Corpnews :: View topic - East: Comstar vs Daslog
Corpnews :: View topic - East: Comstar vs Daslog

Kvlt
Semi-Sentient Burbling Muck
Joined: 17 Jan 2004
Posts: 53
New postPosted: Tue Aug 31, 2004 3:55 pm

To Comstar's credit, I thought English was his first language for a surprisingly long time.

I got through the first round but I'm going to lose this one.

Nicest thing anyone evers said about me on the internet.
- posted by Comstar @ Tuesday, August 31, 2004 0 comments

 
KURSK a GERMAN Tactial victory!?!?!? LOL
WWII Online :: View topic - the tier and balance

aismov wrote:
Wow, you really dont have a clue about WWII history, do you? For the record, kursk was a tactical victory from the standpoint of the Panzer divisions, if you only look at the loss statistics, they tell a god deal of the story.


That is the single most stupidest comment I have ever read here. Kursk a "tactical victory"?!?! Are you out of you MIND!?!? What part of complete faliure can POSSIBLY qualify as a success?!?!

The russian defencces held the german attacks, wiped out the german panzers and the ensuring counterattack took twice as much ground as existsed in the entire Stalient in the first place, including Karkove!

Tactical Victory?!?! HA HA HA!
- posted by Comstar @ Tuesday, August 31, 2004 1 comments

 
WWII Online :: View topic - Give HE to all allied AntiTank Guns
WWII Online :: View topic - Give HE to all allied AntiTank Guns

Actually I believe that QF-2 pounder AT guns had HE, following some recent research I did, and after verifying the extent and validity of this evidence I would propose that we review the decision of sevral years ago and give HE to the 2 pounder if it proves to be the right thing to do.
-DocDoom, Playschool Forum post

I just wanted that up in lights :)
- posted by Comstar @ Tuesday, August 31, 2004 0 comments

 
HC officer breaks CoC?
WWII Online :: View topic - All we ask is a little attention

2nd time too. I'll had to report it again.
- posted by Comstar @ Sunday, August 29, 2004 0 comments

 
Gee Doc, who's the one who gets the vote eh?
WWII Online :: View topic - Pak 38, 6lb'r, US 57mm.

Doc, that would be great, if it was correct. And in first person perspective, it is.

But only the CinC, that is 2 people, total, decide which RDP to do. Nobody else, and I havn't heard anything to change that. The Army level commander players (all 3 of them, well, Navy dosn't coun't, make that all 2 of them, 4 total) get "consolted" but the rest of us, 15000+ don't count.

YOU is one person, and I supose technically you're correct, as the YOU is HE as in the CinC. The CinC writes the story for new weapons, the rest of us act as extras. 99.99% of the player base have no choice in the matter. One man, one vote, the CinC is the man, he has the vote.
- posted by Comstar @ Saturday, August 28, 2004 5 comments

 
Sums it up.



- posted by Comstar @ Saturday, August 14, 2004 0 comments

 
Now THATS funnt!
Corpnews :: View topic - The Mullah's peer over the edge of the dustbin of history

Boogaleeboo
Is Boogaleeboo
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Posts: 758
Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2004 3:33 pm

You don't get it. I don't care about Al-Sadr. He's meaningless.

Americans were asked to come into the holy city.

Americans. Were asked.

The holy city.

You don't get how major that is, do you?

If that doesn't get the Iraqi people revolting, nothing will. Sure, we have to stay away from the major mosque. Who cares?

EVERYTHING has gone right for us this war, and you better start ackknowledging that.

I love that last line. I have to wounder if it includes the 14+ attemprts to get Saddam during the war :).

I had to laugh at that. Though I'm afraid if I answer his last statment I'll be banned from CorpNews. I wounder if anyone else will pick him up on that comment?
- posted by Comstar @ Saturday, August 14, 2004 0 comments

 
Sim tries and fails.
WWII Online :: View topic - Unoffical High Command PLAYER BILL OF RIGHTSsim wrote:
I have a right at work to not have my boss inform me that she thinks all Christians are morons. I have a right to not have to sit there while my dentist talks shait about my political party....If you want to have a game where you are in charge of the experiences of others, then you need to exhibit the same professionalism ON THE JOB that other people in positions of responsibility have.....If you want to log out and talk politics on Yahoo Chat...go for it. That's your time. That's your life outside of this limited commitment you've made.


Sim, I am now copying and pasting from you're original post in this very thread. "Ariticle 8: HC Staff will be held accountable for their actions, in game and out. "

It's NOT at my work. It's ANYWHERE OUT OF GAME. As stated so by Shilling, who used the location of a non-CRS message boardd location as an example. If it just said it includes places where you ACT as a HC officer, in game, or using in game message boards (such as the HC ones) or CRS owned messaage boards, great! It dose not say that. This is no limination to the authority of the HC over my actions on a private message board contorlled by a NON-CRS or HC person.

Quote:
This allows for the fact that one person can have two different roles and creates separation between the two roles - public and private. Can we talk about this idea constructively?


Ahem, you're told me to take the postion or leave it, so I'm glad you want to talk about any ideas to change it or get around the rules constructively. Anyway, that would be breaking Articles 3, 5 8, 12 and 14. The code of conduct does not say there is ANY difference betwen a HC officer and his account with WW2OL. It says only that someone is a HC staff member if they are a member of the HC staff.

Actually it dosn't say anywhere that a HC staff has to indentify themselves as a HC staff member or not, only that you're bound by it in game and out. You could indentify yourself as a HC officer in game, and order people around using that authority, and there's nothing in the TOS stopping you doing it either (The TOS says you wont pretend to be a Rat, not a HC offical).

So I use a different name to make complaints, or abuse people, or break any of the articles, I'm still liable...which is surly what you want? If a HC member started using a secret account to breake the rules, surly that's not a good thing? They could do so HERE, not just elsewhere on the internet.
- posted by Comstar @ Friday, August 13, 2004 0 comments

 
THIS is the same person!?!?
WWII Online :: View topic - Thoughts on WW2OL, OT ? I mean, wow, somehow it's become ...

Maigrey, are you the SAME Maigrey who's a BEF corps XO? Because your comments here and his comments there are completly incompatible.
- posted by Comstar @ Friday, August 13, 2004 0 comments

 
Possible breach of the code of conduct? #1 of a series I'm sure.
Article 7 of the code of conduct states: HC Staff will not make references to political organizations or opinions in their daily conversations and posts. The HC officer is unaffiliated, loyal, and impartial. Represent us well, and we will earn the respect of our fellow players and the gaming community at large.
----------------------------

BEF I corps XO Maigrey made the following post after the code of conduct came into effect: [url=http://discussions.playnet.com/viewtopic.php?t=99240]WWII Online :: View topic - This is not Genocide, its peace![/url]

Maigrey
WWIIOL BUILDER
Joined: 04 Feb 2003
Posts: 10499
Location: Maryland, USA
Posted: 11 Aug 2004 01:14
Post subject:

In my mind, until other countrie start HELPING in places like the Sudan, they can just STFU about Iraq.
----------------------------------------------------
I would like command to take action, and enforce the code of conduct under Article 8: "HC Staff will be held accountable for their actions, in game and out. Misconduct could result in summary dismissal at the discretion of the Commander in Chief, or his appointed disciplinary officer (by default the Chief of Staff). Disciplinary action can range from recorded verbal warning, disciplinary transfer, demotion or full dismissal from the HC".

If they are unable or unwilling to take action, I asked to be informed me of the reasons for inaction.
- posted by Comstar @ Friday, August 13, 2004 0 comments

 
Do these people ever borther to READ the thread?
WWII Online :: View topic - Unoffical High Command PLAYER BILL OF RIGHTS

chieftom wrote:
Comstar, You have taken a lot of time tearing apart Sims hard work and in my opinion, nit picking it to death.


Most of his "hard work" was a straight copy and paste of the original code of condunct, usually a sentence or two added to the top of it. Don't I get a tip for all my hard work in going through all of his arugments too? :(

Anyway, the rules are clear or not clear as they case may be, and one reason I keep replying to this thread is becuase people post to it without reading it first. NOTE: My original post where I DID go through what cluases need to be changed was locked and deleted by the Mods, so don't blame me for that.

Quote:
Where is the Code of Conduct that you would support in its place?


Mabve you should ask the Mod who deleted it? Ok, ok, I didn't rewrite it in DETAIL, but surly by now you've read what I want changed?

Quote:
Please take the time to put your version together so we can review it as you have Sims.


I take it you havn't read the OFFICAL version? Most of nearly all of which is PART of Sims? In other words I wasn't revwiing Sim's, I was reviewing the offical code of conduct. Something that an offical mod deleted when I did!

Anyways, I would be glad if you reviewed and commeted on my version. That is not something that is allowed of the *offical* one if you're a HC officer and you would like non HC members to know you're thoughts on it. Furhtermore, it has been made quite clear both by CRS staff (Shilling) and HC staff that there will be NO changes to the document. Only 6 players were givin the right to be consolted on the document (no names have been givin on who they are, though I can guess they were the 3 HC senior officers as listed in the document), the rest of us must take it as is or not have ANY part with the HC's.

Quote:
These rules, in spirit, are no different then what real military officers are required to abide by everyday. The real world rules for officers have evolved to where they are today over thousands of years and they are this way for very good reasons.


Yes. The real world has such as a right of appeal, the right to state your political views and not be sanctioed for doing that, a right to open hearings, the rights of having an invistagtion if you are accused of something, and a right not to have one man as your judge, jury and exacutioner (and you can't appeal to HIS surpioers without going through him first either).
- posted by Comstar @ Friday, August 13, 2004 0 comments

 
I missed Shillings comment.
WWII Online :: View topic - Offical High Command Code of Conduct

Ya know. I sorta missed this post by Shilling. I shall make amends.

SHILLING wrote:
I would suppose under the new code of conduct I would slated for a butt chewing from the CinC in the least. If I as an officer made that comment.


SUPPOSE? Why suppose you would only get a verbal warning? Why should you not be dismissed? You admit you posted an inflamarty and abusive comment to enemy players. Joke or not it does not matter.

And if the CinC DID dismiss you for a joke, would you be happy for that to happen and have no right to appeal it?

And if the CinC does NOT dismiss you, what do I, as a normal player, do about a CinCs lack of action?
- posted by Comstar @ Thursday, August 12, 2004 0 comments

 
Cav fights back, I reply.
WWII Online :: View topic - Unoffical High Command PLAYER BILL OF RIGHTS

cavalier wrote:
Comstar, so do you think that the HC members should have a code of conduct that sets the left and right of arc of how we should behave? If so and you find these so at fault what would you propose.


I have said repeatly which clauses need to be changed or re-writtin. In fact I said so in this very thread, when responding to Sim's original post.

I agree the HC's need a code of conduct. This is not it. It's badly writtin and flawed. SOME of it is acceptable, I hightlighed the clauses that are not. The HC's ARE in a postion of resposinbility and need to be accoutable for their in game actions, and use of HC provided tools. Furthermore, it dosen't provide ANY resposibnility for in game actions or abuse of HC tools!

"Corse, that might be already covered by the TOS and EULA, which is fair enough.

cavalier wrote:

I think you are reading into this. All CinCs so far have been able to show loyalty to the player base and the Rats. Funilly enough I think this goes hand in hand. The player base will not stand for heavy handed CinCs and will make their displeasure known. An aggrevated player base is against the best interests of the Rats.


Yes, but the OFFICER playerbase cannot MAKE thier feelings known to the rats!!!! They can only go through the CinC to make a complaint about the CinC. The playerbase will rarly if ever interact WITH the CinC, but the officers will.

IF there is a persoanilty clash between the CinC and another HC player, only the CinC (and his CoS if the CinC so chooses) can decide who is fired because of it. Persoanilty clashes have occured before, and they WILL hbppen again.

