Posts by South Paw

I must say, I am both astounded and pleased that those who are or where die harders are at least trying to let time and Bytro prevail. Provided that they get good feedback and patience, as Buddha pointed out in CoW layout, the possibilities are there. I hope for the communities sake, so is the patience.
I would miss seeing the familiar personalities in games, chat and the forums.
Be part of the solution or you are part of the problem I was always told.
Furry, as always, you bring a smile to my face. No horses... too funny. Well done old friend.

Ic3, nothing in life is apples to apples for a comparison, not even apples.
The point I try to make, is that the game remains. Graphics, controls and features change as the player base changes to support their expectations because things in life and technology advance or digress.
I played 'PONG' when it was first introduced. I would not waste the time now to do so, but back in the day, it was amazing.
My expectations have changed drastically from those early days, and simple is not always best, especially when compared to the success of the CoW franchise. You build on success at the expense of established norms at times.
This is one of those times. Legacy, like Java, will be a memory that will rival my recollections of "PONG' as time marches on.

Fun in it's time. But that time has passed.

OMG. You so rock. I may actually appear in some of the old forum discussions, before I did a name change way back when that is..... again, thanks for the info Helgraf.
DoGeeseSeeGod among others. Bet Rage and Godi are still listed in there.....

And tournaments. *sigh* Some good times, along with the old Player League.

Indeed. I did not know such archival photos actually existed anymore. A fine tribute to a award winning game back in the day, and thanks for a fine blast from the past Helgraf.
And, as you can see, the differences are in stark contrast to the Legacy now mourned. Change is inevitable. Life gives few choices, but at least they are choices we get to make: Accept it. Change it if within our power to do so. Get out if the cost is too high.
Again, I enjoy it more than enough to try and relearn a system yet again, knowing that the premise of the game itself provides the same months of enjoyment as it did in the Java years.
Thanks again for the trip down memory lane.

An interesting read so far.
There are a few in here that will recall Java. It went away and the players grabbed their pitchforks and things became a bit 'interesting' for a while.
The player base recovered as they adapted to the changes.
Now, Legacy is gone, as Java has long ago.
And yet again, the pitchforks come out and the discussions are interesting.
I note a few things about this. First, the loyalty of those that play this game. Not to simply kick some rear, not to be smug. We play to have fun. To teach. To learn.
The game is the same as when it was Java. The format changes. So do cars. Phones. Heck, even kids change as time goes by. And we adapt to these changes and still find enjoyment with the changes.
This will be a growing pain. No doubt. But, constructive feedback is what will improve upon the issues. Same as when we went to HTLM from Java, and from Legacy to what is here now.
I for one, will still find enjoyment in the game. It remains intact from a strategic point of view. Just different seats and transmission to deal with is all.
I would ask the vets to find the issues. Report them and be patient to allow for corrections and improvements. We have been here a long time. I for one, intend to be here for a long time yet to come.

Joining a map already running and creating one are two sperate issues. Rank is required to initiate some maps., while joining is limited only by the parameters installed by the one creating it for a minimum rank requirement.

A unique perspective there GB. I kind of like the idea.

ride a koala

Agreed. A report of the issue will prompt the Game Operators assigned to the ticket to open the game and review. If violations are noted, actions will be taken for the situation.

I would not have it any other way Hastings. I lament the loss, but understand the way of progress as well. A tight rope to walk, indeed, but the game dynamics remain, so a new paint job on an old house is worth the time to see if the furniture still works with it.

I might suggest that any of the open 'discussions' that may be offensive to anyone, written by anyone find a different place to be written.
If there is a problem with this suggestion, please feel free to PM me and we can discuss possible solutions to the issues.

Welcome back. Always nice to see a returning vet.

By George, I think he's got it! Tactfully and tastefully stated Psy. Well done.

I do not disagree that there are game options that can be built into the game features, and I would also like to see some, to include a surrender option button or alliance game VP settings. However, until that day comes, we have what we have and all things considered with the shape of the world in general, it is indeed nice to be able to discuss the things that are within our ability to try and influence. So much is going on out there that we can not.

LOL! Furry......

I name them stuff like that Frank. "Howdy, how are ya?" Wanna make a campfire?" Things of that nature. Makes it fun in the paper when it comes out. Folks smile I suppose.

Personally, I think that naming units is kind of cool. Nothing like wasting a stack of troops with a battleship named "Have a nice day".....

I actually took the liberties months ago to review this law out of simple curiosity.
As I am not a lawyer, nor am I a German statesman, it is not up to me to apply these statutes, and would suspect that it is not yours either to try and do so.
From what I can discern from it though, is that it is in reference to games that have their premise in WWII, where the symbolism used was allowed for accurate representation of the opposing sides.
As this game is a WWI game, no such representation applies and is therefore negated under your assumption.
But then again, I'm no lawyer.....
I will wait for those with far more experience in this matter to review this post should they deem it necessary.

I can hardly criticize a rule or application of policy that is administered fairly and equitably across the board as much as is possible as being 'obtuse'. Rules are just that, and we expect as much from the staff to try and maintain them as we do from the players to work with in them.

The community is dis-satisfied, or a hand full of alliance or high profile players within certain maps?
The The bottom line is, where is the line drawn then as to what maps are closed at request? 500 player? 10 player?
One size does fit all in this application.