You know, where you can group up with some friends, get something done in game on your own intiative? I know this doesnt fit into their HC high command structure, but their HC system doesnt fit into MMO's.

How are you supposed to play a game with only 1 guild , well 2 1 for each side where you cant do anything in that game but follow the 1 guilds plans. Thats not mmo. And since its a public guild the cooperation and teamwork and caring is just not their. It would be if you allowed anyone to make your own guild that can actually get something done in game that counts.

I wanna get my guys over to the game and raid England, I cant. What gives?? when??

Most MMO's are based on a lot of little instant gratification that slowly leads to larger gratification. Gamers are naturally lazy, they want to do things the easiet way. i.e., Do something easy and be rewarded for it and still feel like you accomplished something..

BG:WW2OL is not exactly that kind of game. The pace is more or less...well to put it this way...if WOW is for kids who shotgun energy drinks then WW2OL is for men and women who sip their whisky.

The two guilds point is simply not true. There are many squads that comrpise any one side. The squads are akin to guilds with the high command being the ones looking at the big picture. Its important to remember that the high command is comrpised of people who play the game and are also members of squads and who also want to enjoy themselves. Its very easy to get in contact with an officer and ask them to set a mission up for you, its called coordination, and a lot of people who play this game play it for the coordination and teamwork, because quite frankly there is no other games out there that requires the combination of player skill and team coordination at the same scale this game offers.
 

To coordinate at such a level effectively it requires a chain of command. Tell me of one organization in the world that is large and successful that is not organized in some wa?. If you want do the big picture things in this game its just a few whispers away generally.

With the recent introduction of placeable spawns has made the game more lively with larger battles so that is quite an attractive new feature as more time is spent on the battleground rather than looking for battles (generally their are at least two battles going on somewhere at the same time if not many more).

Finally, where else can you in the course of a couple of hours, call in fire for mortar teams, blow up an enemies barracks, go on a bombing mission, shoot down enemy planes with aa, and roll across the enemy in a tank? The combinations are so varied and complex that no two battles are ever the same. I have played WOW, Fallen Earth, and a few other mmo's and they all pale in comparison to the entertainment value of this game if one sticks with it for a bit, at least for my tastes.

 

---

Originally posted by Eberbach

---

Most MMO's are based on a lot of little instant gratification that slowly leads to larger gratification. Gamers are naturally lazy, they want to do things the easiet way. i.e., Do something easy and be rewarded for it and still feel like you accomplished something..

---

BG:WW2OL is not exactly that kind of game. The pace is more or less...well to put it this way...if WOW is for kids who shotgun energy drinks then WW2OL is for men and women who sip their whisky.

The two guilds point is simply not true. There are many squads that comrpise any one side. The squads are akin to guilds with the high command being the ones looking at the big picture. Its important to remember that the high command is comrpised of people who play the game and are also members of squads and who also want to enjoy themselves. Its very easy to get in contact with an officer and ask them to set a mission up for you, its called coordination, and a lot of people who play this game play it for the coordination and teamwork, because quite frankly there is no other games out there that requires the combination of player skill and team coordination at the same scale this game offers.
 

---

To coordinate at such a level effectively it requires a chain of command. Tell me of one organization in the world that is large and successful that is not organized in some wa?. If you want do the big picture things in this game its just a few whispers away generally.
With the recent introduction of placeable spawns has made the game more lively with larger battles so that is quite an attractive new feature as more time is spent on the battleground rather than looking for battles (generally their are at least two battles going on somewhere at the same time if not many more).
Finally, where else can you in the course of a couple of hours, call in fire for mortar teams, blow up an enemies barracks, go on a bombing mission, shoot down enemy planes with aa, and roll across the enemy in a tank? The combinations are so varied and complex that no two battles are ever the same. I have played WOW, Fallen Earth, and a few other mmo's and they all pale in comparison to the entertainment value of this game if one sticks with it for a bit, at least for my tastes.
 