Furthermore, there is NO way the playerbase CAN make thier displeaure known, as they arn't in the chain of command to tell anyone! And posting HERE would most probably be aginast the TOS because you would be crtiaizing someone directly.

Quote:
So why do you want to be able to espouse your political views in the forums dedicated to this game. Politics is an emotive subject that often creates unnecasarily heated debates that have no place here! The last thing I want littering the forums of this game I play are peoples views on politics, religion, race, etc!


I presume you are NOT talking about Off-topic, because otherwise you're talking about a different game.By all means an officers political views should not effect his in game abilities or functions. Unfortunaly, it dosn't SAY that. It says he can't TALK about them. The next clause says this applies IN GAME AND OUT. SHILLING posted that this covers SQUAD FOURMS.

Quote:
I think you are blasting way over the top and making this code of conduct something that is meant to control you and take away your rights.


Taking away my ability to make political comments and complain about sections of the game or CRS ANYWHERE is a gross taking away of my rights.

Quote:
You are worried about the abuse of power but then rail against a code of conduct aimed at ensuring power is not abused to the detriment of the player base.


There is actually no recorse LISTED for players who ARE abused by HC officers abusing thier postion. This should be stated, and the procudure to be used by the CinC to resolve it. The OLD AHC code of conduct had that in it, I do not understand why the new one cannot.

Quote:
Abuse of power is not in anyones interests


...except the person doing it :). I agree there DOES need to be rules on stopping abuses of power. Stopping squad commanders from being Div commanders does not accoplish this. A player can abuse his power wether he's a squad commander or not. And a brigade OiC who IS a squad commander may be offered the role of divison commander in GAME. If accepts the role, he's broken the code of conduct, but if declines the role, he's not doing his duty.

Quote:
It is actually entering procedures to ensure that it is far more open than it is at the moment and will help prevent people sitting in HC positions forever.


If a player is never offered promotion, he can hardly be stopped staying in his current postion. There's nothing in the code EXCEPT the CinC's term of office with a time listed. It is perfectly possible for someone to stay in thier postion forever (persoannly, I think it should be 4 months).

ALso, there's nothing open about the procudres. The CinC does not report to his players, only CRS. He can decide to demote someone, and there is no way to stop it or prevent it. If a Brigade is orded by Divison to do nothing for 3 weeks, the brigade HC officers and players have no recorse about that either.

Quote:
Is this code of conduct perfect? Probably not. Is it reasonable and a good start? I strongly believe so.


We already HAD a code of conduct, this one is full of flaws. It is not resonable to state it is as it is, will never be changed and complaits about it will be locked (as an offical CRS MOD did to me first post about it).

I agree it's a start. It's a draft than needs to be redrafted, not something that came into force as soon™ as more than 6 people agreed to it for the rest of us.
- posted by Comstar @ Thursday, August 12, 2004 0 comments

 
Court is in session, will the defendant please rise.
I LOVE IT!

WWII Online :: View topic - Court is in session, will the defendant please rise.


imsneaky
Joined: 08 Jun 2001
Posts: 4281
Location: Jacksonville, FL

If it pleases the court The Prosecution will begin with opening statements. First we see the above statements made by the defendeantBuggsy. Nothing new as the defendant is a known Axis Troll. We, the prosecution, intend to prove this and will also prove the following:
Count #1 Buggsy is a 1337 6@m3r dude.
Count #2 Buggsy is a confirmed Axis Troll.
Count #3 Buggsy is a Camper.
Count #4 Buggsy was not truthful about his stats versus the Axis in the above statement. Infact those 2 screenshots were the only truly outstanding sorties he has listed as Allied.

The Prosecution trusts the court will find that the overwhelming evidence, we are about about to present, confirms all 4 counts. The Prosecution asks that the court gives careful consideration to all of the evidence presented.

The prosocution continues on the link. One of the funniest threads I've ever seen :)
- posted by Comstar @ Thursday, August 12, 2004 0 comments

 
Of Lawsuits and Duty Officers Rules
WWII Online :: View topic - Offical High Command Code of Conduct

smithers wrote:

The foundation of the EA lawsuit was that UO Counselors were required to put in a minimum amount of time, and that time was scheduled into mandatory shifts (i.e. OSI told them when and where they had to work). The question was whether or not EA and OSI violated the Fair Labor Standards Act. Again, the three Counselors who sued claimed that they were entitled to minimum wage for their work. .


Ok, true, fair point.

Have you read the new DUTY OFFICERS rules for the AHC?

They say you must work for 8 hours over a week period, must report to higher staff, must file reports, must ask if you can be dismissed when finished.

Granted it's not *quite* like the EA situation, as EA enforced times you must play. CRS is instead inforving 8 hours of "duty" on channel 99, and no scheduled time as such.

As a AHC member, I was not allowed to complain about THAT either.

Everyone who wishes to be a AHC officer from now on must participate in the Duty Officer "training".


Now, Ok, it's not about the code of conduct. But it shows the thinking. If the code of conduct and the Duty Officers training were changed, mabye I'd be happy to agree with them.

Furthernote: As I have resigned, if I want to join Brigade Deployment as an officer, I will need to DO the DO training, and have no recorse or ability to dispute my need of it, or complain to anyone else about it either.
- posted by Comstar @ Thursday, August 12, 2004 0 comments

 
Sigh. Winning the battle perhaps, but I can't win the war can I
WWII Online :: View topic - Thank god I quit GHC years ago

Chipaev wrote:

Comstar, once again, no one is forcing you to join HC.


I was refering to angriff, who is.

I *was* in the HC. I resigned when forced to agree to those terms. Note that I had already broken them because they say they come into effect immidatly they were posted, not when I agree to them. During that period of time, I critized CRS for the upcoming bridge building rules. The rules were not enforced.

Quote:
This IS a WW2 simulation and the realistic high command is one of the reasons I joined.


This code of conduct is not realistic, nor a valid simunaltion of real world code of conducts. Real world code of conducts have procudures to work through if something goes wrong. This code of conduct has no procdures whatsoever, only laws you must obay.

Quote:
I may not like keeping my mouth shut while someone talks about politics but I will honor my responsibilities and do so.


You do know that it includes any political comment anywhere, including non-CRS message boards? If you're real life job is as a Poloitican, or a Union Offcial, or a newspaper opion writer, you are going to break the code of conduct, as it applies in game and out at all times.

How long have you been a HC officer? I was one for over a year. That's a long time to not ever say anything about any political organzaion, anywhere.

As a HC officer, if you ever particpaite in a political comment thread on this fourm, I can nail you to the wall and demand the CinC takes action aginast you for breaking the code of conduct.

Furthermore, the CinC can choose to NOT enforce the rules, making them useless to have in the first place.
- posted by Comstar @ Thursday, August 12, 2004 0 comments

 
And I rip apart practicaly ALL of sims examples!
WWII Online :: View topic - Unoffical High Command PLAYER BILL OF RIGHTS

Sim, you're examples are bad, misleading and nearly all of them, wrong.

"There is nothing in the code of conduct preventing this" is something I say a LOT below.

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

1) You have to join HC to get any equipment...kiss ass or get nothing.

Under the code of conduct, HC officers must kiss ass or get nothing (and be removed from the HC, or demoted).

2) You have to follow orders exactly every time you log on to get any equipment or advancement at all

HC officers must do this under the code of conduct.

3) You can expect to be publicly mocked if you ever spoke out against or disobeyed HC

HC officers can be publicly demoted, dismissed or warned for disabaying or speaking out aginast the HC.

4) You have to not play for three days while your HC leader denys your brigade any equipment to boycot the game until his favorite unit is created

This is a complete falsehood. HC leaders when not online have NO powers in game, If a HC leader boycotts the game, he will have no effect in game, because the next person below will take his postion automaticly.

IF a brigade leader refuses to attack, or otherwise fails to do effective action in game, there is NOTHING in the code of conduct saying he can't do that.

5) Hey don't you know, your sector HC leader is working for the other side just for the fun of it, giving away your goals and plans and laughing as you all die...hey if they can post missions, this follows logically!

The code of conduct does not say a HC CAN work for the enemy, only that they may not frantinzie with them. Note that breaking the TOS is still breaking the TOS and not releated to the code of conduct.

5.5) You could have your leader teaching and encouraging cheating and then have the enemy Brigade you're facing use the same tactics against you non-stop just to get even...great leadership!

Cheating is aginast the TOS, and ANY player cought doing it is breaking the TOS. This is not covered in the code of conduct.

6) This one's fun...your CO is in a screaming match with his Division Commander and decides to spend the week leading you all off a cliff to make a point. He get's the promotion...be happy!

Why whould he get a promotion??

Furhtermore, there is nothing in the code of conductb saying he can't do that.

7) You could have a French brigade leader that never let you join a mission because you're an American...I mean this is a no brainer that could never be avoided, right?

There is nothing in the code of conduct preventing this. Only that HC officers may not talk in public about thier political beliefs.

8) You could tell CRS about any of the above and have them laugh at you since as you say "HC can do anything they want"

They can. There is nothing in the code of conduct saying CRS must act againast anyone in the HC over anything. Only the CinC does. And the CinC is under no obligation to invistage, prosocute or report on any actions, or his own actions.

9) You could also have an HC that was run by some nameless people that CRS didn't even know...yey player freedom, CRS shouldn't be involved, no rules, man, let the dice roll!

CRS may well know them, but CRS ONLY talks to the CinC, no one else. There is nothing in the code of conduct saying HC officers must name themselves.

10) You could have reinfrocements never reach you because your division didn't have anyone in charge of actually allocating units

This is a automatic function of the game when we get Brigade Spawning. It is not covered in the code of conduct.

10.5) Or your CO could go on vacation for a month with no replacement...have fun succeeding at missions that are never posted

This IS covered, but the game with automaticly give someone else the job.

11) You could have a Brigade CO who gives all the good missions to the squad he leads and not your's

Brigade leaders are allowed to be squad commanders.

12) And you could have a Division Commander who uses your entire brigade as a meat puppet to soften up the enemy so that his 'favorite' brigade (with his squad buddies in it) gets the mission points after you're all dead

Yes, he could. There is nothing in the code of conduct saying he can't do that. I *think* you're talking about a divsion commander and his favorite *squad*, but divsion commanders don't ACT with squads, only brigades, which are made up multiple squads and lonewolves.

Furhtermore, players can transfure between brigades.

13) Hey...you get jumped over for promotion cause the CiC's little brother started playing last monday!

There is nothing in the code of conduct preventing this. The CinC can promote someone 2 levels at once if needed.

14) Or your Division HC commander owns the entire command chain, air land and sea in your sector...all requests go through and are executed by him...and he hates you...best of luck

I belive you have confused the divison commander with the CinC.

15) Jimmy just became CO...and he has no idea how to post missions...sit around for 3 hours while he learns how to do that in real time...exciting!

Brigade deployment means that if no officers are online, or willing to take the duty, anyone can be offered the role of brigade commander, weather they have HC access or not.

17) And when you check out your Brigade web site there's a picture of you drunk from the minicon with your home phone number and a gay joke...all fun and games in the HC!

There is nothing in the code of conduct preventing this. Furthermore, if action IS taken. there is no resposibility for the results of that action to be published.


Hey...that would suck! That's not fair!

Yes, yes it would. But it seems you don't *want* the code of conduct re-written to prevent these things from happening.

Hope that answers your question.
- posted by Comstar @ Thursday, August 12, 2004 0 comments

 
Unoffical High Command PLAYER BILL OF RIGHTS - Sims a blatent tool
WWII Online :: View topic - Unoffical High Command PLAYER BILL OF RIGHTS

sim wrote:
Remember every HC 'rule' exists to GUARANTEE YOUR RIGHTS.


