcourse doc stacked the bb battles in the allies favor so they could get some momentum...i personally didnt enjoy nor partake much in bb....axis had a bad run and things were changed in their benefit......i know your a good leader dcoy but i think axis will survive without ya...me personally i have made alot of friends over the years in this game and that enjoyment alone is a reason why i wouldnt unsubb even if crs gave 40 towns to the axis that i worked hard to get 

Originally posted by Rigamortis
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.

Not getting into the whole Axis or allied bias claim cause its 50/50 both ways. But I do find it interesting that you act like a whole 5 hours for a town like Twerp is a huge investment. Considering that takeing a town like Twerp used to take as long as 2 or 3 weeks its a huge commentary on how piss poor the current AO/HC/TOE system has failed the game.

Pffft 5 hours wouldnt even fill the supply building portion for a town like Twerp back in the day. Im sure  alot of old time axis/allied players are looking at this thread just shaking there heads in disbelief over what a fuss you guys are makeing about such a MINOR setback.

Originally posted by Zbus

Originally posted by Rigamortis
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.

Not getting into the whole Axis or allied bias claim cause its 50/50 both ways. But I do find it interesting that you act like a whole 5 hours for a town like Twerp is a huge investment. Considering that takeing a town like Twerp used to take as long as 2 or 3 weeks its a huge commentary on how piss poor the current AO/HC/TOE system has failed the game.

Pffft 5 hours wouldnt even fill the supply building portion for a town like Twerp back in the day. Im sure  alot of old time axis/allied players are looking at this thread just shaking there heads in disbelief over what a fuss you guys are makeing about such a MINOR setback.

 Seeing I am a day 1 player I am well aware of how Twerp was back in the day.  I find it troubling you like to minimize people spending their OWN personal time in a game to capture the most important town on a map and then call it a "MINOR" setback.  Apparently so many paying customers had issues with it CRS decided to grace us here on these forums as well as making an official post about the screw up on their front page.  Lets ask CRS if the # of accounts they lost after the Antwerp cluster is a "minor" financial setback.  K?

Originally posted by Rigamortis

Originally posted by Zbus

Originally posted by Rigamortis
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.

Not getting into the whole Axis or allied bias claim cause its 50/50 both ways. But I do find it interesting that you act like a whole 5 hours for a town like Twerp is a huge investment. Considering that takeing a town like Twerp used to take as long as 2 or 3 weeks its a huge commentary on how piss poor the current AO/HC/TOE system has failed the game.

Pffft 5 hours wouldnt even fill the supply building portion for a town like Twerp back in the day. Im sure  alot of old time axis/allied players are looking at this thread just shaking there heads in disbelief over what a fuss you guys are makeing about such a MINOR setback.

 Seeing I am a day 1 player I am well aware of how Twerp was back in the day.  I find it troubling you like to minimize people spending their OWN personal time in a game to capture the most important town on a map and then call it a "MINOR" setback.  Apparently so many paying customers had issues with it CRS decided to grace us here on these forums as well as making an official post about the screw up on their front page.  Lets ask CRS if the # of accounts they lost after the Antwerp cluster is a "minor" financial setback.  K?

So what CRS has made comments about alot of things, being as your a Vet you should know it means squat as they dont mean a dang thing they say or come through on the promises they make to the player base. And I was not pointing out just you I was pointing out the farce this topic has become with all these guys posting.

By the way LOL on the accounts im not subbed nor do I play for free so I could care less, but if you read the fourms here you would know im no fan of this game anymore hell even Stug fan boy number 1 will vouch for me on this part.

Im always amazed at the effort you guys put in to subjects like this but not a peep on the real problems the game has beyond the MINOR setback of 5 hours  which i repeat is a joke for a town the size of Twerp and its value rateing on the map.Hell you want to be insulted be insulted by the fact that its even possible to cap a town that size in such a short span. Now that would be a valid complaint .  You got cheated alright but not by CRS but rather the system they created and alot of you blindly supported that allows these types of action to happen which in turn  robs the player base of decent fights.