---

---

1. It is 2 guilds. When the loot is a capturing a town, turning it over to your flag, then theres only 2 guilds because they hold the power to start, stop and choose a target. Having to ask someone in game if you can go on a raid means your not a guild, youre in one. Theres only 2.

2. To coordinate takes people willing to coordinate, and that willingness wont be gotten in a public guild where the person in charge is not the one you chose to follow. In real life a High Command system promotes coordination where soldiers are paid for their efforts, in video game life the HC system of this game does not promote coordination where people pay to play.

3. Battles are not attractive when its not your battle.

4. You cant call in a mortar team, you spawn a mortar unit and spam spawn points hopeing for a kill.

You cant blow up barracks.

You dont roll across the enemy, you roll to their spawn point and camp them until you can cap the town.

Look their are many thing wrong with this game but the gamebreaker is thats its not a MMO. You know where you can get together with your squad, coordinate and get some phat lewts.

Sorry to hear you did not play the game. How long did you play it? What was your final rank? What squad were you in? Which leadership did you not like? As a community feedback is good as it helps us improve. Thanks!

Point for point.. (what the hell its a stormy friday night, why not some idle banter?)

1. It sounds like your definition of a guild was formed by whatever MMO's you have played in the past and applying that subjective experience to your experiences in WW2OL. You take it one step further by creating clear divisions when in fact the world does not work that way , its a shade of grays that to some people appear to be only black and white.

The HC is just one more level of organization on the chart. Squads or guilds themselves are often dividied into smaller units for better coordination. Since often squad members will comrpise the high command itself it is possible to set the attack the squad chooses. For example, the other night we wanted to take brussels, at first the AHC was reluctant and after a bit of time gave way and in what could have been record time we captured it. This negotiative management style is more reflective of real life problems and challenges. People dont always get their way and they have to comrpomise to reach a greater common goal. Its not really about asking permission its more or less veryfying if a given squads actions are in the best interest of the overall goal.

2. Leadership is often tossed around in the game. You make it sound like there is a big division between the HC, leadership, and the average player. On the contrary, people in game are always switching roles, thats why you see senior officers in the field and lower ranked members leading. Switching up the gameplay keeps the game fresh. Most people who are given leadership are good players and leaders with a few exceptions. There is usually more than 1 battle going on at any time and many leaders so its quite possible to serve or lead with many different people. Finally on point two, every organization that works has structure. Volunteer organizations such as charities have structure and organization, large scale anything cannot be accomplished without either an organization or a system in place to execute it. In either case people who want to acheive large goals are generally either a slave to either someone or something else, even the president of the united states, Richard Nixon had to answer to the people.  This axiom applies to anything be it a game or not....software coders might be the closest thing to being their own master if they are good enough but even then usually its only on a certain scale, facebook success stories of the uber master are 1 in a billion at that scale, Donald Trump one in 10,000,000 maybe...going that route is like playing the lottery.

3.   Again it sounds like you are applying your subjective experiences to this game and again its easy for a squad to coordinate with high command and pick their targets within reason...just as guilds also generally have certain rules of behavior in other games and also have a chain of command. This is just on a larger scale and hence you need the extra level of organizational structure. Saying its only two guilds is like saying the horde or alliance in wow  is just one big guild.

4. Your play experience is different than mine. I have seen  the enermy rolled over, the enemy push back, and yes you can call in a mortar team because your squad has trained to do so and other squads even provide support for more complex tasks. Just so I understand where you are coming from what mmo do you play? You can put charges on spawn points and blow them to bits so I dont know what you mean by that.

I don't even play this game and i can tell you simply want it to be something its not.

Originally posted by D_TOX

I don't even play this game and i can tell you simply want it to be something its not.

Ignorance is bliss.

Originally posted by bigtime102

 

---

Originally posted by Eberbach

---

Most MMO's are based on a lot of little instant gratification that slowly leads to larger gratification. Gamers are naturally lazy, they want to do things the easiet way. i.e., Do something easy and be rewarded for it and still feel like you accomplished something..