The HC officers, do not HAVE any rights. They have no right to appeal, no right to complain and no right to political comment.

Quote:
Moreover, HC members will have to earn it


Where does it say that? It dosn't. It does say they need qualfications, but it dosn't say they need to earn anything.

Quote:
Those leaders who violate your trust will be summarily removed.


Huh? It says verbal warnings, demotion and dismissil. Now you're directly contradicting Shilling who said he would "be expected to get a dressing down" (for what he had said).

Quote:
You decide the game you play on your own terms, free from discrimination, and will never have to enter HC in order to have fun


Note that HC players ARE discriminated aginast, they are not allowed to post any polticial view ANYWHERE, in game or out. HC players who wish to have fun playing a game AS a HC member will be forced to do so with thier political views shut down.


Quote:
2: You will never be forced to follow an order issued by a member of HC


Unless of course, that HC member fallsbacks you're brigade.

Quote:
HC staff will not engage in rudeness or other insulting exchanges on forums or in game.


As Shilling stated, this rule applies OUT of game, on NON-CRS messafe boards. Furthermore it's againast the TOS for ANYONE to do this in game.

Quote:
HC staff shall be positive in public, and not post in a way that would lower your morale or that of your community.


Shilling would have been dismissed immidatly. He attepted to lower the morale of the allies for months with inflamatory and misleading posts on this very message board.

Also as CinC, Shilling would be juding himself for his actions.

Quote:
Remember, as a player you can complain and post your views freely in public, but your coaches have no right to take away your ball, poison your teammates with defeatism and negativity, and refuse to let you play.


This is a total misrepesnation. The "coaches" are not allowed to argue with the umpire, have a deciasn reversed or appealed, or be able to say in public ANYWHERE ON THE INTERNET a problem that have with the game.

Furthermore, no where does it state a brigade commander can't post orders that players don't find fun. If a HC player posts orders that are boring, dull, wrong or actiavly helping the enemy, he may do so under this code. The players have no say in this matter.


Quote:
HC Staff will not fraternize with enemy HQ staff or officers while holding office in this HC. There will be no collusion, no espionage, no unfair exploitation of the additional powers HC members are entrusted with.


There will also be no talking, no jokes, no posting in each others threads and no out of game commincation between HC members of opposing sides. That is all fraternizing.

Presuably NON-HC players CAN collude and conduct espionage.

Quote:
Senior commanders both Allied and Axis are expected to have open lines of communication with each other


If there's no messaging in GAME between opposing side players, how is that going to work? Furthermore, arn't HC players locked out from coming out to the opposing side for the same amout of period as any nother player, meaning maintaining open lines of commincation is impossible due to the CRS in game rules?

Or does that mean senior commanders both Allied and Axis will have access to the others TS server?

Quote:
You have the right to disagree and be heard, to advance and to prosper, free of political retribution and infighting from HC members


HC OFFICERS DO NOT HAVE THIS LUXERY.

Quote:
HC personality clashes that paralyze your side and detract from your gameplay and immersion will be dealt with in the harshest terms possible, namely summary dismissal of both offending HC parties.


Unless one of them is the CinC. The CinC has the ONLY say on this, and does anyone belive the CinC would dismiss himself because of a "persoannily clash" with a 10iC of the lowerst brigade?

Quote:
You have the right to a gameplay experience that is free from harassment, prejudice, or ridicule based on your real world beliefs


GAMEPLAY EXPERIENCE, YES. It's in the TOS for ALL players, not just HC.

Quote:
HC Staff will not make references to political organizations or opinions in their daily conversations and posts.


A HC's players political beliefs do not exist.

Quote:
but you have the right to leaders who will treat you fairly as a soldier, all differences checked at the door with sportsmanship and excellence the only values in play.


In Game, YES.

But you're saying someone ELSES political beliefs OUT of game count too. This is a disgrace

Quote:
HC Staff will be held accountable for their actions, in game and out.


Not if the HC staff breaks one of the HC rules he won't. Right NOW the HC rules are not and have not been enforced. Why will these new rules be enforced when the old ones have not?

As a HC officer I broke the current rules (as they say they were in force as soon™ as they were posted. 2 days after they came into force, I complained in public about the proposed rules for bridge destruction.

The rules were not enforced on me. Note I have resigned from the HC since that date.

Quote:
You have the right to totally transparent and ultimately accountable leadership that answers to the game designers.


There is nothing transparent about it. There is no public court of justice, right of appeal and NO accountabilty. If the CinC or his CoS decide on something there is NO obligation to inform the public of the results or status of complaints of actions.

If a HC officer does something aginast a normal player, and the player takes his complain to the CinC, there is no rule stating action MUST be taken, or even inform the player of the result of any actions.

Quote:
High commanders must deliver for their players. If they are unable to deliver and provide you with adequate leadership and or representation then they must step down making way for others behind them who can.


Note there is no defination of what that is. One persons lack of leadership is anothers minor tactical error.

Quote:
You and your squad will never be abandoned.


This will be enforced by the auto-matic Briagde Leadership tool. If no officers are ONLINE, or want the job, the next level of player is automaticly asked if they wish to be the brigade commander.

Note this also applies to DIVISON and CORPS commanders. A player who is a leader of thier squad may be asked to be a Divsion or Corps Commander if they are normally a Brigade commander but no Div or Corps commander is online at that time.

If they agree to this though, they face instant dismissil, as no squad command can be a divsion commander.

Quote:
Commanding Officers of brigade/KG level will not place their squad's interests before their HC duties. They must be able to manage both.


The 2nd sentance is redundent. It does not matter if a Brigade leader is a member or leader of a squad, he should not play favorites to anyone.

Quote:
12: Above the Brigade level, you have the right to absolute attention and impartiality from the HC, without actual or even perceived conflicts of interests. [/b] As such, HC Officers above Brigade/Kampfgruppe Commander will temporarily pass on squad responsibilities in order to be eligible for promotion.


See above. Being a leader or NOT a leader of squad is irrelevent. The divison commander should be impartial between ALL squads, units and players.

Quote:
13: You have the right to rise to HC membership and the right to a dynamic, fair, inclusive, and progressive leadership.


What this dosn't say is promotion is VERY slow. The only player in the HC with a term limit is the CinC. If people do not leave their postions over time, there is ZERO movement in the ranks, expcet when the CinC's term is over.

Furthermore,

Quote:
Promotions are approved at the senior command level (branch commanders and up). All promotions are done at the discretion of the Commander in Chief, and his appointed representatives.


Heaven help a HC officer if he has ever angered the CinC. The CinC can deny anyn promotion, and no reason or explantaion is required.

Quote:
No single person will ever monopolize an entire command chain or strata of command.


Except the CinC. Want to re-write that?

Quote:
In order to be eligible for membership in the HC, officers must demonstrate ability and commitment through a training program that will prepare them for Brigade/Kampfgruppe Command. This training program is mandatory...


Note it dosn't say what the training IS, but I supose that's fair enough.

Training in the AHC invloves at LEAST 8 hours of duty a week. You must sign in and sign out (and you can't sign out until givin permission to do so). You must write reports on your actions.

EA and AOL were sued over items like this.

Quote:
The pool of candidates will remain fresh, and you have a right to enter that pool and advance as far as you are willing to go.


As you long as you give up all
: Political Comment, anywhere
: Squad leadership postions
: Agree to the code of conduct, which will not be changed or even discussed.

I'm able to discuss it only because I am not IN the HC any longer. HC officers cannot complain about it to anyone but the CiNC, and are not allowed to disucss it in public with non HC members.

Quote:
You have the right to leadership that communicates with you, creates content for you, and uses all the tools at their command only to enhance your gameplay experience


This is directly contradicted below:

Quote:
...They are in charge and mandated to deliver fresh content and information as needed maximizing the effectiveness of the officers below them


Officers, NOT players.


These rules give the HC officers no rights, the playerbase no rights to get justice from HC players. They are badly written, contain uneforcable and unethiecal rules, apply CRS's rules to the entire internet and should be re-writtin (with some clauses deleted completly).
- posted by Comstar @ Thursday, August 12, 2004 0 comments

 
My entire nights work
WWII Online :: View topic - Offical High Command Code of Conduct

SHILLING,

As my email to you and Badger stated, I attempted to make my concerns known. Your mod deleted my post, and locked the thread.

Seeing as you're now saying not many people seem to care, I am reposting why some of the clauses have got to go. You're rules explicty state that there CAN be no discussion of these rules, as you must go through the Chain of Command. I did. It didn';t work, so I resigned. I am no longer a HC officer, so I should be able to talk about them without getting deleted...right?

The argument that these rules are ok simply because the OLD rules were worse, does not make these rules any better. When you said "Apparantly you guys never read the previous versions or operated under them", I take it to mean these rules WILL be enforced? If the political clause has always been there, why was it never enforced? If it was never enforced, why must we agree to it?

6 people agreeing for the rest of us is not a valid argument either. Not everybody is going to like it, but most understand it and why it is needed. . Who is this "most"? Presuably of the 6 people who DID agree to it, some of them didn't like it either?

Going through the Chain of Command lead nowhere. Therfore I have left the Chain of Command. Further more, the Chain of Command has already started to take steps to broaden the rules, stating that it covers comments about "Politics, religion and current events".

Clause 3 explicty denies me the oppotuinity to make this post as a member of a HC. Note I am no longer a member of the HC, unless this gets changed.

Anyone who wishes to be a 2nd Lt or higher when Brigade Deployment comes in, will need to accept these terms, or not be allowed to be part of the High Commands. Further more, all current High Command players, have 4 days to accept the terms or be removed from the High Command (this may not be for the GHC, I only know the AHC policy).


Clause 3 means if you are in the HC, you may not complain about the game. This includes complaining about these very rules. It also includes my own thoughts on Spitfire Pilot Armour, the armour on the front mantlent of the PZIIIH, bridges and blowing them. It also means no reviewer or someone who wishes to review the game, can do so from a HC perspetive.

Clause 5 means HC officers cannot talk to enemy Officers, it does not say where or how. As there is no way to commincate in game, it must be refering to out of game. As there is no limitation, it must include message boards, fourms and anythign else, including at cons. Furthermore, no where is there a defination of "Offical Duties". You're reply implies this only occurs in game, where players cannot talk to opposing players anyway.

Clause 5 also states that HC officers will not play the opposing side for more than 2 days. Is that 2 days in a row? Can they log off for 2 hours and come back on their own side for 10 minutes and then play on the other again? Is it 2 days as in 48 hours of total play time? In which case, a HC player may be only playing one side for a very long time indeed (3-4 years to reach CinC and not play the other side).

Clause 7 means you may not conduct political type talk (this has been broanded by a senior member of the AHC as "politics, relagion or current events") such as occurs in the Off-Topic Fourm. It also does NOT state that this clause only applies to the WW2OL fournms and the HC fourms. It is banning my ability talk in public anywhere about politics. Leadership is possible to have, even with political views. It has never been enforced under the old rules as far as I know, but if you want it, start enforcing it. CRS employees have ignored this rule in the past, why are they not bound by it?

Clause 8 states explicty that the code covers all things, in game and out. It does NOT limit this to CRS controlled message boards or TS servers.. Sue me if you want, deleted my posts on your boards, but why shiould I be constrained from talking outside your area? It also means no Politica, Union Offical or other types or workers can be a member of the HC. Futhermore, other boards have thier own mods, rules and regulations. You are attemtping to moniter and control those places. If someone is behaiving badly on another board, I would expect that boards owners to deal with it. Mabye they LIKE people mouthing off, but it's their board, not yours. To enforce this, you require people to turn others in and act as informers. This is not a great morale builder technique.

