PortalHomeCalendarFAQSearchMemberlistUsergroupsRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 Werner, one question.

Go down 
Go to page : 1, 2  Next
AuthorMessage
{1.SS}Salz



Posts : 10
Join date : 2009-01-22

PostSubject: Werner, one question.   Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:45 pm

From metalbourne on the other topic;;
Quote :

I've discussed things with 12thSS and come to the realization that {SHD} as a unit is simply not used to AB at all. We are used to playing in the RO League and standard RO and the AB mod does change things, but I can not judge it to be bad or good because of our in-experience with it. We are a tanker clan and love tanking realism, in fact many members in our unit were real tankers at one time and most of our unit is old enough to be your fathers, lol. So perhaps time is what we need to make a confirmed decision on this matter. Maybe a few weeks for us to get used to it and everyone else that doesn't play with AB.

The other issue that has come up,

With using the AB mod the custom vehicals will need to be out. The custom tanks are still using the standard RO hit system and can become super tanks compared to other AB tanks. So if we do use AB, we can't use any of the custom tanks/equipment. That means no ISU-152/KV1b/KV2/Motorcycle/StugIII(Short) just to name a few. So if we do use AB, we would have to have another vote on this matter.

About the Darkest Hour AB mod, being a tester on the DH team, all I will say is that they have a totally new system and is nothing like the old AB mod used, so you can not compare these 2 games (they are now Apples and Oranges).

My final thought is, I want this campaign to work and don't want anyone to leave, if you do then so be it, but that isn't my wish. This issue has come up in the past and has destroyed other campaigns and I will not let it destroy this one. We need to come to a comprimise on this issue. I am willing to make a comprimise of allowing AB mod to be in the campaign, but what I ask in return is for 1 full turn for us and other units to get used to it. For 1 turn we go back to using regular RO, and the following turn go back to using AB. Although the current vote has regular RO system winning, I am willing to give AB a real chance, but I need the Germans to be willing to give us and others time to get used to it.

Why, after those who brought up the issue in the first place came up with a wonderful compromise, do you insist on not using AB?

I am not here to start another thread about this, I just want to see a list of reasons besides "I read both arguments and decided"
I want to see what lead to your decision and I think the whole community would appreciate it, and it would help stem the conflict.


Salz
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Metalbourne
Admin
avatar

Posts : 166
Join date : 2008-12-02

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Fri Mar 27, 2009 1:28 pm

It's true we are willing to comprimise on AB, but I really want to put this to rest once in for all. So there's no way to keep going back to bad blood I've erased the entire past threads because the language used will come back to haunt us later. Since in that vote it was basicly a 50/50 split to use it, the best way to handle it is to allow it in Jan. of 43. That way half of the war is fought with it and the other half is fought without it. I think this isn't only the best comprimise of the Allies and Axis, but all players voted and came to 50/50. Many either were strongly against it or for it or simply didn't care. This way (starting in 43), we can all be happy about it. It gives us time to get used to the AB and by halfway, you guys get AB and those that didn't care could keep not caring, lol. I hope we can all move on for the sake of the campaign. Very Happy

_________________
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://theatreofconflict.forumotion.com
Günter Severloh
Army Group Commander
avatar

Posts : 30
Join date : 2009-01-20
Location : Illinois, USA

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Fri Mar 27, 2009 3:03 pm

So in a way nothing has changed except attitude, were still not useing AB til 43.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.187th.net
Friedrich Werner
Admin
avatar

Posts : 262
Join date : 2009-01-01
Age : 30
Location : US of A

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Sat Mar 28, 2009 11:03 am

correct no AB til 43 unless someone gives me a good reason why we should use it when the SU76, StuGIIIG and PZIV F2 appera in mid 42.

_________________
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Gerhard Schmidt



Posts : 10
Join date : 2009-03-29
Location : Lugano, Switzerland

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Sun Mar 29, 2009 6:06 pm

Armee-Gruppe Nord has fought without it with great success. I don't see why it's such a huge problem when Werner has already voiced his opinions. The compromise set forth by Metalbourne and the allies is very reasonable.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
{1.SS}Salz



Posts : 10
Join date : 2009-01-22

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Mon Mar 30, 2009 10:31 am

Werner did you even read my post? I understand your decision. What I want to know is WHY. Right now I feel it was arbitrary and you didn't even look over the information available. Can you not give everyone your reasoning?

Salz.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
{1.SS}Salz



Posts : 10
Join date : 2009-01-22

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Mon Mar 30, 2009 1:38 pm

Gerhard Schmidt wrote:
Armee-Gruppe Nord has fought without it with great success. I don't see why it's such a huge problem when Werner has already voiced his opinions. The compromise set forth by Metalbourne and the allies is very reasonable.

This is suppose to be a realism campaign no? AB is more realistic than stock RO. So therefore you would think the campaign would use AB.

As I said before, all I would like to see is the reasoning behind this decision instead of just hearing, "Because I am the admin and I say so."


Salz
Back to top Go down
View user profile
|GD|Kessler
Unit Commander
avatar

Posts : 26
Join date : 2009-01-21
Location : Calgary, Canada

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Mon Mar 30, 2009 1:49 pm

There was a vote, it was tied, so the decision from what Ive read is that half the campaign will be with it and half without, why can't you just accept that and move on.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.GD-Div.com
{1.SS}Salz



Posts : 10
Join date : 2009-01-22

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Mon Mar 30, 2009 2:03 pm

|GD|Kessler wrote:
There was a vote, it was tied, so the decision from what Ive read is that half the campaign will be with it and half without, why can't you just accept that and move on.