---

BG:WW2OL is not exactly that kind of game. The pace is more or less...well to put it this way...if WOW is for kids who shotgun energy drinks then WW2OL is for men and women who sip their whisky.

 

The two guilds point is simply not true. There are many squads that comrpise any one side. The squads are akin to guilds with the high command being the ones looking at the big picture. Its important to remember that the high command is comrpised of people who play the game and are also members of squads and who also want to enjoy themselves. Its very easy to get in contact with an officer and ask them to set a mission up for you, its called coordination, and a lot of people who play this game play it for the coordination and teamwork, because quite frankly there is no other games out there that requires the combination of player skill and team coordination at the same scale this game offers.
 

---

 

To coordinate at such a level effectively it requires a chain of command. Tell me of one organization in the world that is large and successful that is not organized in some wa?. If you want do the big picture things in this game its just a few whispers away generally.
With the recent introduction of placeable spawns has made the game more lively with larger battles so that is quite an attractive new feature as more time is spent on the battleground rather than looking for battles (generally their are at least two battles going on somewhere at the same time if not many more).
Finally, where else can you in the course of a couple of hours, call in fire for mortar teams, blow up an enemies barracks, go on a bombing mission, shoot down enemy planes with aa, and roll across the enemy in a tank? The combinations are so varied and complex that no two battles are ever the same. I have played WOW, Fallen Earth, and a few other mmo's and they all pale in comparison to the entertainment value of this game if one sticks with it for a bit, at least for my tastes.
 
 

---

---

 

1. It is 2 guilds. When the loot is a capturing a town, turning it over to your flag, then theres only 2 guilds because they hold the power to start, stop and choose a target. Having to ask someone in game if you can go on a raid means your not a guild, youre in one. Theres only 2.

2. To coordinate takes people willing to coordinate, and that willingness wont be gotten in a public guild where the person in charge is not the one you chose to follow. In real life a High Command system promotes coordination where soldiers are paid for their efforts, in video game life the HC system of this game does not promote coordination where people pay to play.

3. Battles are not attractive when its not your battle.

4. You cant call in a mortar team, you spawn a mortar unit and spam spawn points hopeing for a kill.

You cant blow up barracks.

You dont roll across the enemy, you roll to their spawn point and camp them until you can cap the town.

Look their are many thing wrong with this game but the gamebreaker is thats its not a MMO. You know where you can get together with your squad, coordinate and get some phat lewts.

 

You just want World of WWII...

I just want a game that lets you group up and do something. This game doesnt allow that. I could get 1000 guys over, draw up an elaborate plan, and I wouldnt be able to excecute it because the game wont let me with the HC system. Sure I can spend the day trying to convince those with power to give me some, but why should I? People is power, If you can organize 1000 people you should get power to pick a target, it doesnt make any sense otherwise and call this a mmo. Its a simple concept, what dont you understand?

Originally posted by bigtime102

I just want a game that lets you group up and do something. This game doesnt allow that. I could get 1000 guys over, draw up an elaborate plan, and I wouldnt be able to excecute it because the game wont let me with the HC system. Sure I can spend the day trying to convince those with power to give me some, but why should I? People is power, If you can organize 1000 people you should get power to pick a target, it doesnt make any sense otherwise and call this a mmo. Its a simple concept, what dont you understand?

The current concept is also simple enough and has been used for ages (even before MMO's), well before this democratic system you refer to.  However a system like that has no place in an MMO like this with is trying to be a WWII simulator. The game is not suppose to be run by leaders of big guilds, but by people who proved themselves (and some who got into by making the right friend....just like the real WW :P).

The game is not a MMORPG, that is true. It is a MMORTS/MMOFPS game and you will have to take it for what it is.

To be honest, I would like a war MMORPG but WW2 is not the perfect setting for that. If you put it in, say Vietnam and made the guilds into smaller units, like a platoon for each guild you could get a really cool game that is more a MMORPG and is about smaller skirmishes instead of large battles.