Clause 12 means you can not lead a squad, or have anything to do with the running of a squad, if you wish to be a divionial officer or higher. This makes no sense as often the Briagde level officers ACT as the Divisonal officer becuase there is not enough Divisional officers online. BDE OiC's must act as Div Officers (or even Corps Oifficers) if none of the Div or Corps officers are online. Being a Div Officer is no temporary assignment either, as a player cn start as a Div Officer and go onto CinC over a 2-4 years time span. This is no short term appoirntment.

This article does not allow for favor of one squad over another to enter into the equation. . It does not. It just means the Div commander cannot run his squad. That has nothing to do with if he's going to be favorable to one squad or another. If the Div commander wishes to "favor" (ANd how does one do that anyway?) one squad over another, he can do so weather he's the squad commander or not.

The rules are badly writtin and must be changed to reflect realtity and not some imaginary real world job. If they are to be used as is, they must be enforced. If they are enforced, few people will remain HC players, or want to be one. If they are not enforced, they are meaningless, meaning they can be removed with no problem.

These are rules for YOU Shilling, not the rest of us.
-----------------
calistor wrote:

If you don't want to sign off on this then you're obviously not HC officer material and should not bother to go through all the hazzel of becoming one.


Qualifications are maturity, experience with the game, the ability to
organize and lead others, and the ability to put aside your personal time for the enjoyment of your fellow player.

NEXT!

Quote:
Keep in mind, this is for the HC officers to sign off on.
You as regular players only have to follow the ToS and rules you agree with as soon™™ as you log in to the game.


Arcording to the mod who deleted my origianl post on this topic.

That includes complaining about the rules, whether or not they now apply to you. As a former HC officer, you are still expected to uphold some semblance of law in your conduct, and I feel that this should not be open discussion on the forums. Therefore, I refer you to the community managers, as mentioned above.-Mod

So arcording to the offical CRS board Mods, even AFTER you are abn offical HC officer you are still bound by the code of conduct. Note he is NOT refering to the message board rules.

------------
SHILLING wrote:

How should the HC handle an accusation from within your command that you show favor to the 101st over other squad in that command?

Take their word on it and just fire you?

Take your word your not doing it and ignore or not satisfy their complaint?

Should the HC Spend hours researching to see if its valid or not?


At the very least there should be an invistagation to see if it's true or not. You are saying that's too much trouble!?!? What happens if there is an accusation from within your command that a HC officer posted a politcal comment? I presume they should just take thier word and fire them?

If someone IS favoering one squad over another, and they are NOT one of those squads...leaders (Follow up question- what's a postion of leadership in a squad actually MEAN?), and they are breaking the code of conduct because of that, what happens then?

You're saying both that they won't be fired, won't satisfy the complaint AND won't conduct an invistagtion to prove it either.

How is that a good thing again?
----------------------
SHILLING wrote:
If a couple of those 6 squads needed you to make a decision for them that would help them become stronger but might adversaly affect the 101st and make your squad change something they do not want to change in thier protocal or the way they operate. Could you make that decision for those others and would you?


And here we have some REAL Political dynamite.

What is CRS proposing to do to ALLOW one squad to be advantaged over another?!!?


You're forcing ME to change my protocals and the way I operate already and you don't seem to be bothered by it, does that answer you're question?
---------------------
SHILLING wrote:
....but I wanted more responsibility and new I could not fairly represent both TOT GD KGM and1stFJ too. So I gave TOT to my XO at the time Oboelcke and tried my best to represent all of them at the table.


You're inability to handle to these 2 jobs at once dosn't make it impossible for everyone else. You're saying this rule exists because you couldn't handle the responsibility yourself, and no one else can either.

For that matter, way back when, the original HC's were made up mostly of SQUAD commanders, and the 2 CinC's were CRS/SF employees. Are you saying none of them were able to do thier jobs THEN?
--------------------
decqeard wrote:
Is it even legal to prohibit one from expressing one's opinion in public?


In American law, yes it is. PRIVATE fourms, such as the CRS message board and the HC message board CAN.

These rules however apply to public area's, but CRS is banning you from a private area if you do so, so I presume techincally it's not illegel.

Dosn't make it a GOOD idea.
-------------------------------
As usual Bilton cuts to the heart of the matter.

IAmBilton wrote:

One thing you cannot codify on the internet is a Code of Conduct amongst volunteers.


That bears repeating. The experience of the UO/EQ/AOL "volunteers" shows what the end result is.

However, I do think there needs to be rules, guidelines and restructions on HC personnal. But these current rules are not the way to do it.
-------------------
Not if I want to play a section of the game you would tell me I can't because of my political comments.

I *want* to be able to do things in game Briagde Deployment will allow a chosen few to do. If I do not agree to these terms, I cannot be part of that section of the game.

It's excatly like saying I can't drive a tank or pilot a plane unless I agree to those terms.

I *am* agreeing to terms. The EULA.'s terms.


Last I checked (and granted, it was a LONG time ago I read the EULA we all agree to when we play the game), this code of conduct is NOT in the EULA!
-----------------
trout wrote:
ANY kind of political organization needs these kinds of safguards - this stuff was not just pulled out of somone's arse. If you don't get it by now then I certainly don't want to have you as MY division or corps leader.


Clause 7 prevents any HC member from talking or disccusing "political organizations". If you're claiming the HC is such a thing, they arn't allowed to talk about themslves.
----------------------
schulz wrote:
Then again, by volunteering to be in a HC, you are in fact volunteering to be a member of the Rats (unpaid of course) as a community leader. If you have such strong negative feelings about the game that you cannot contain them or express them privately, you shouldn't be a community leader.


I strongly recommend you do not make that argument. AOL and EA were sued, succsuffelly, for excatly those reasons.

---------------------
trout wrote:

Conflict of interest? What? How dare you! If you make me sign a code of conduct agreement like Schilling wants I am OUTTA HERE!


Either you have a conflict of interest and take advantage of it, or you do not.

The code SHOULD say that no one will take advantage of thier postion to help others for personl reasons. It DOSN'T say that, it just says you can't be a squad commander and a Div officer or higher.

As a Div Officer, I could give some advanatage to my squad, so long as I'm not a commander of that squad!

Which makes even less sense when you relalise BRIGADE commanders ARE the ones who give the squads missons, not divisonal or corps. Divsion and Corps have no contact with the squads themsleves. The Squad is part of a brigade, and can move from brigades if it chooses to. No Divison is made up of ONE squad that a divsion officer could give sole advantage to over others in that division.
-----------------
schulz wrote:
AOL and EA were sued because volunteer players were required not to badmouth their products on privately hosted boards? I don't see how CRS requiring players (who will be given special powers ingame) to be supportive of said game, is illegal or anything..


Clause 8, 1st sentance: HC Staff will be held accountable for their actions, in game and out. Shilling stated that posting something on a private squad fourm, would apply.

If I'm a memeber of the HC, I cannot possible review the game (clause 3, "public complaints about the game or CRS is incompatible
with membership". That's like saying a car reviewer can't drive a car and then review any bad points in it.
-------------------------------
pruitt wrote:
Unfortunately, many existing leaders don't believe in doing this and that's why there is so much distrust of the HC's. Dropping those command responsibilities within your squad is absolutely necessary for CRS to be able to show all players that there is no favoritism within the HC's.....There are certain existing HC members who constantly use degrading terms for their adversaries here.


WHAT?!!??!

Can you repeat that please? I mean, that's breaking the CURRENT Code of Conduct. If this is true, you should inform you Chain of Command and/or CinC with these facts, and have the current Code of Conduct enforced.

Quote:
It's really very simple, these are the rules. Every organization in existance has some form of rules.


I agree with you. But if the current laws arn't being enforced, why will the new ones be? There should be laws. They should be used fairly, on everyone, at all times. The new code of conduct won't allow that to happen.

Quote:
It's a voluntary organization afterall


Good, lets have a voluntary code of conduct then.


Being part of the HC is part of the game. Some people never get tired of shooting thier gun at another player. Some people prefer to orgainze the attack or defence so other people can have fun. This code will prevent me from doing that.
---------------------------------------------
pruitt wrote:
If I had to guess, I'd say "yes", Duty Officers are a representative of the game and need to follow these rules (or a slightly revised version that has no mention of the Command aspects). But a Rat would have to answer this to find out for certain. :-/


I'd say yes, as being a DO is the start of being a HC member. Like so many other things, it's not clear from the Code of Conduct.

'Corse DO's have thier OWN rules which is ever worse in same ways, buts another thead.


Mlucas- I had to resign from the AHC before I could talk about this in public. AFIAK there was ZERO consolation with anyone, though Shilling says there were 6 other people invloved, but declines to name them. I was repeatly told it would NOT be changed under any circumstances and tom put up with it or resign.
- posted by Comstar @ Thursday, August 12, 2004 0 comments

 
WWII Online :: View topic - Offical High Command Code of Conduct
WWII Online :: View topic - Offical High Command Code of Conduct: "SHILLING wrote:
If a couple of those 6 squads needed you to make a decision for them that would help them become stronger but might adversaly affect the 101st and make your squad change something they do not want to change in thier protocal or the way they operate. Could you make that decision for those others and would you?


And here we have some REAL Political dynamite.

What is CRS proposing to do to ALLOW one squad to be advantaged over another?!!?


You're forcing ME to change my protocals and the way I operate already and you don't seem to be bothered by it, does that answer you're question?"
- posted by Comstar @ Wednesday, August 11, 2004 0 comments

 
WWII Online :: View topic - Offical High Command Code of Conduct
WWII Online :: View topic - Offical High Command Code of Conduct

SHILLING wrote:
How should the HC handle an accusation from within your command that you show favor to the 101st over other squad in that command?

Take their word on it and just fire you?

Take your word your not doing it and ignore or not satisfy their complaint?

Should the HC Spend hours researching to see if its valid or not?



At the very least there should be an invistagation to see if it's true or not. You are saying that's too much trouble!?!? What happens if there is an accusation from within your command that a HC officer posted a politcal comment? I presume they should just take thier word and fire them?

If someone IS favoering one squad over another, and they are NOT one of those squads...leaders (Follow up question- what's a postion of leadership in a squad actually MEAN?), and they are breaking the code of conduct because of that, what happens then?

You're saying both that they won't be fired, won't satisfy the complaint AND won't conduct an invistagtion to prove it either.

How is that a good thing again?
- posted by Comstar @ Wednesday, August 11, 2004 0 comments

 
Our Rules are VERY strict.
ANZAC Corps - Weird, weird times.:

"The rules are very strict. You have no way or right to appeal them.

I was still a HC officer, you could take this very discussion to the AHC, and I would be found of breaking clause 3 (for making a complaint). The charge would be upheld because squad boards/blogs count (as Shilling said in the barracks thread). I would be punished. That's what the rules say will happen. Thats what SHILLING said will happen.

Aismov if an Allied officer was on the 31st wrecking crews forums talking all kinds of negative and defaming/abusive type material would you not in turn ask CRS or the Allied HC to act against such a player?
- Shilling

Do you think I'm being negative? If I was a HC officer, you could turn me in. I don't think anyone in this squad is that stupid. But there's nothing stopping me doing it to you, and you'd never know I'd done it, and you have no right of appeal or even an investigation to find out if you ever did it or not.

Shilling again:
Should the HC Speed hours researching to see if its valid or not?

His answer was no.
- posted by Comstar @ Wednesday, August 11, 2004 0 comments

 
WWII Online :: View topic - Offical High Command Code of Conduct
WWII Online :: View topic - Offical High Command Code of Conduct

SHILLING,

As my email to you and Badger stated, I attempted to make my concerns known. Your mod deleted my post, and locked the thread.

Seeing as you're now saying not many people seem to care, I am reposting why some of the clauses have got to go. You're rules explicty state that there CAN be no discussion of these rules, as you must go through the Chain of Command. I did. It didn';t work, so I resigned. I am no longer a HC officer, so I should be able to talk about them without getting deleted...right?

