There's too few people on trainingserver to do anything unorganised.  Mostly it's squadmembers who are on a planned training ops.  Maybe they will let you join their training (if it's about what you want to practice)?

If you want to learn to fly etc... best use trainingserver as not to waste planes from the campaign when they crash.

Do not wait to join a squad until you're out of trial, per sé.  Take the time to choose the one that fits your playing style though (axis -allies, voicecomms mandatory or not, timezone, ...).

As a new player you wont be able to drive all tanks from the start.

Also, at the start of the campaign only certain tanks are available.  For the most advanced types (eg tiger), you need to wait several weeks before they become available.

Originally posted by chiege

The ONE thing that has always turned me off about WW2OL was the lack of feedback when you make a kill.  Whether it be a tank or infantry... you just never really ad that suspension of disbelief... when you killed a soldier, they just lay down.  Very unrealistic.  Looked like shooting stick-men.  Hopefully the rag doll will bring some of that much needed feedback to combat kills.

By reading all the V 1.31 stuff i couldn't resist the temptation and already resubbed yesterday. 

I played a little of the intermission before map reset and i noticed you got notification of kill credit in the chat window.  At some point I noticed some hostiles on the first floor of a building.  They hit me, but I could duck away behind a low stone wall.  I was too badly wounded to make it far, and because they didn't get any "kill credit notification", they quickly moved in before I could prepare my final ambush :-)

Fortunately, once the campaign started, this "kill credit notification" seems to have been turned off.

Compared to 2 years ago, nothing much seems to have changed (only played infantry yesterday), so that was disappointing.   Paras now have different loadoud types.  Even though my gfx card is now a gtx280, fps doesn't seem to have improved: I get about 30-40 in cities and 70-80 around firebases with about 50-60 friends close by and a dozen planes above.  That's with most bells and whistles turned off!

Any way, I had fun and there were very nice battles yesterday.  I also found some squads which mandatorily use (their own) TS so might join one of those.  Allied side was overpopulated with about 7-13 seconds spawn delay.

Originally posted by VykkDraygo

The game's population is pretty big. It's no where near other MMOs (into the hundreds of thousands+ active members), but there's still a decent size.

...

I'd like to add that there is a trial, so before forking over money.. see how that plays for you.

What I used to found lacking is the use of voice comms by squads.  I checked the allied ts server yesterday and population was dissappointing.  There used to be squads which used their own teamspeak. and I know most players in the game don't use voice comms at all, but still...

I noticed there is a free trial (for new players only), but you can also just install the game and launch it in offline mode to check out the sound and graphics.  That way you can test all vehicles, set all controls the way you want and tune gfx and sound for performance.

fyi: i played for 4 years, last time 2 years ago in EU-timzeone, so info below might not be 100% accurate anymore.

1. Realism.

Generally: 1 good shot = 1 kill.  Infantry can be wounded, but cannot be healed.  Likewise, vehicles can be damaged (eg. track shot off. So immobilized, but gun still operational) but not repaired in the field.  A basic infantry rifle can kill any infantry if aimed well, under the right conditions (obviously target has to be in range etc...).  In any case, you don't need a headshot at all to kill the enemy with 1 blow.  Close combat (<50m) could be frustrating due to lag effects causing simultaneous deaths or allowing the opponent to shoot after he was already dead (according to your client at least).

Amount of available planes, armor and men depends on:

- supply (is the town in supply = attached to friendly hinterland)  -> this could have been changed with brigade spawning??

- Factory output.  This depends on whether the friendly factories have been damaged by bombers or not.

- Player run high-command decisions regarding production and research options.

Terrain: expect forests to actually feel like forests (huge, providing aircover), cities like cities (easy to get lost in the bigger ones).  Elevation plays a role in tactics & strategy.  Strategy (attack and defence objectives) is decided upon by the player-run high commands.  Cities used to be very ugly though, with cardboard walls.

There is anti-tank infantry (AntiTank rifle, sapper) that can kill or damage armour.  There is a ballistic model that takes into account distance, projectile velocity, angle of impact , ammo type, armour thickness etc.. Each vehicle has it's weak spots.  There are websites with pictures of these weak spots.

You cannot choose or customize your weapon loadout.  Instead you choose the type of unit at spawn (also depending on availability) and will have to do with the weapons until you die.   Exception is ammo, which can be obtained from others, without having to respawn yourself.  Infantry can board or ride upon vehicles at any time, but not take over control.  If you want to (multi)crew a vehicle, this has to be done at spawn.

So, supply of infantry, armour, airforce is not unlimited, but restocks at time intervals.  Back then, supply was linked to towns, so you could try to organize resupply runs from other towns (few volunteers for those kind of missions).  I think that's no longer the case and supply is handled by brigade instead.

There is a day-night cycle.  At night, watch for muzzle flashes and use surround sound to locate the enemy.  If I remember correctly, a night lasts about 1 hour realtime.