But I think changing this game into a game like that would be a serious mistake and I also think that letting people play nazis in a RPG game might not be the best thing for the genre (it is fine in a FPS game like WW2OL).

I am sure there is room for a more RPG based game about a 20th century war but making a NGE of this game is probably not a great idea. A Vietnam based sandbox RPG game would however be a great addition to the current MMOs, at least in my opinion.

Originally posted by Loke666

The game is not a MMORPG, that is true. It is a MMORTS/MMOFPS game and you will have to take it for what it is.

To be honest, I would like a war MMORPG but WW2 is not the perfect setting for that. If you put it in, say Vietnam and made the guilds into smaller units, like a platoon for each guild you could get a really cool game that is more a MMORPG and is about smaller skirmishes instead of large battles.

But I think changing this game into a game like that would be a serious mistake and I also think that letting people play nazis in a RPG game might not be the best thing for the genre (it is fine in a FPS game like WW2OL).

I am sure there is room for a more RPG based game about a 20th century war but making a NGE of this game is probably not a great idea. A Vietnam based sandbox RPG game would however be a great addition to the current MMOs, at least in my opinion.

Well said. You do have the option (or at least you had when I was playing) to join HQ and go through the officer training which is very well-structured. When the game was "HQ free" (many years ago) all players were free to decide upon objectives and such but it was seriously lacking the structure to coordinate all those grunts.

Yet the game became very HC dependent which may not please everyone but well...

On a side note I would also really like to see a game with the Vietnam conflict background.

The game used to have what you are asking for. Large Squads controled the action by preping and carrying out the battles on a open front. But they went away from that method a long time ago and in the process lost a ton of players. HCs are good for playing chess on the map by moveing flags but they lack the ability to control local tactical battles in any meaning full way.

That being said the Rats are not going to go back to the older method of play even though at times there are no HC on at all and the game breaks down. Or the fact that you dont see as large and as well organized attacks with tons more players than you see now in game. To do so would mean they would have to admit there game path was wrong and there not going to do that.

Now there will be some guys that come on a dispute this but no matter. The only thing you need to know is that the direction has been set and the game will not change its coarse better to just not play or get used to substanderd play if you have exp. anything else in the past of this game.

Im notgoing to dispute what Zbus is saying.

Im going to say I have just logged off after a fun evening. One side was hitting St Niklaas hard and the other was defending.

One side had captured the west cp meaning supply couldnt be bought back in to the beleaugered town, but using mortars a smoke screen was laid that helped the defenders recapture the ground and spawn point.

Excellant fun for both sides. As for the Squads, they were playing hard as were the HC online. It needs players to make it work - simple.

Regarding "is it an MMO?". Well, my previous experience of MMO's was DAOC and EVE. DAOC was similar in that you had 3's and player run Alliances. WWIIOL is representing national command, so it is hard coded into the game. You however have diverse squads runnign around on each side. Some specialising in "tanks" (heavy armour, not fighters!) and some people who specialise in Air or Anti-tank guns so theres plenty of oppurtunity for squads to form ad hoc groups and do there thing.

This game is what you make of it as an MMO I would say.

It's a very enjoyable game. I'm actualy thinking of resubbing......my problems tend to revolve around limited play time and funds for gaming...and there are alot of games out there to draw your attention.

I honestly do think it could use a little bit more of an "MMO" style experience.... as lets face it, as far as the FPS experience it isn't THAT much difference then B2P boxed FPS...and alot of those have more advanced features nowadays (like the destructable terrain in BFBC2)..... it would be nice to see them add something that made you feel like you wanted to keep coming back month after month and paying a sub.

Maybe something a little bit more involved then the currenr player campaign history that they have available via the website. I'd like to be able to "create characters".....maybe do a bit of customization of looks....put in some background details like name, birthdate, place of birth, civilian occupation, etc...... and then maybe have the game do a little more advanced tracking of thier combat record during a campaign...and keying it to individual "characters" rather then your account.... so fought at battle of Arras June 9th, WIA (probably present most KIA's as Incapacitated rather then killed, with maybe a random chance of KIA) June 22nd etc. Also be nice maybe to have the game automaticaly award you "pins" for specific achievements during a campaign (streak of 10 kills with an ATR, etc).... nothing that really effected mechanics but added a little more flavor to play.