Originally posted by Jsilec

Originally posted by dcoy68

So because "no one cared about them" CRS didn't try to stack for one side to win?  They didn't ban people, almost entirely Axis players who didn't like the BB format, or RA and were vocal about it?  Drink more of the Kool-Aid man. 

 

Yeah its all because I left....    Sorry if I don't think its overstepping my bounds to say the side I played on benefitted from my presence.

 

P.S. I can't wait for a member of Senior OKW step up and tell how they were asked to hold back from breakthough moves.

the game has had many instances where things were changed to benefit a particular side....you were not around when the rdp wars happened and the whole system was changed because axis lost 4 maps in a row while allied bombers bombed the factories flat every day...back then when factories dont produce then tier progression was slowed so we had tier 0 vs tier 2.....axis side screamed mass threatned unsub and things were changed and rightfully so.....its not a unique thing and ofcourse doc stacked the bb battles in the allies favor so they could get some momentum...i personally didnt enjoy nor partake much in bb....axis had a bad run and things were changed in their benefit......i know your a good leader dcoy but i think axis will survive without ya...me personally i have made alot of friends over the years in this game and that enjoyment alone is a reason why i wouldnt unsubb even if crs gave 40 towns to the axis that i worked hard to get 

Though a different discussion I would say that such a change would be appropriate for gameplay as new equipment is not trickled in. That is when new equipment was introduced e.g. the panzer 3H in the real war the moment it's introduced it would not suddenly make up 1 quarter of all tanks every panzer division. Having such a dramatic system of tiers (rather than say the tank supply increasing by 1 every 10% RDP) means you can easily get into a situation where you can suddenly have allies in tier 2 with (in current supply numbers) 8 shermans and 8 wolverines going up against tier 1 3H's, 4D's and 3B's. Likewise having stuarts and S35's against 4G's or spit 5's against FW190's for a few days of the campaign would not be to good for the players, most of whom want actions around towns fighting on the ground or in the air. I would support a more hardcore implementation of RDP if they made the air ews more detailed though (to represent air defense detection) with rough altitude, size of 'blob' on radar screen etc which could become more detailied as the tiers advanced (to represent the improvements over the war) as then it would allow RDP interception to be easier to understand and potentially more successful as I think many pilots can't be bothered because it takes so long to get altitutude and it's very hard to find the bombers.

In terms of 'Bloody Battles' I'd agree with most others that they were pretty pointless and the significants of anything from it is pretty neglibile. They wanted to get the Americans in and of course would want to push for the Americans to win as the whole sceneriao was a half-assed marketing ploy (with most potential customers being Americans they wouldn't want 'them' to have their asses handed to). One of the less remembered reasons why players thought "WTF is CRS doing?"

---

Originally posted by Zbus

Im always amazed at the effort you guys put in to subjects like this but not a peep on the real problems the game has beyond the MINOR setback of 5 hours  which i repeat is a joke for a town the size of Twerp and its value rateing on the map.Hell you want to be insulted be insulted by the fact that its even possible to cap a town that size in such a short span. Now that would be a valid complaint .  You got cheated alright but not by CRS but rather the system they created and alot of you blindly supported that allows these types of action to happen which in turn  robs the player base of decent fights.

---

I think I see where you're coming from but all of the major problems with the game are non-negotiable. They're never going to go back to a simple system with town-based supply. They are going to keep the high commands despite the fact that they can't keep them staffed. They are going to keep spawn delay despite it ruining large squad's squad nights.

It seems that most of the people still subscribed(or at least were until Antwerp) had given up on lobbying for new features and just wanted to play the game, that's why this is getting so much attention. All CRS had to do was referee the game in an impartial manner with full disclosure but they can't even manage to do that without screwing it up.