2. Balance.

Back when I played axis had more players.  I estimate max 100-150 players online per side.  Minimum 30-50 a side.  I was regularly in battles of about 60 armor and infantry on our side with about 10-15 airforce-support.  Max 2-3 battles ongoing at the same time due to AO-restrictions.  I always felt it could use more players :-)

3. Community.

Best I ever encountered in any MMORPG.  Generally mature and no smack like I see in my current game EVE.  Of course maybe that's because there are no common channels, except when you just shout or say something in "local" chat, which is garbled to the enemy anyways sicne germans don't understand British and vice versa :-)

I intend to come have a look when trinity 1.5 is released, and I would definately only return to a squad which uses voice comms.  The high-commands used to have a teamspeak server, but i guess the address changed since I cannot log on any more.

There is a general "help" channel in which you can ask questions.  Not all veterans read it though.

4. Comparability?

The game "feels" a bit like operation flashpoint (- helicopters ofc).  Also, even though in concept it's quite simple, getting proficient at it (especially the flightsim-part) requires practice.

Of course they are different.  Nevertheless, the comparison of the PvP-aspect of both games still stands.

Likewise, a comparison between WWIIOL and a shoebox-FPS could be made as well.

I left WWIIOL for EVE 3 years ago, after playing WWIIOL non-stop for 3 years.

Now sometimes I wonder which one really gives me the best PvP-experience:

1. Gfx: I'd say WWIIOL is much more immersive.  WWIIOL: "Real" trees and forests, you can see for kilometers around.  Dogfights going on above your head.  Smoke plumes in the far distance...  Cities are plain ugly with cardboard walls and generally "feel" and play very unnaturally.  I used to avoid city combat because of this.  EVE: 2D planets and moons, red crosses or red brackets as targets (you can't PvP decently whilst "zoomed in"), the darkness of space...

2. Terrain: WWIIOL has usable terrain: hide behind hills or move under tree / brush cover, use highground to your advantage, capture airfields etc...  Para-Jump out of transport-planes and ignore blocking terrain whilst coming to the target :-)

EVE: star systems and 0.0 space: conquer a real part of the "world" (galaxy) and harvest resources for the war effort from moons, rats, etc...

However: you cannot hide behind / between asteroids.  You can shoot right through them. :-/

So as far as tactical use of terrain is concerned, WWIIOL has a + as far as I'm concerned.

3. Sound: WWIIOL you need sound or you're at a definite disadvantage.  Locate (3D sound) your enemy by identifying sounds as well as the type of weapon he is using.  EVE sound: nice and well done.  Not vital to the PvP experience though.

4. Action: WWIIOL: Finding it can take some time if you're new.  If theres not many people online, it can even be hard for veterans.  Once found, easy to get back to.  EVE: Finding action can take some time.  If you die, you need to PVE to get back a new ship and fight again.  Of course most people create a reserve of ships.  In any case: you need personal "ISK" to fund PVP.  In WWIIOL just take a new unit from the spawnpoint and enter the game again within seconds or minutes.

5. LAG: WWIIOL is realtime.  Fraction of second delays can be extremely annoying.  WWIIOL really is frustrating when combating close range (<50 meters).  EVE: I've experienced battles with minutes lag!  Really unacceptable.  Fortunately the game is playable at 200-300 in system, which is 90% of battles.

6. PvP in EVE is very organised.  The PvP corporations use voicecomms, which helps enourmously in organising coordinated attacks & defence ops.  The lack of a good and coordinated squad is one of the reasons I left WWIIOL.  PvP in EVE = teamplay.  In WWIIOL that's less the case.

7. Strategic level: WWIIOL: the high commands monopolize this.  A map usually lasts a few weeks and then is reset.  In EVE you have sovereignty and space-holding alliances.  The "map" is never reset but rather keeps evolving.  Also here the interaction between PVE-industrialists/miners and PvP'ers is most important.

(8. realism)

I put this between brackets because obviously for EVE this isn't a point.  In WWIIOL i find the level of realism ok: one (good) shot-one kill, is what I like.  I also like the mobile spawn points, although not realistic.

9. Skill

EVE, although you need real PvP skills, is more statistics driven than WWIIOL.  This is both a + and a -.  In WWIIOL you have (almost) no character advancement.  If you're good with the rifle, you are a deadly asset.  In EVE you need to train skills to be able to be of real use (yeah even for tackling the elite corps will turn down T1-frig pilots in favour of elite-skilled-interceptor or interdictor pilots).  Lots of MMOG gamers need "levelling" or "skilling" to keep the game interesting.

I still enjoy EVE, so for me EVE (PvP) > WWIIOL at the moment.

I sometimes hesitate to put EVE "on hold" and switch back to WWIIOL.  Until now, I didn't go through with it.  Just keep the game alive until I finally decide to come back ;-)

Originally posted by Rhoklaw

In regards to strategy and tactics in MMO's such as terrain modeling and name tags, WW2Online has gone that route, but since this thread went to crap about graphics instead of answering your question, I guess in a way they answered it ironically. Strategy and Tactics in MMO's involves large battles which some games focused on. WW2Online which I mentioned, Planetside, Shadowbane and Dark Age of Camelot. Of those 4 games I listed, only one is still played by a decent amount of players and that is DAoC. WW2Online is an older game and the graphics are lacking, but like some people know, no matter how rigged a players computer may be, no one is going to be able to handle hundreds of people in a simultaneous battle. That is unless you tone down the polygon count.