I think the HC feature was cool...but I think the game probably could use a little more freindly cooperative play features...to help new players get into that aspect...I know I played off and on for about 6 months and pretty much had zero interaction with the squad/outfit aspect of the game. For instance one of the nice features about the Battlefield Series was the "attach me to a squad button"..... be nice to see something like that added to WWII-Online....So rather then having to effectively join a Guild to experience squad-play....a more casual player could simply request a temporary attachment to a squad....and the game could auto-group those players into squads based upon where they spawned...or maybe guilds could even flag that they were accepting temporary attachments when they wanted to say during periods when they had limited amounts of players on hand. That way you could experience some of the organized play aspects of the game....without having to make the commitment to join a Guild up front. Also, the game could really benefit from integrated VOIP.

It's a pretty good game overall....but the addition of a few small features could really make a big difference, IMO.

Originally posted by Loke666

The game is not a MMORPG, that is true. It is a MMORTS/MMOFPS game and you will have to take it for what it is.

To be honest, I would like a war MMORPG but WW2 is not the perfect setting for that. If you put it in, say Vietnam and made the guilds into smaller units, like a platoon for each guild you could get a really cool game that is more a MMORPG and is about smaller skirmishes instead of large battles.

But I think changing this game into a game like that would be a serious mistake and I also think that letting people play nazis in a RPG game might not be the best thing for the genre (it is fine in a FPS game like WW2OL).

I am sure there is room for a more RPG based game about a 20th century war but making a NGE of this game is probably not a great idea. A Vietnam based sandbox RPG game would however be a great addition to the current MMOs, at least in my opinion.

I think you are right about the MMORPG thing....although WWII is such a classic "Film Noir" setting it would be a shame to not be able to use it for an MMORPG because of political issues....lets face it, Vietnam has a very different feel...and has it's own political issues as well.

I think the way to go for something like that would be the "alternate history" route. For instance, if you wanted a WWII style setting... you could maybe do a timeline where WWI ended in a stalemate and the Germans in that timelines version of WWII  were actualy fighting for the Kaiser and Imperial Germany instead....preserve much of the feel without some of the ugly political overtones.

I also remember an excellent Pen'N'Paper RPG game based off the aftermath of a hypothetical NATO vs PACT conflict which culimated in a limited nuclear exchange....and a general break-down in the Command/Control and central governments of the warring factions. Was titled Twillight 2000. I always thought that would be a really neat setting for an MMORPG....totaly off-topic for WWII-Online though.

Originally posted by bigtime102

I just want a game that lets you group up and do something. This game doesnt allow that. I could get 1000 guys over, draw up an elaborate plan, and I wouldnt be able to excecute it because the game wont let me with the HC system. Sure I can spend the day trying to convince those with power to give me some, but why should I? People is power, If you can organize 1000 people you should get power to pick a target, it doesnt make any sense otherwise and call this a mmo. Its a simple concept, what dont you understand?

There was a time when you could do a lot more squad organized attacks around 4 years ago, you have played the game at this time isnt it ? There was power to the squads and the HC, squads often did organize and decide what town to attack. There were no brigades just supply from towns and you could form huge columns with equipmen just from the towns behind the frontline.

There were no mobile spawns or this new FRU types, just organized Opel runs by people...this was a lot of fun, but had its problems aswell. Since you did invest a lot of time and died so fast. On the other hand these new FRU spawns are just way too much, you can build them to close and an "army" spawns from nowhere is a bit strange.

I remember that on several channels people did form tank columns with almost 50 tanks sometimes, that was huge and really amazing.