The argument that these rules are ok simply because the OLD rules were worse, does not make these rules any better. When you said "Apparantly you guys never read the previous versions or operated under them", I take it to mean these rules WILL be enforced? If the political clause has always been there, why was it never enforced? If it was never enforced, why must we agree to it?

6 people agreeing for the rest of us is not a valid argument either. Not everybody is going to like it, but most understand it and why it is needed. . Who is this "most"? Presuably of the 6 people who DID agree to it, some of them didn't like it either?

Going through the Chain of Command lead nowhere. Therfore I have left the Chain of Command. Further more, the Chain of Command has already started to take steps to broaden the rules, stating that it covers comments on non WW2OL/CRS fourms, including squad fourms, and anywhere else in "public" view.

Clause 3 explicty denies me the oppotuinity to make this post as a member of a HC. Note I am no longer a member of the HC, unless this gets changed.

Anyone who wishes to be a 2nd Lt or higher when Brigade Deployment comes in, will need to accept these terms, or not be allowed to be part of the High Commands. Further more, all current High Command players, have 4 days to accept the terms or be removed from the High Command (this may not be for the GHC, I only know the AHC policy).


Clause 3 means if you are in the HC, you may not complain about the game. This includes complaining about these very rules. It also includes my own thoughts on Spitfire Pilot Armour, the armour on the front mantlent of the PZIIIH, bridges and blowing them. It also means no reviewer or someone who wishes to review the game, can do so from a HC perspetive.

Clause 5 means HC officers cannot talk to enemy Officers, it does not say where or how. As there is no way to commincate in game, it must be refering to out of game. As there is no limitation, it must include message boards, fourms and anythign else, including at cons. Furthermore, no where is there a defination of "Offical Duties". You're reply implies this only occurs in game, where players cannot talk to opposing players anyway.

Clause 7 means you may not conduct political type talk (this has been broanded by a senior member of the AHC as "politics, relagion or current events") such as occurs in the Off-Topic Fourm. It also does NOT state that this clause only applies to the WW2OL fournms and the HC fourms. It is banning my ability talk in public anywhere about politics. Leadership is possible to have, even with political views. It has never been enforced under the old rules as far as I know, but if you want it, start enforcing it. CRS employees have ignored this rule in the past, why are they not bound by it?

Clause 8 states explicty that the code covers all things, in game and out. It does NOT limit this to CRS controlled message boards or TS servers.. Sue me if you want, deleted my posts on your boards, but why shiould I be constrained from talking outside your area? It also means no Politica, Union Offical or other types or workers can be a member of the HC. Futhermore, other boards have thier own mods, rules and regulations. You are attemtping to moniter and control those places. If someone is behaiving badly on another board, I would expect that boards owners to deal with it. Mabye they LIKE people mouthing off, but it's their board, not yours. To enforce this, you require people to turn others in and act as informers. This is not a great morale builder technique.

Clause 12 means you can not lead a squad, or have anything to do with the running of a squad, if you wish to be a divionial officer or higher. This makes no sense as often the Briagde level officers ACT as the Divisonal officer becuase there is not enough Divisional officers online. BDE OiC's must act as Div Officers (or even Corps Oifficers) if none of the Div or Corps officers are online. Being a Div Officer is no temporary assignment either, as a player cn start as a Div Officer and go onto CinC over a 2-4 years time span. This is no short term appoirntment.

This article does not allow for favor of one squad over another to enter into the equation. . It does not. It just means the Div commander cannot run his squad. That has nothing to do with if he's going to be favorable to one squad or another. If the Div commander wishes to "favor" (ANd how does one do that anyway?) one squad over another, he can do so weather he's the squad commander or not.



The rules are badly writtin and must be changed to reflect realtity and not some imaginary real world job. If they are to be used as is, they must be enforced. If they are enforced, few people will remain HC players, or want to be one. If they are not enforced, they are meaningless, meaning they can be removed with no problem.



These are rules for YOU Shilling, not the rest of us.
- posted by Comstar @ Wednesday, August 11, 2004 0 comments

 
I agree with Azimov. Will wounders never cease
Barracks posting of new code of conduct

And Azimov's reply

aismov
Joined: 07 Jun 2001
Posts: 10244
Location: 31st HQ, Berlin
Posted: 11 Aug 2004 17:04
Post subject: Thank god I quit GHC years ago

After reading what comstar posted, seem like that joint is becoming a second job. What made the HCs so great when I was there (2001-2002, 1st Panzer Army CO) that it was a jovial group of people that joked around and had a good time, and worked as a team.

I think CRS is taking the wrong step with all these rules and mandates. I mean - you can't "fraternize with the enemy?" WTF is that? This is a game - and these are forums for crying out loud. I don't know what CRS is thinking trying to somehow disrupt friendly communication between players. Its not like this is a real war, or that someone is somehow going to get "fooled" into thinking this is a big dake because somebody is "fraternizing."

And no espousing political beliefs? What? How many times have I seen mods speak their mind - or even CRS. As long as someone is being respectful and honest, I don't see a reason why he CANT espress himself. Hell this is OT for crying out loud.

Sheesh, the HCs are really going down the pooper.
--------------------------------
- posted by Comstar @ Wednesday, August 11, 2004 0 comments

 
What I've asked of Shilling and Badger
http://discussions.playnet.com/viewtopic.php?p=1421206#1421206

[Ah, but you are bound by the TOS, and that states you cannot do things of this nature. If you want to complain: badger@playnet.com or shilling@playnet.com]-Mod

3. We discourage discussions of the board itself or of moderator decisions. If you have feedback on either of these two topics, please direct your questions to badger@playnet.com or shilling@playnet.com.

Forum Rules and Conduct

[That includes complaining about the rules, whether or not they now apply to you. As a former HC officer, you are still expected to uphold some semblance of law in your conduct, and I feel that this should not be open discussion on the forums. Therefore, I refer you to the community managers, as mentioned above.]-Mod
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Woah. Deleted and locked within 5 minutes of posting.

I'm not allowed to DISCUSS this with other players?

"As a former HC officer, you are still expected to uphold some semblance of law in your conduct, and I feel that this should not be open discussion on the forums'.

My being a FORMER member in no way changes anything. As of a few hours ago I am a FORMER member for that reason, I was not allowed to post this AS a member. I RESIGNED BECAUSE I DID NOT AGREE WITH THE NEW CODE. I NEVER AGREED TO IT.

What fourm IS the right one? Not the allied staff fourn, I resigned from that. Not Off-topic it seams is not the right one either? Ok, lets try the Barracks?

Badger and SHilling: Please take action on the Mod resposible. It should not matter if I was a member of a HC 2 hours ago or 2 weeks ago.

I attempted to use the Chain of Command in the Allied fourms. I was told:

" Where can you "mouth off" if you disagree with something AHC is doing? You can take your OFFICIAL concerns up the chain of command, or deal with them tactfully in the proper forums (Secured staff forums, Generals forums, etc). You are free to utilize non AHC mediums to "mouth off" however if you are still acting as an official representative of AHC your conduct might be called into question. (just because I'm in my squad forums or on another site does not give an AHC officer the right to violate the OD or Code of Conduct)"

As you can see, I'm appenrtly not allowed to post this anywhere AS a member of a HC.

I was also told:

"With respects to your concerns: The HC officers while acting in official capacity has NOTHING to say about politics, religion, or current events, as the HC officer is not a function of any of these facets. An HC officer will NOT make comments to religion or politics in the AHC forums unless they are off-topic, as they are NOT a function of his duties. "

That was an offical reply from the Chain of Command. As it came from the Chain of Command, I must (as listed in the rules) obay it. That was another reason I resigned, as not being a HC members means I'm not bound by it anymore, A point the MOD above has failed to take note of.

Please note I am not the only one who disagrees with these rules. In the 2nd Div Fourm at the AHC some other memebrs have voiced thier unhappiness, including Sporin who POSTED the origical document. However, the AHC Chain of Command refused my requests to change it, or even talk to you about changing it.

If you do not change these rules, I will be quite happy to go through the fourms (and any and all other public places) for officers who break them, and send the information to you, so you may remove them from thier commands.If these rules are to be left "as is",, it should mean a large propotion of the HC's should be removed within a short while (particlay clauses, 3, 7 and 12). I will also add the CRS employees have broken these rules in the past (particlay the political clause), so I will be interested to hear if clause 7 applies to CRS employees in the future (I don't expect it will).

I ask that you re-write the code so it it ONLY applues to offical WW2OL fourms (the HQ fourms, and the HC fourms)and in game chat text. I ask that clause 3 by re-writtin so it still allows critasim of parts of the game. I ask that clause 12 be changed to be the same as clause 11 (as it makes no sense having different rules because the Briagde commander can, and often does BECOME the divisonal commander in game!). I demand that clause 7 be removed compeltly.

I await you're reply.

Comstar, EX-4iC 2nd Division, I Corps, BEF..
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

- posted by Comstar @ Wednesday, August 11, 2004 0 comments

 
OFFICAL new High Command Code of Conduct. Agree or else
Woah. Deleted and locked within 5 minutes of posting.

WWII Online :: View topic - OFFICAL new High Command Code of Conduct. Agree or else

I submitted by resignation as 4iC 2nd Divsion, BEF. Therefore, I'm not bound by this "code of conduct", so I can now complain freely.

[b]The following is an offical annoucnment from the Rats, to all members of the High Commands, from the lowest Briagde OiC up. [/b]

I have bolded the 3 clauses that I cannot agree with. I was informed there is no possiblty of discussion. Going through the Chain of Command lead nowhere. Therfore I have left the Chain of Command. Further more, the Chain of Command started to take steps to [b]broaden[/b] the rules, stating that it covers comments on non WW2OL/CRS fourms, [b]including squad fourms[/b], and anywhere else in "public" view.

Clause 3 explicty denies me the oppotuinity to make this post as a member of a HC. Note I am no longer a member of the HC, unless this gets changed.

Anyone who wishes to be a 2nd Lt or higher when Brigade Deployment comes in, will need to accept these terms, or not be allowed to be part of the High Commands. Further more, all [b]current[/b] High Command players, have 4 days to accept the terms or be removed from the High Command (this may not be for the GHC, I only know the AHC policy).

[b]I wish to bring to you're attention, clauses 3, 7 and 12. Clause 3 means if you are in the HC, you may not complain about the game. Clause 7 means you may not conduct political type talk (this has been broanded by a senior member of the AHC as "politics, relagion or current events") such as occurs on this fourm. Clause 12 means you can not lead a squad, or have anything to do with the running of a squad, if you wish to be a divionial officer or higher. [/b]


Please discuss. I wasn't allowed to discuss it as a high command officer, so it wouldn't surprise me if most of you havn't heard of this.. I have been told repeatly that [b]there will be no discussion of changing the rules, they stand as is and will not be changed[/b]. So be aware, you may be wasting you're time.



I hope not, I want them changed.
--------------------------------------

The following is the new Officer Code of Conduct that will take affect this day of posting.

All Officers are to review it and post a reply of understanding, all newly recommended officers will also be required to check off on this as well from this day forward before any recomendation for acceptance in the AHC officer ranks is approved.

All Division Commanders are to post this mandate within your forums as a sticky for brigade Ics to check off on, if after 1 weeks time a officer does not sign off then they will be considered as non-compliant and be removed from thier role within the AHC. (special circumstances on officers on LOA will be understood and are to be checked off when they return)

MISSION: The WWIIOL HC is a player run organization that serves the larger
WWIIOL community through its volunteer staff's dedication and commitment to
the organization's ultimate purpose noted below. While a fully
volunteer-based society, the HC is a CRS mandated structure designed to
enhance gameplay quality for the entire WWIIOL community.