But no, I'm not looking for another game like that.  I really want to experience good storylines and RPG as well as PvP in WAR.

As for PvP performance, both WWIIOL and EVE (another game I play) could both do with some improvement  (especially EVE).  I guess as you say, its hard to avoid lag in mass-battles so I expect to encounter it in WAR as well.

Originally posted by Strycker

The game also ran very poorly on my AMD 4200+, 7800GT, and 2GB.

 

Otherwise you'll be looking at single-digit fps, regardless of system.

Originally posted by hardcase

Mob..ww2ol is very newbie friendly.

I guess you mean the community, not the game itself?

, but I do agree with you about graphics not making a game great.

Well actually the way terrain is designed and modelled is one of the things i truly find fantastic about WWIIOL:

- Use cover to reach your target or get into position before an attack.  A forest really is a forest, hills are really hills and give great lines of sight!!

- Checking enemy advancements through binocs and choosing a nice defensive position to deploy the lmg. 

- Hiding in forests and under trees from enemy divebombers. 

- Using the zoneless map for flanking movements.

- Organising an armoured column or ATG-convoy to take ambush positions on vital crossroads directly behind enemy frontlines (in order to disturb reinforcing columns).

...

Only the berms could use rework (unity II).

After breaks, I always come back to this game and always will.

Now if despite my X2, 2 Gb and 8800GTS i could get above 40fps, that would be great :-)

I hope the storyline quests set it apart from the mindless grinding of WoW.

Just wondering how long it will take to complete a storyline and whether there are enough stories to adventure in, not just 1 per char.

Originally posted by Dubaz

Completely without adding anything, this topic once more shows how little people know about Warhammer, its Universe, the way it looks, the way it's deliberately created ( Posh people wasn't an invention by Paul Barnett, they are _based_ on them )

 

I'm sorry for my topic lol.  I thought this was a WAR-related forum and I could ask questions about the game here.

Also, if you have nothing to add, why post?

Just to clarify:

With my OP i didn't mean to start a discussion about the 'cartoonish' look of the gfx (everybody his own preference, no need/use to argue), merely the functionality of terrain grafix and tagging for PvP. 

I just hope it wont merely be a question of bashing at the enemy with as many maxed out characters as possible.  Of course strength of numbers and army-organisation are important in any battle, but using (terrain &) other features should make it possible for an understrength army to defeat a more numerous enemy.

As someone in the thread pointed out, It seems that they are just trying to even the numbers and levels of chars on both sides and making the fights instanced.  Fingers crossed that the game has some nice mechanisms to make the out-of-instance-PvP worthwhile.

I look forward to seeing how this game combines elements of the warhammer rpg with the warhammer wargame.  I hope they succeed in making it a unique PvP-RPG (not neglecting the PvE-part).

I will certainly be trying this game.

Originally posted by jor8888

 

its same as daoc u wont see enemy's names until they are right next to u. 

 

 

Aha that would already be something.

Originally posted by Kalmarth

I'm sorry to say this but you just discribed a FPS, Using Tactis is a must, Terrain 100% of you game play is knowing the lay out and where to get the best shots from, seeing peoples names, only when you get the kill does this come up, Flanking, goes back to Tactics and Squad based play, your not looking for an MMO your looking for an FPS, I recommend BF2, run with a good Clan and you will do nothing but smile.

The warhammer p&p rpg had one of the best rules systems and did not include levelling.  An ideal and unique concept which really might make an MMORPG revolutionary.

As it stands now, a level 10 char cannot beat a level 40.  So at least he should have the option to travel offroads, being able to hide in forests to avoid the level 40 enemies camping the main road or such...

Looking forward to a new way of PvP.

However, good PvP for me includes the usage of "terrain" features in tactics.  Example: high ground gives the opportunity to look farther, climbing slopes slows down movement of troops,  hiding in forests or in the dark gives an opportunity for ambushing and flanking movements by friendly regiments, terrain can be used by scouts to spy on the enemy positions and his army-constitution, etc etc...

Now I read this in the faq:

Q: Will WAR have the players' names over their heads?

A: Yes, although you will be able to control the display on your own client.

So I hope the tags are only displayed for friendy PC's.  Otherwise you might as well lock the opposing armies in a square room and let them fight it out as the opportunity to remain hidden or use terrain is unexistant.

I was also surprised to read that WAR will include levelling (max level=40, 4 tiers of 10 levels).  This is so un-warhammer-like.  In the RPG only some professions could increase hitpoints and then only max 2 (assassin 3 if I remember correctly).  I fear that this will reduce the PvP to a stats-game instead of a skill/tactics-based game.

Does anyone know where I can find more info about terrain modelling and levelling-system?

Originally posted by bukshot
 From the screenshots it looks like I could have played this back in 1985,

Originally posted by Agricola1

So bombing factories will reduce the amount of planes and armour available to the enemy for a future offensive?