I didnt subscribe to this game anymore since this change, but I do play the trial currently again to see whats going on. At least they offer the trial without credit card. Dont have the time anymore to play mmos that much, but its nice to jump into this older game again since it still has some kind of gameplay which is hard to find, I would say there is really none unfortunately. Planetside was the only alternative game, which died more or less on the other hand it was quiete gamey..the more realism in BE is really nice.

If you think about that this company is that small that you could call it a garage company but they game is still around after ( 8 years ?)...this is amazing. The game is still unique, doesnt matter if the graphic isnt superb. I was looking for a game in the last 5 years with similar possibilities...there is none :(, the only one which comes close is armed assault II.

----------------------

"But I think changing this game into a game like that would be a serious mistake and I also think that letting people play nazis in a RPG game might not be the best thing for the genre (it is fine in a FPS game like WW2OL).

I am sure there is room for a more RPG based game about a 20th century war but making a NGE of this game is probably not a great idea. A Vietnam based sandbox RPG game would however be a great addition to the current MMOs, at least in my opinion."

------------------------

I dont think you will find any war era where you could just role play without a bad taste, false flag started vietnam war with two million civilian casulaties and contaminated with chemical WMD.

I also remember an excellent Pen'N'Paper RPG game based off the aftermath of a hypothetical NATO vs PACT conflict which culimated in a limited nuclear exchange....and a general break-down in the Command/Control and central governments of the warring factions. Was titled Twillight 2000. I always thought that would be a really neat setting for an MMORPG....totaly off-topic for WWII-Online though.

Twilight 2000! Wow, that is a missed game and the genre would be outstanding for an mmo. I digress.....

I hope the largest scale battles in WWII Online are yet to come ! No other game has the possibilities for several brigades to pit each other at the same time on the same map.

Originally posted by Coman

Originally posted by bigtime102

I just want a game that lets you group up and do something. This game doesnt allow that. I could get 1000 guys over, draw up an elaborate plan, and I wouldnt be able to excecute it because the game wont let me with the HC system. Sure I can spend the day trying to convince those with power to give me some, but why should I? People is power, If you can organize 1000 people you should get power to pick a target, it doesnt make any sense otherwise and call this a mmo. Its a simple concept, what dont you understand?

The current concept is also simple enough and has been used for ages (even before MMO's), well before this democratic system you refer to.  However a system like that has no place in an MMO like this with is trying to be a WWII simulator. The game is not suppose to be run by leaders of big guilds, but by people who proved themselves (and some who got into by making the right friend....just like the real WW :P).

Originally posted by Vidharr

Originally posted by Coman

Originally posted by bigtime102

I just want a game that lets you group up and do something. This game doesnt allow that. I could get 1000 guys over, draw up an elaborate plan, and I wouldnt be able to excecute it because the game wont let me with the HC system. Sure I can spend the day trying to convince those with power to give me some, but why should I? People is power, If you can organize 1000 people you should get power to pick a target, it doesnt make any sense otherwise and call this a mmo. Its a simple concept, what dont you understand?

The current concept is also simple enough and has been used for ages (even before MMO's), well before this democratic system you refer to.  However a system like that has no place in an MMO like this with is trying to be a WWII simulator. The game is not suppose to be run by leaders of big guilds, but by people who proved themselves (and some who got into by making the right friend....just like the real WW :P).

 

I wish somehow CRS could get more funding to do all the things they want to do and more than anything, advertise to get players.

Advertising isn't the problem.  The game is the problem.  People are instantly turned off by either the graphics, the interface or the subscription.  It appeals to the hard core sim and  wargame crowd.  Something major has to change if your going to attract the FPS crowd.   Otherwise all the advertising dollars in the world will be a waste if no one stays past the trial.

There is no FPS out there that can compare to this game (they're fun and they have their place, like Black Ops etc) but I see guys who supposedly are gods of FPS games online come to WW2OL and either slink away swearing to never let anyone know they tried to play and got owned, or they stay and never look back. I'm hoping for more of the latter, as this unique simulation deserves more. /shrug Doesn't matter, I still love it, am still playing, and I might even go back in to HC again after I get rid of all the dust and cobwebs. If the graphics are what turn most people off because it doesn't match the TINY worlds of games like Black Ops though, well, too bad for those guys then.