WWIIOL is designed, and supported as a game that allows it's players to
define the course and flow of the "war." In that light, specific game
systems and functionality are delivered from CRS to the HC in ongoing
support of a fully player-run command layer. The HC structure represents the
marriage of game technologies and services with community dynamics to
deliver a system that is unprecedented in the online gaming world. Indeed
the WWIIOL HC is a fully functioning High Command Structure without equal.

The ultimate purpose of HC is to conduct military-style combat operations in
the WWIIOL game theater, and all administrative functions that these
operations engender. HC is not only responsible for the planning and conduct
of strategic and tactical combat operations in game, but it also is
responsible for policing its members, managing its member lists, conducting
Research and Development choices and deployment of combat forces and assets
in game. The ultimate outcome of all this activity is a more enjoyable and
intense gaming experience for all subscribers.

The CinCs, Chiefs of Staff, and Deputy Chiefs of Staff manage the WWIIOL HC.
Those highest command positions are guided by the CRS community management
staff, which are CRS employees.


1: Membership in the HC is voluntary and is open to players who are willing
to follow its rules, obey its senior members, and apply its policies in
game. Qualifications are maturity, experience with the game, the ability to
organize and lead others, and the ability to put aside your personal time
for the enjoyment of your fellow player. Membership in HC does not come
automatically with a subscription; participation in the High Commands is
granted or revoked at the discretion of the senior HC staff.

2: HC staff will not attempt to force other players to follow their orders.
They have authority only over players who are members of the HC, and players
who have acknowledged their willingness to participate in its plans.

[b]3: HC staff will not engage in rudeness or other insulting exchanges on
forums or in game. Rants, flames or whines are not allowed while you
represent HC, and public complaints about the game or CRS is incompatible
with membership. HC Staff shall utilize the Chain of Command in reporting
complaints on the game or CRS. HC Staff shall be positive in public, and not
post in a way that would lower the morale of their community.[/b]

4: HC staffs are ambassadors of CRS, The rest of the gaming public will be
looking for your example and assistance. You will provide it, treating all
members of the community with the utmost respect and cordiality.

5: HC Staff will not fraternize with enemy HQ staff or officers while
holding office in this HC. Personal relationships with enemy officers are to
be pursued in private, and not during the conduct of official duties.
Officers on leave of absence may play the other side with the approval of
the Commander in Chief. The time away shall not exceed two days due to the
fact that officers are community members who have stepped up to lead the
community. When playing the other side they are unable to fulfill the
obligations that they volunteered to do.

5.5: Working with enemy officers to assist in the capture of griefers and
prohibited game play is authorized on a case per case basis. Senior
commanders both Allied and Axis are expected to have open lines of
communication with each other to enhance the game play for all players under
the leadership of the High commands.

6: HC Staff will treat each other professionally, as fellow officers, with
all the respect that this implies. Remember that your subordinate could end
up being your superior. Infighting and disagreements are to be expected, but
are never to be conducted in public. Personality clashes that become
disruptive will be dealt with in the harshest terms possible, namely summary
dismissal of both parties. Disagreements with official HC policy is to be
done in private, in the restricted forums reserved for such discussion.

[b]7: HC Staff will not make references to political organizations or opinions
in their daily conversations and posts. The HC officer is unaffiliated,
loyal, and impartial. Represent us well, and we will earn the respect of our
fellow players and the gaming community at large.[/b]

8: HC Staff will be held accountable for their actions, in game and out.
Misconduct could result in summary dismissal at the discretion of the
Commander in Chief, or his appointed disciplinary officer (by default the
Chief of Staff). Disciplinary action can range from recorded verbal warning,
disciplinary transfer, demotion or full dismissal from the HC.

9: The Commander in Chief is responsible for the effective conduct of HC
business, both in game and out. The Commander in Chief answers to the CRS
Community Manager. All HC staff is to channel their communications to the
Community Manager through the Commander in Chief.

10: HC Officers must follow the official chain of command, and carry out the
instructions of senior officers, to the best of their ability. If unable to
carry out orders or duties the officer will delegate the task to subordinate
officers in the chain of command. High commanders must deliver for their
players. If you are unable to deliver and provide your players adequate
leadership and or representation then you must step down making way for
others behind you who can.

10.5 Leave of absence. It is understood that real life must come first. In
the event an officer must be away tending to real life issues. Then it is
the officer's responsibility, as soonT as reasonably possible to inform your
CinC and the commander directly up the chain of command. Leave of absence
lasting more than two weeks the CinC should consider a replacement unless
special circumstances warrant an extension given only by the CinC.

11. Brigade COs and XOs may belong to a squad, and keep their squad duties
as long as they can carry out their HC duties as well. Commanding Officers
of brigade/KG level will not place their squad's interests before their HC
duties. They must be able to manage both. Some Brigades/Kampfgruppes have
multiple squads, and players who are not in squads attached to them. They
all must be equally taken care of.

[b]12: As such, HC Officers above Brigade/Kampfgruppe Commander must
temporarily drop squad responsibilities in order to be eligible for
promotion, and for the duration of service in HC. Senior officers cannot
represent both the interests of HC and a squad at the same time. Squad
structures and command lines do not supercede HC organization and protocol.[/b]

13: Promotion is based on merit and time spent in the HC. An officer can be
promoted a maximum of 2 ranks in a single promotional event, but this is
rare and only done when exceptional need or ability is demonstrated.
Promotions are approved at the senior command level (branch commanders and
up). All promotions are done at the discretion of the Commander in Chief,
and his appointed representatives. An Officer can transfer to another branch
of the armed forces, at the discretion of the senior staff and at the
officer's request. Rank and position in the new branch will be specified by
need, ability, and the command staff (namely the CinC, Cos and Dcos. All
officers start at the bottom and work their way up. No placement of people
is allowed within the organization.

14: An officer cannot hold more than one position in the HC at any time.

16. In order to be eligible for membership in the HC, officers must
demonstrate ability and commitment through a training program that will
prepare them for Brigade/Kampfgruppe Command. This training program is
mandatory and is a pre-requisite for entry into the bottom rung of the HC,
as a Lt Colonel, and deputy to a Brigade/Squadron/Flot Commander. Training
is conducted by the training staff of the HC.

17. Term limits will be imposed in two categories. CinC and those refusing
promotion.
CinC's going forward will be limited to a four-month term. This promotes
healthy forward movement of all officers below that position. Those refusing
promotion may only refuse twice. A third rejection of promotion will result
in immediate retirement of that officer.

In the event that no officer is available to promote into the position
opened by the termination of the third term officer, the Senior Command can
approve him to stay for another, or subsequent term(s).

18. All High command communication vehicles will be managed by the Senior
Staff of the High commands. This is the CinC, Cos and Dcos. This includes
websites, forums and in game editable content. They are in charge and
mandated to deliver fresh content and information as needed maximizing the
effectiveness of the officers below them.
- posted by Comstar @ Wednesday, August 11, 2004 0 comments

 
You can wish for more bridges all you want.
WWII Online :: View topic - Destroyable bridges!!:

"montieth wrote:
A. Bridges will never come back up.
1. There are lots of bridges. When I was looking for cross bridge supply links to FBs I found quite a few rail road bridges and road bridges. There are lots of places that are off the beaten path that will allow for a crossing if your opponent isn't paying attention.

Tell me, how many Bridges are there between Antwerp and Masstrict?

Apart from 2 rail bridges near Hasselet and 2 north of Paal, there is 1 bridge per link. There are 3 axis airfields within 5 minutes flight time, little lone Antwerp which is 30 seconds away from BOTH shilde bridges.

What tactical trickery do you plan on using to stop the RAF blowing the 2 Shilde Bridges?


The rest of you're post is thinking out loud for things the rats have not said they will or can do. Wish all you want."
- posted by Comstar @ Wednesday, August 11, 2004 0 comments

 
SO I resigned from the AHC
Over thier stupid fucking CODE of conduct, that does not allow

Political thought (clase 7)

Or

Complaits about the game or CRS(clause 3)

WTFG, the Chain of Command failed to do a fucking thing and just kissed the ground the shit is put upon.


Sigh.
- posted by Comstar @ Wednesday, August 11, 2004 0 comments

 
WWII Online :: View topic - Destroyable bridges!! Part Deux
WWII Online :: View topic - Destroyable bridges!!

KFS1 wrote:
Rather I'm thinking that an organized advance that may have to cross a bridge will now have another reason to want to take aa along with it - to help in securing that bridge.


KFS1, have you EVER seen a FB defended near an enemy airfield with AA?

I give you ONE guess who wins that fight.

And it's not the AA guns!

How many times is a bomber strike on a factory EVER BEEN STOPPED BY AA guns. Even friendly fighters can't stop Stukas drop thier bombs on the tanks BEFORE the Stuka arrives. Partcialy early war allied fighters (or Axis fighters trying to stop fast moving DB7s).

BTW, it's now a standard tatic to already bring AA guns on attacks. It dosn't stop the air attacks now either.

Quote:

It's not like we've suddenly magically put bridges between every town on the map. We may end up adding extra bridges.


Wil someone now tell the class how having a 2nd bridge near Grobendonk will allow the BEF to attack it if the FB is south of the river and the axis hold Glitz, S.Hergeboch and Eindhoven? Ort to be an interesting question. Tow Bofers to it? How many do you think you'll need again? 30 or so pre bridge?

Presuably the bridge does NOT cut supply if it's blown, or the question is then, which of the 2 (well, 1 is assumed) bridges DOES provide supply? If the Bridge south (to Lier) and West to Shilde from Antwep are blown, is Shilde able to draw supply from the North Antwerp Bridges (or Grobendonks bridge(s?), if it's BEF but Osstmale is Axis).

Or does a blown bridge != cut off supply? In which case, why blow it?


Fiannly, yes it won't effect every town on the map. But it will stop attacks in thier tracks, and unlike blowing the enemy FB with 4 sappers (easy to spot, easy to defend because the defenders spawn AT the FB) will be impoossible to top air units from doing.

What happens when we get LANCSTERS, little lone Typhoons?!?! The very reason Killer gave out was to stop planes bombing FB's, is the excat same reason why planes should not be able to blow bridges.

AT least if you needed 10 sappers to do it, it's a larger undertaking than one or two Typhoon's doing it. :oops:

Quote:
We woulda loved to have been able to add some fording equipment ;)


BTW KFS1, you're the one who said we're not getting "fording equipment" or simuler. What ARE we getting that allows sappers to repair the bridge, probably under enemy fire? Smoke rounds for tanks? Smoke rounds for artilalry? Small manhandable boats for infantry to go across (with light AT/AA) quickly? You've made no mention of it, apart from what we're NOT getting.
- posted by Comstar @ Monday, August 09, 2004 1 comments

 
WWII Online :: View topic - Destroyable bridges!!
WWII Online :: View topic - Destroyable bridges!!:

"KFS1 wrote:
Hopefully they will introduce a new contact point, a new focal point for people to fight over, and it will draw some of the combat away from towns - after all, you're going to want some of your AA guns and tanks for bridge duty ;)

NO, PLEASE, NO.

You WANT me to sit at Bridges for Hours on end defending with an AA gun aginast some Stuka that may or may not turn up at 5 minutes notice? Or sit in a tank or as a LMG waiting for an enemy sapper team to come up to cut supply at some point in the future?

You WANT to drive from Grobendonk to Genk north of the river!?!? The FB's on the SOUTH side so if the bridge is blownm, the next closest bridge is north of PAAL or 30 minutes away at Grobendonk (And won't Grob bridge be a nice and fun place to attack when the defending AB is 1 minute away).

For that matter, if a Bridge is blown, and enemy tanks are on the other side, how pray tell will the sappers live long enough to repair the bridge? What are the axis going to do if there's 2 matties defending it?

