Members - Veterans
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

29 Neutral

1 Follower

About PurGe

  • Rank

Faction & Soldier

  • Faction
    United States
  • Soldier

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Being able to group AT's would solve alot of problems..
  2. You can actually see where your troops are headed in the battle list, but yea, its still a mess when you have more than 10 AT's..
  3. PurGe

    Current position

    Would be sorta cool if generals could control the bots somehow 😄 And like, pay warfunds to get better bots on the team! Also, I think that US Asian clans, and American vets, are hurting SU more than AR during EU/RU nights. AR is mostly used on encircled cities and such. But I agree it would be nice to see such things on a "replay" or at least to have some AR statistics.
  4. I think its pretty obvious by now that the 6 hour AR didnt solve warfund drains such as encirclement or morale. Even though I try to let encircled enemy town be, it seems that they are a primary target of my fellow vets and clans. One reason is the queue, another is getting reinforcements stuck in those encircled towns behind enemy lines. I would like AR to be reduced to around 2 hours, unless it can be dynamically adjusted to fit the number battles played on average during the last hour or two. This would allow us to move troops around more often, i.e. play the game, instead of waiting and missing that random 30 second window that might appear in 0-6 hours. To mitigate losses due to encirclement, it would be nice if reinforcements, and AT's in general, would avoid active battles unless directed there specifically. This means that "cleaning up" after a push, would become less important, and the encircled towns could get played by randoms indefinetely, as they lose attacks 90% of the time. To avoid encirclements due to softcap (capturing large areas because someone left a city with less than 216 spawns in it) it would be nice to be able to see whether a city has a "fun" amount of troops in it. This should lead to better deep defenses, and more AFK AT's closer to the front lines. It would also help if retreated units would go to a safe place, rather than into skirmishes or active battles. This way, we can actually move our units around (i.e. play the game), even if it costs a bit to retreat. The cost of retreat should also be changed to reflect the current number of spawns in an assault team - not the number of maximum spawns in that AT. But in the end, i guess reto doesnt have the will or ability to really improve the RTS yet.. I really hope its true that the "refactoring" is close to complete.. Been waiting like 2 years for this.
  5. This would be a pretty neat feature, especially when you cant get enough players together to pop a battle. It would also give us a different way to "vote" for which battles should be played.It might need a semi-advanced algorithm to handle squads queuing though. Like, prioritize battles with more AT's or AT's from more players in the squad? This would be a great feature for smaller casual generals that want to play their AT's.
  6. The progression tab needs to go.. Just give us an option to disable it at least.
  7. Yes, its funny innit? 😄 No bias, no bias at all! Even the gunner has pretty good cover on GE APC.
  8. PurGe

    Reto come on now...

    It seems to me that reto likes staged best. Its possible that most players like staged best too, and only use war for grinding, but reto doesnt help the issue with descriptions like these. Like, whats this over-complicated description of war? Is it Heroes & Commanders now? 😄 Just say "War battles are created by generals in the strategy game, and are not always balanced in terms of ressources or skill". Also, the description of "Assault" mode should just be something like "All classes, all players". I am guessing no infantry wants to play this mode, as we have the choice of infantry only now. So maybe this shouldnt be the largest rectangle? On a side-note, the visual design would look better, if the 2 small rectangles were not of the same size. I.e. make war a little taller than "quick battle". Also, is "Quick battle" only staged/training/grinding, or does it throw players into war as well? While you are at it, why not just replace the new "progression tab" with "Battle selection" or something to that effect. Then we dont have to pick a battle type every time, and you get a full page to present your game-modes in. Maybe even add a video tutorial there? Anything other than "progression" would make sense.
  9. I have been flipped by Hetzer quite a few times. Its not a specific faction problem, it applies to every faction. I really hope that gravity fix applies to vehicles too. As it is, we are all bouncing around with weird forcefield bubble mechanics doing random backflips and olleys on invisible walls and annoying terrain "features".
  10. I am not a casual gamer, and I don't think you understand the idea as I do. Instead of being #700 in queue for paras within 1 hour of every war start, or ~300 for medium fighters, because everybody and their moms want to deploy 5-10 of them, but dont actually use them, we could get 1 para and then go back in queue for the next after that. I am pretty sure that people sitting on special class AT's means that paras and pilots are rarely put into battles to be played, because they are pretty much 1 time use every war. This way, we would get at least 1 of the special AT's relatively quickly, while whales might have to wait a bit longer to deploy those 2000 pathfinders and 500 pilots. They mainly use them to end the war anyway, so no big loss there. I think the queue sucks as a US player, so I fully understand why German generals dont wanna play anymore. It has to suck alot not being able to deploy simple stuff like infantry vehicles. This is another thing about the queue - there should be no queue for bikes or jeeps, it makes no sense. It just leads to super-fast walker armies that leech off other people's ressources. That being said, i fully support the idea of being able to freely change lines, regardless of squads. Maybe even make changing lines unnecessary, and just let us spawn where we want to. Some sort of fix for "dead lines" would also be nice. It is also frustrating to lose battles because 5 players chase down a newly captured line, and neglect to defend the O's. I would also support the changes that Khadmon propose ahead of changing the queue. It doesnt feel fair that we generals lose tanks and planes that are still alive when a battle ends, and the "new" bouncy vehichle mechanics gotta go. I would even prefer going back to the mechanics where my vehicle just blew up when i hit a tree. The current useleness of jeeps and motorcycles make me wanna quit the game on a daily basis..
  11. I actually like the "10 AT's at a time" queue idea 😄 But it could also be 1 at a time. I believe it would lead to seeing more active special classes in the field, like paratroopers. Not for fun drops, but more for actually playing them in FPS.
  12. I would be satisfied as long as AT's simply stopped going into active battles.. Both when retreating, but also when sending them around the map and reinforcing.
  13. I am not entirely sure how long it takes to place H3 or throw stickies/RPG's, but I would like an equally long time to do it, in return for a reduced cost of usage. It gives tankers a chance to GTFO, even though my first hit would be on the tank tracks 😄 If reto tweaks the "tank exit" animations, it has to be done right offcourse. To make it realistic,the tanker should sort of throw himself out of the tank, maybe even roll a bit, but not just be a sitting duck on top of the tank for 1-2 seconds. Having multiple choices for exits would also be cool. Skilled AT rambos might even kill more tankers this way, as they come at them on foot instead of rolling off. All that being said, the current situation is 100 times better than before tank nerf.
  14. I think most war players have been getting sick from the tank spam since update 1.12. At first I thought "Great, now tanks actually stand a chance", but the big tank buff just made every game cancer, unless I had a tank myself. And I don't spawn tanks unless we need them. Since everyone can spawn tanks instantly all the time, I dont spawn tanks when others likely will. That meant getting blown up by HE 20-30 times a battle. That is not fun or fair to anyone. Nerfing tanks back down makes sense, especially since H3 and stickies cost way too many credits as it is. I would however like to see bazookas and shreks get a buff, while decreasing H3/stickies/RPG-44 costs and making them slower to use. Would also be nice with a faster exit on tanks, which requires AT rambos to have some skills with a gun. In the end though, tanks should not be buffed again, because it just ruined the gameplay. Unless perhaps there is a restriction of 1 squad per battle or something, and we get more XP and credits plus assists for killing them. Oh, and make reloading HE slower please!
  15. Torches and petroleum lamps for those night-time battles where GE camo makes GE players invisible 😄 Oh, and ampibian APC!