You have the same attitude subscribers had back in 2002.  The only difference is then it was Battlefield 1942, now it's Black OPs.  You bemoan the fact those games have more players and simultaneously denigrate the very same players.  "Go back to BF1942" used to be the rote response anytime anyone criticized WW2online.  "Go back to Black Ops" must be the new refrain.   And all the while your subscriber numbers dwindle....

Originally posted by rendus

Originally posted by Vidharr

Originally posted by Coman

Originally posted by bigtime102

I just want a game that lets you group up and do something. This game doesnt allow that. I could get 1000 guys over, draw up an elaborate plan, and I wouldnt be able to excecute it because the game wont let me with the HC system. Sure I can spend the day trying to convince those with power to give me some, but why should I? People is power, If you can organize 1000 people you should get power to pick a target, it doesnt make any sense otherwise and call this a mmo. Its a simple concept, what dont you understand?

The current concept is also simple enough and has been used for ages (even before MMO's), well before this democratic system you refer to.  However a system like that has no place in an MMO like this with is trying to be a WWII simulator. The game is not suppose to be run by leaders of big guilds, but by people who proved themselves (and some who got into by making the right friend....just like the real WW :P).

 

I wish somehow CRS could get more funding to do all the things they want to do and more than anything, advertise to get players.

Advertising isn't the problem.  The game is the problem.  People are instantly turned off by either the graphics, the interface or the subscription.  It appeals to the hard core sim and  wargame crowd.  Something major has to change if your going to attract the FPS crowd.   Otherwise all the advertising dollars in the world will be a waste if no one stays past the trial.

There is no FPS out there that can compare to this game (they're fun and they have their place, like Black Ops etc) but I see guys who supposedly are gods of FPS games online come to WW2OL and either slink away swearing to never let anyone know they tried to play and got owned, or they stay and never look back. I'm hoping for more of the latter, as this unique simulation deserves more. /shrug Doesn't matter, I still love it, am still playing, and I might even go back in to HC again after I get rid of all the dust and cobwebs. If the graphics are what turn most people off because it doesn't match the TINY worlds of games like Black Ops though, well, too bad for those guys then.

You have the same attitude subscribers had back in 2002.  The only difference is then it was Battlefield 1942, now it's Black OPs.  You bemoan the fact those games have more players and simultaneously denigrate the very same players.  "Go back to BF1942" used to be the rote response anytime anyone criticized WW2online.  "Go back to Black Ops" must be the new refrain.   And all the while your subscriber numbers dwindle....

If people take graphics over gameplay, then that is their loss.

The interface isn't designed so that a simpleton used to consoles can blindly poke a few keys, however, the interface is now pathetically easy to use.  You log in, you choose a persona (German Army, for example), then choose a brigade from a list which is in combat somewhere you want to be, then choose a mission and unit type, and go, or if you have the rank, make your own mission, choose unit type and go.  How much simpler do you need it to be?

Subscription? Yep, that's what pays for the game, just like any other MMO.

Sorry pal, you obviously didn't read what I said.  I'm not "bemoaning" the players of Black-Ops, since I'm one of them.  However, the only area where Black Ops beats WW2O is graphics.  The only denigration, if you must think it is so, is the simple fact that I've met many people in WW2O who used to play all kinds of other FPS games who somehow found out about WW2O, and I've also met them in other games, and they either come to WW2O and stay, or, they try it and leave.  This most often happens because the standard FPS player doesn't have the foggiest clue as to how to fight as a team, and they get their asses handed to them constantly.  The ones who leave with their tails between their legs are the guys who don't bother to try and learn how to fight as a team.  Those who do, stay.  But many would much rather jump into a tiny map that's 800 meters wide at most, that they know by heart where every good position is, every sucker position, and do the same thing over and over again.  These are the punks that can't handle playing a game that actually has a learning curve.