Say the bridge in Dinent is blown. Both sides can sit on each side and kill the enemy..sappers trying to repair it for hours on end (there's enough cover on both sides now), little lone putting a tank on top of the valley and shooting down the road with HE.

And some bridges are nowhere near the local FB's or AB;'s, such as the RR bridge 'near' Vise (the one DOc fiannly fixed a month or two ago). Who gets to guard it to stop enemy sappers blowing it, or afterwards to stop enemy sappers repairing it?

And a 'bridgeEWS' won't help, it dosn't help the factories now, and it won't stop planes blowing them up either. Neither will Bridge AI AAA (which has far more avilable at factory cities, and dosn't stop many planes either).

And it seems we're not getting fording boats, ferries or abilites yet. AFIAK we wern't going to GET blownable bridges until we could!

And what about the CITY bridges? The ones where you CANNOT cross the river without leaving the city? If the 3 North Antwerp bridges are blown, neither side can attack the other.



Defending bridges will be like Bunker duty of old, with no-link bridge demolations happeing all along the front, just to annoy the other side (little lone so called FRIENDLY units blowing bridges other friendly units do not want blown yet! Who gets to decide who gets left and cut off on the WRONG side of the river?). Combat points wil be drawn away from front line towns all right. EXCATLY like we had 'combat' out the front line before no-link-no-cappy."
---------------

Joke:

How do you stop 3 Stuka's from blowing a Bridge?

.......The Answer is...you don't! I've seen EVERY AA gun the BEF has in it's spawn list at the Masstrict-Aachan FB. You think they could stop the Stukas/109s and 110's?

And now imagine you have to TOW the AA gun there first.

Pretty funny joke, ha ha?
- posted by Comstar @ Sunday, August 08, 2004 0 comments

 
New BEF code of conduct: NO WAY
"Quote:
7: HC Staff will not make references to political organizations or opinions
in their daily conversations and posts. The HC officer is unaffiliated,
loyal, and impartial. Represent us well, and we will earn the respect of our
fellow players and the gaming community at large.


I utterlyt object to this! No way, no how. It is unenforcable, unethical and has NOTHING to do with what I do or how play the game. This must be removed.

For that matter, am I allowed to mouth off on NON-AHC/HC/WW2OLofficalfourms? If I disagree with something rhe AHC is doing, I'm not allowed to post that on the...public fourms. What about my own blog/Squad fourm/whatever?


BTW, did I miss the discussion on this, or was it a generals only thread?"
- posted by Comstar @ Sunday, August 08, 2004 0 comments

 
Discussion: Objectives and the InG ame map features.
WWII Online :: View topic - Discussion: Objectives and the InG ame map features.

In game Map wish list:

WHo owns what flag and FB. Directing to closest enemy flag, town and FB, same for friendly (or if you must, direction to closest enemy and friendly RTB point for the unit I currently am)

Current Misson objectives (AIR/GROUND/SEA) that's someones posted a mission to attack or defend (with different icons for each).

Counter Lines.

GRID LINES.

ZOOMABLE Map. Down to indervidual buildings or up to the ETO (showing the front line in nice red and blue too).

Abiliey to move the map so I can view other area.

Clutter/Unclutter functions so I can turn off this stuff if I want to.

Latatuite/Longtiute/Altitude (of moutains and hills)

Landmark Names for rivers and forests and tourist places of interest (eg the Willimstead Castle)

ON MAP SCALE.

Way Points, Rally Points, Attack directions (markedble arrows!), perhaps keyed to the unit I choose (eg- I choose 4th BDE and only people who tick 4th BDE can see that marker).

Objectives:

CRS has made the rules that ONLY the top 3IC's count. The other OiC's have no power in game. Right now that just means they can't acces .hc . But with btrigade objectives and only seemigly 3 people allowed to do it per briagde, who's going to have the ability when those 3 people arn't online? This is a disaster waiting to happen because there WILL and ARE times when there is only a few .hc people on alredy.

On any one night there is in threory, there is at least 10 brigades operating on the BEF front. Right now we sometimes have less .hc players online for the ENTIRE allied army! ANd that's not including the Div and above staff (who it seems, won't be able to set brigade level objectives either).

SO who is getting the power to set these attack and defence(?) objectives? Who precisly, and what happens when they arn't online?

Blowable Bridges:

Sappers now do everything. We need an enginner class, the sapprs are busy killing tanks, not reparing bridges!

3 Stukas vs 9 Hurri II's, Yeikes. Can't even GET 9 Hurr II's the 1st RDP they came out! DOn't let the airforce do this, make it infantery only. For that matter, presuably 88's will be able to do it...and the BEF...err...can't (And the French need to use a Char!)?

Or give us the abiliety to get tanks across the river and infantry across the river with boats and ATG's. Because taking towns with bridges near them is going to be impossible. Soon as the Allies take the Geel S depot, 3 Stukas will show up and bomb it. The allies attacking then have no armour and no sappers ablwe to get there (and heaven help the towns with AB's near the bridge! Try attacking Andenne now with armour and you'll bge driving from Liege!).

In fact, how does one plan on STOPPING 2-3 Stuka's from blowing the bridge I want to use? YOU CAN'T. We learnt THAT when Stuka's blew FB's.The more I think about it [b]the more obvious it is that allowing planes to destory bridges will be excatly like destorying the enemy FB with an air attack[/b]. It will have the same effect in that it will stop ALL armour, ATG, AA and truck supply from effedting the town under attack.

Case Study: Allies attacking Masstrict from 2 FB;s (Tongeron and Bltizin). Axis bomb the road bridge. 10(?) Sappers required to repair it. I garrentee that will stop any attack.

And no, dirving down to the RR bridge near Vise won't work, as the Stuka's a Aachan and Verviers will get there far far faster.

And just think of the fun on trying to REPAIR a bridge [b]near a boat spawn point[/b].

In conclusion, blowing bridges sounds like a bad idea until we get the ability to float tanks, ATGs and infantry across in boats.
- posted by Comstar @ Saturday, August 07, 2004 0 comments

 
WWII Online :: View topic - DAY 1 PLAYERS
WWII Online :: View topic - DAY 1 PLAYERS

Snail getting a A13 and letting me ride on it. I was so proud. Then I got the purple sky bug.

Seeing tanks flip in the ditches. Flipping my own tank.

Driving a Char.

Being the last allied solider left in Spotin, and 20 panzers driving around.

Being one of the last few allied soliders left on the map when the last allied town fell fell at dusk. Woundering around a destrtered France doding mauridng panzers and trying to rally ther troops in a vaine attept tio cap Dunkirk(?) when we had no more towns so no more links. As the sun went down and the last allied tank woundered around the coast somewhere, I CTDed.

No COVER. None.

DO YOUR 10. I went from Sgt to Major guardingt bunkers for hours at a time.

Being with ther 3CD as they caped a town..silently.

Capping my first town (all 6 of us).

Seeing 109's outturn my Hurricane.

Doing endless loops in the Hurricane. VERTICAL ones.

...and gaining hight in the process.

Seeing Stuka's destroy a FB I'd spent 3 hours trying to blow as a sapper.

Seeing 20 AA guns unable to shoot down a Stuka.

Seeing a Stuka with bothwings on fire fly around without a hitch.

Looking for Champlon....

..and orgaizning an attack on it.

alse Dawn. I miss that. It added atmosphere.

UberLuger. Gah, I am so glad THAT day is over.

Being shot down by a German flah gun for 6 months before the allied had one.

Reading Techpubs new articales.

Being unable to see anything at night.

Rifles shooting THROUGH infantry without killing them.

Being absoloty furious with Stukaairrape.
- posted by Comstar @ Saturday, August 07, 2004 0 comments

 
Billmon - Catches a great Bush quote
Billmon

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."

George W. Bush
Remarks by the President at the Signing of H.R. 4613
August 5, 2004
- posted by Comstar @ Friday, August 06, 2004 1 comments

 
I was lucky
Till now, but them's the breaks. Can't talk about it ofcoruse, thats the point.

I was lucky. Never had a problem really till now, and now every(ones) hypersentative about it.

I wish I could talk to okeimoe about it.


Mabye I should go play axis for awhile

sigh
- posted by Comstar @ Thursday, August 05, 2004 0 comments

 
Inrugancy and Counter-Inergancy operations in WW2OL
'Cause that was what I do a lof of the time. Cap a few flags, nail a few panzers, and bug out.


- posted by Comstar @ Thursday, August 05, 2004 0 comments

 
WWII Online :: View topic - I dare an allied player say the words breakfast club
WWII Online :: View topic - I dare an allied player say the words breakfast club:

Kc's right, our armour use is appaling. Absolutly terrible.

Fortunaly, there were many more squads, brigades and divisons at Tongeron than one mere squad. The defeincies of my inability to deploy armour were more than made up for by far better units.

And seeing as I crashed 6 *times* during the attack, it's the general allied playerbase who won THAT particlaur battle, and not (as anyone on the objective channel at the time can attest) my use of the CAPSLOCK key. (Note to CRS: Why am I forced to USE the Capslock key?!!!?).

Though I will say the GHC mucked up the defence. Should have called fallback (HAAC wouldn't have helped much). Can anyone tell me who was the OiC of the german defence? I would like to compare notes.

'Corse...I thought the'd be smart and planned on a .fallback. The poor sapper team was stuck at the FB for 30 minutes before we took the AB.

And for anyone worried about security and me blabbing about the attack- THis is better for the game. One day next campain I expect to be on the receiving end of attacks like then allies did tonight. I expect not to like it much.


As Doc Said in one of his more lucid moments: This is PvP, the hardesr PvP on the planet.


This was now 22 minute tank ride to the AB. I'm sorry Bilton didn't get a chance to see it, as the vast majority of the fighting was infantry, first for the spawnbale, then the NE depot, then the E, depot, then for an hour or so, the AB. Never saw or heard more than 3 tanks a time. It was an infnatry battle, something that was impossible before Speedtree, berms, depot spawning, ATRs and ATGrenades.

Infantry is not decisive in the victory, but neither was the tanks, planes,player ability, commanders or logestics.

It's not there *yet*, but WW2OL is fiannly starting to end it's beginning. We've just fought the battle of El Alamien, and it's still a long road to 1945.
- posted by Comstar @ Thursday, August 05, 2004 0 comments

 
OiC TOngeron. That was me.
WWII Online :: View topic - I dare an allied player say the words breakfast club:

As OiC of the Tongeron attack, I have some knowlage of this matter,

It took an hour and half of combat (and I *WALKED* from the FB to the town origiannly). It was no sneak in attack (not my fault you wern't defending the one depot we can spawn in NOT in the AB). EWS went off 30 minutes before we took the first depot.

And a BIG hello to the 6 panzers killed without checking thier flank as as drove out of the AB without an escort.

And a big THANK YOU to all the green tags and new guys on the allied side.

And a big up yours to all those STuka pilots. If you can't keep a town 3 minutes flight time from 2 airfields, I don't know whar to say.
- posted by Comstar @ Wednesday, August 04, 2004 0 comments

 
Infantry Warfare in 2020. Looks like WW2OL comminations systems?
The Number #1 rule on theEvil Overlord List is

1: My Legions of Terror will have helmets with clear plexiglass visors, not face-concealing ones..



From Slashdot, the 2010 and 2020 new combat oufits for the US.

2010 design, the 2020 version is the Legions of Doom version, I think I saw it in Robocop.


And then there's the medical interface


Which might produce the following exchange (from the slashdot discussion)

From the article: "A medic, who can be miles away, will now be able to diagnose and treat a soldier who is about to have sunstroke, without even physically seeing the soldier.

Radio traffic: "Alpha Bravo Charlie appears to be out of action! Doctor, can you give us a report on his telemetry?

Doctor: "Is he wearing that black, 50 pound Darth Vader suit?"

Radio traffic: "Yes!"

Doctor: "It's probably sun stroke."

- posted by Comstar @ Wednesday, August 04, 2004 0 comments

 
WWII Online - idea for a movie
WWII Online

Our story begins outside Tienein (or St Trudien)

Scene of a Matty driving around the roads with an infantry on board (SMG). The tank drives up to the camera and the infantry hops off. The Matties cuopla opens up, while the infnatry scans with bincos.

SMG- "I tell you (says the infantry) there ai'int any gernams for 10 k's. Last big attack on Tienein was 3 days ago, and there were wiped out".

(shot of scanning good looking scenrey of terrian through bincos. Switch to view of matties gun scanning)

Matty- "Yer well, they DO want this town a lot, opens the way to Brussels and all that".

(As the tank scans, it stops and backs up. A GERMAN ATR is spotted just as he fires)

BANG!

(View of the infantry dropping flat as the Tank fires it's machine gun)

SMG- "Did you get him?"

Matty- "Negative, he's gone behind the forest. Can you go chase him down? He's probably just recceing".

SMG- "Roger that, cover me, I'll go get him".

(The SMG runs up to the forest and looks (turning head) around. Sees nothing)

BANG. A german rifleman behind a forest fires (seen by the SMG, reloads his gun, and goes behind the forest)

SMG- "Why you!"

(The SMG runs around the forest...and sees a 88, 1/2 track, AA gun, Bofers, Every Panzer in the invantory and a few infantry standing around. They ALL turn to face the SMG)

SMG- "Oh..."

(Shot from behind matty looking towards forest)

BANG BANG BOOM BOOM SMG RIFLE BOOM BOOM BOOM.

Matty- "Ahh,...DRIVER BACK US UP!"

(As the mattyies engine comes on (smoke!) multiple panzers come around the forest)

Matty- "DRIVE KEEP GOING BACK!"

(The matty starts engaining the panzers, and 1-3 BLOW UP with turrents flying off. German infantry race past them, using the conbat emotes)

Driver- "WE CAN'T STOP ALL OF THEM BY OURSELVES!"

BOOM (another PZ blows up, and shots fall around and on the Matty)

TC- "2nd Divison, I'm outside Tienein, many panzers inbound. Send Help....Oh..."

SOUND OF STUKA SIRENS as 4 STUKAS Dive in on the Matty and Release bombs

BOOM. Matty blows up.

Shot of Panzers, Infantry, 109's and 110's attacking a town.

Announcer - "YOU drive the tanks!"

(Shot of BEF tank convoy from the POV of a truck taking infantry going in the oppoiste direction)

Announcer- "YOU fly the planes!"

(Shot of 4 Spitfires flying low over the countryside or Antwerp)

Announcer- "YOU captain the ships!"

(Shot of French 2 DD's, 2 Frighters and 2 Faimiles crossing the ocean)

Announcer- "YOU attack the factories!"

(Shot of massed He111 attack on a Factory city with AAA as they drop bombs)

Announcer- "YOU fight the battle!"

(Shot of many infantry kills with different weapons)

Announcer- "This is no shoebox.."

(Shot of TPGO's map showing how big the map is)

Announcer- "This is Total Warfare. Air, Sea and Land".

(Shots of a French P40s, British DD and German Panzer IIIH).

Announcer- "This is World War 2, Online".

Fade out to WWW.WWIIONLINE.COM.

- posted by Comstar @ Wednesday, August 04, 2004 0 comments

 
Squad names: a critique on just about all of them
I don't the squad NAME really counts for much. Besides, all the in game unit names for Brigade Deployment will meet youre criteria anyway. Within 4 months it won't matter . Squads will be part of Brigades, but you'll be joining an offical Brigade with an offical historicaly correct name anyway.

Anyway, the names not important, the people in it are. Do tghey play in YOUR time zone? Are you happy to play a game with them? Are they happy with YOU? Do they do things you like (not much point of joining a Air squadron doing bombing runs to Koln if you don't have a joystick)?

The BEF isn't much help either I might add. 4th Brigade is made up of a squads with little to no historical...names (ANZACs for example wern't used as an offical unit name in WW2, only WW1).

I don't think squad names mean much myself . It's an licence plate, not the brand of the car
- posted by Comstar @ Wednesday, August 04, 2004 0 comments

 
A GREAT infantry story of last nights battles!
Allied Headquarters :: View topic - Proud day to be Allied:

"Gq27
Joined: 13 Jul 2002
Posts: 132
Location: Washington State, USA
Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2004 9:31 am

Well in the about 12 hours I played yesterday I was in on the captures of Mazagran, Namur, Eghezee, Eind, Andenne, and Weert.

In Mazagran I was tossing nades from the spawnable next to the AB into the AB area mostly and shooting the EI here and there. Got 2 KIA and 12 kills there as inf for that one.

Namur grabbed a Brit smg and rode a squad mate in. Helped around NAB a bit until it was totally locked down so went to town for the spawnable with another squad mate. When we got to the Eghezee depot flag it changed and of course some guy capped it French so we only had one spawnable depot now in town. So I just ended up near the SAB infantry spawns keeping EI from getting to our tanks and out into town until it was totally locked down and capped. A few minutes later we capped the docks and then NAB to own. A 10 kill RTB run there.

Eghezee, well that was a headache to get to town. I got killed from a driver and damaged to the point of almost total red screen on another run and had to take a MIA. Two other runs I got sniped as soon as I we got dropped and then I got dropped a mile from town on the SE side and had to flank around of foot to the SW side where the spawnable depot flag was at. I did get in the flag but was nailed by an EI that came running in after me that got through our tanks covering the depot. We finally got the spawnable and I got a kill on the EI trying to recap and then 2 more kills in the AB and a RTB after we capped it. Total 4 deaths, 1 MIA, and 3 kills...

Eind was a nice one, hopped a beddy as a SMG from the FB both runs to town. First run made it into the AB Veh spawn killed an 88 and 14 EI before getting nailed. Next run I got back into the AB again and got a nice 31 kill run and RTB after we owned. Total 1 death and 46 kills.

Andenne we had EA thick over the FB that stalled us a bit but got a kill on a 109F with a 38 and spoted for our AAA guns for 2 opel drops of ei way out on the hill at the FB. Got killed 3 times and got in the flag once with 4 kills before we finally got the Namur depot. I respawned and cleared the Huy depot after that and got nailed crossing the bridge. Spawned in at the depot as a RG and got 3 kills then checked the bunker and figured I would us my last RG after that. NOTE* you cant fire RG's from the top of the bunker or rather you can but you will not be alive afterwards... Respawned a SMG and got another 3 kills as the bunker was capped and then a RTB afterwards. Total 5 deaths and 10 kills.

Weert I joined in on that one as the south was dead quite and they were asking for troops. I think that town was designed for rifleman only as there were snipers EVERYWHERE. First run I got sniped right off the bat and there were some pz's near the depot so I figured it was not going to end well. EWS went off down south so I checked it out and it was just a LW on foot so went back up to Weert again. Got a 3 kill run and capped the W spawnable depot flag and RTB'ed at it. I then got pinned down by snipers near the S depot and after a while go irritated so I through my smoke, switched to nades and sprinted through the open ground to my smoke and tossed my nades into the hard cover where the some snipers were and took 5 with me. Next two runs I got 3 kills and got sniped both runs and then got a RG and got a 5 kill run and RTB after we owned. Total 4 deaths, 17 kills and capped a spawnable depot.

Total on all 6 attacks as only infantry was 16 Deaths, 98 Kills, 1 MIA and 1 spawnable depot cap. Overall it was a good night I would say. "
- posted by Comstar @ Tuesday, August 03, 2004 0 comments

 
WWII Online- Cornered Rat Software/Playnet.com
WWII Online- Cornered Rat Software/Playnet.com

With the introduction of ATRs, what is the next weapon going to be for infantry?
-Murnane Next time I'll add my username!

The hand-held Nuke. This will be perfect for defending against fast moving Motorcycles. Seriously, the next infantry weapon might not be a weapon at all, but maybe a "rebuild" kit for repairing bridges....er...what? Did I say that?
- posted by Comstar @ Tuesday, August 03, 2004 0 comments

 
Two new trailers
Apple Trailer site.

Thunderbirds as used by the creaters of South Park save the world from Osama and the DPRK!?!?!?

I think I'll have to go watch it when it comes out :)

-----------
(Also, there's a new Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow Teaser. Who knew you could take P40s under water?
- posted by Comstar @ Monday, August 02, 2004 0 comments

 
AAR of last nights Egazze Attack (Failed)
The plan was supposed to go like this:

As overall OiC I recon the westeren defences of the town with 3-6 other infantry. We then get into postion to kill any light/AT defences as the main attack comes in.

I then CTDed just as I was about to do that. ****.

So I sent in another group. Because everyone had already been waiting I decided to start the attack. My Mistake. The recon/forward inf group reports on Panzers espy one SW of the spawnable depot. I didn't understand what they were saying, and the recon group couldn't relay that to SgtMaj0r and the armour because it *I* was the comms link. That ONE panzer then killed all the inf with a beurtufil flank shot as we were going between one forest and another. ONE PZ, that was sitting out in the open and the air guys hadn't seen/bombed either. Our Armour was placed correctly...just NORTH of that ONE panzer on the other side of forest/drop off point for the infantry. Bigass GOT to the depot after dropping us off. Should have stayed on him :(.

Conclusions:

As OiC I *MUST PERFORM RECON OF THE TARGET MYSELF*. Prefrebly 1 hour beforehand.

My (Well, taking KC23's idea) idea of having a genunie SQUAD of infantry (1-2LMGs, 1-2 Sappers, 1-2 RGs 1-2 ATRS and 1-2 SMG', 1-2 ATGs, 1-2 AA) in place on the side of town the armour will arrive it might just be a good idea. The armour dosn't have to get TOO close into town to attrit panzers as long as they can get close to town first without being picked off by 88's and unreported Panzers (who get bombed from air via a FAC).

I needed a FAC on commander able to to tell KK (or the air commander using TS commander on another channel) where the panzer targets were. That FAC cannot be the overall OiC

I needed a Armour OiC, and SgtMaj0r did everything I asked of him.

I needed a recon OiC and the 333rd did that, I just wasn't able to use the intel they got me effecivly. I was too busy trying to be the Inf OiC. I needed an inf OiC.

I also needed not to CTD *5 times* during the attack, or have a XO who can take over instantly. The XO needs to know the plan.

This map is HARD. Right now we have a slight advantage in the air, and thwe ground is pretty much equal on all sides.


Hmmm...I seem to have rediscovered the normal militiry needs of a moden army. You don't get THAT in many MMOG's eh.
- posted by Comstar @ Monday, August 02, 2004 0 comments

 
Giry Car? HA!
If an easy car to drive is a girly car I WANT A EASY CAR TO DRIVE.

It's so bloody easy. If I wanted a F4U Ensign Eliminator I could buy one and die in a week. I want a Hurricane. Sure it's not as cool as the Spitfire, it can't outrun a 109, it's can't outshoot a Head On 110 and it's can't do crap aginast a solid Panzer4WDofDoom but it can damm well TURN.

I want to be able to pull out of the Dibve before I meet the windshield at a speed my head can't handle (Duel Bags BTW).

And it's a very good gunning platform. Handles VERY well (ABS) and it's a GOOD looking Spolier! Not like the 1 inch wide BritishMilityHelumt look of the Current EuropeanStlyed small cars (Like the Fiesta).

I don't want a Tiger, I don't want a Matty, I don't want a 38t and I don't want a ClownCar.

I want a Vicky :)
- posted by Comstar @ Sunday, August 01, 2004 0 comments