Can we not ask for the reasoning behind it?

Salz
Back to top Go down
View user profile
TChristie

avatar

Posts : 71
Join date : 2009-01-18
Age : 27
Location : London

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Mon Mar 30, 2009 3:05 pm

when you have a half-half situation, and a decision is taken on one side, what useually happens.
In countries a civil war will useually start.
With such a 50-50 scenario you have to make compromises so each side can reach an agreement which is now done.
Thats most likely why.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.invasionx.com
LSchroll

avatar

Posts : 40
Join date : 2009-01-18
Age : 31

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Mon Mar 30, 2009 3:36 pm

I have to agree with Kuleshov.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://12sshj.clanservers.com
{1.SS}Salz



Posts : 10
Join date : 2009-01-22

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Tue Mar 31, 2009 6:25 pm

Alexsey Kuleshov wrote:
when you have a half-half situation, and a decision is taken on one side, what useually happens.
In countries a civil war will useually start.
With such a 50-50 scenario you have to make compromises so each side can reach an agreement which is now done.
Thats most likely why.

And I have no problem with that. I just want to hear it from the Admin so to say. It is an issue of feeling a bit cheated, as I have seen no signs of reasoning or even looking at the arguments. This is in no one suppose to start another argument, just tie up the old one.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Metalbourne
Admin
avatar

Posts : 166
Join date : 2008-12-02

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Tue Mar 31, 2009 7:05 pm

{1.SS}Salz wrote:
Alexsey Kuleshov wrote:
when you have a half-half situation, and a decision is taken on one side, what useually happens.
In countries a civil war will useually start.
With such a 50-50 scenario you have to make compromises so each side can reach an agreement which is now done.
Thats most likely why.

And I have no problem with that. I just want to hear it from the Admin so to say. It is an issue of feeling a bit cheated, as I have seen no signs of reasoning or even looking at the arguments. This is in no one suppose to start another argument, just tie up the old one.

The reason is, because of the 50/50 split to play with it and not to play with it. With PzDF joining I know personally that they dislike the AB mod, so there numbers would've pushed the vote to no AB at all, but waiting until 43 is a good comprimise for both sides. Both sides win. Both can argue what is realistic and what isn't, to be honest i think it lies inbetween the 2 (original RO and AB mod). Both sides can quote hundreds of scources on how this tank did this and this weapon did that, but in the end it's a game and to appease everyone the decision was made to use both. The goal is to keep the campaign going and not let it ground to a halt over some mod. I've been told that the 1st SS decided to withdraw from the campaign until 43, if true, please just let me know. I am a Admin so hopefully this answers your question.

_________________
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://theatreofconflict.forumotion.com
Werner Jungmann

avatar

Posts : 80
Join date : 2009-01-18
Age : 28
Location : Fulton, Wisconsin, USA

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Tue Mar 31, 2009 9:25 pm

Metalbourne wrote:
I've been told that the 1st SS decided to withdraw from the campaign until 43.

If true, that is laughably pathetic.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Gerhard Schmidt



Posts : 10
Join date : 2009-03-29
Location : Lugano, Switzerland

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:59 pm

That doesn't seem right...play if you want to play, or don't if you don't. Selective playing seems rather pathetic, I agree.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Friedrich Werner
Admin
avatar

Posts : 262
Join date : 2009-01-01
Age : 30
Location : US of A

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Wed Apr 01, 2009 7:19 am

for the reasons metal has stated and this reason I have stated 15 times at least.... I don't like AB for early war tanks in terms of realism. I think the mod is better suited for use with later war tanks on both sides.

and i havn't seen/ heard anything about 1ss leaving, they are members of this community and I know they are just looking to make sure everything is as realistic as possible. A little discussion never hurts.

_________________
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Metalbourne
Admin
avatar

Posts : 166
Join date : 2008-12-02

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Wed Apr 01, 2009 10:19 am

I was told by their fellow AG unit (187th) that they were leaving, I just wanted them to confirm this.

_________________
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://theatreofconflict.forumotion.com
Friedrich Werner
Admin
avatar

Posts : 262
Join date : 2009-01-01
Age : 30
Location : US of A

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Wed Apr 01, 2009 12:30 pm

i heard they were just doing infantry until 43. I love rumors

_________________
Back to top Go down
View user profile
razyl_daz

avatar

Posts : 61
Join date : 2009-02-01
Age : 30
Location : Richmondhill, ON/Canada

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Wed Apr 01, 2009 2:57 pm

Werner is right.

187th.Obgf. Boon here to say that 1.SS is not pathetic, they just all agree on the same personal preference when playing RO. Their server has AB on it and thats just the way they like to play. They are a realism unit at its finest, from my understanding they are the first realism unit made since the beginning of Red Orchestra.

Yes it is true, they are just looking to make sure everything is as realistic as it can be for a game. They are not poor sports... everyone has their personal opinions/preferences.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
{1.SS}Salz



Posts : 10
Join date : 2009-01-22

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Wed Apr 01, 2009 6:17 pm

I am honestly disgusted. Pathetic? Try fucking realistic.

I thank Boon for stepping in here. The 1.SS is pathetic hu? How long has your unit been around? 7 years since the mod? Bullshit.

Fuckers, longest unit in RO history being pathetic? More like we have survived what has ended other units. We have our preferences towards the game and being as we are a historical unit and interested in German History more than gaming.

So stop talking bullshit about our unit and our preferences just because we won't play your way.

And Werner still brilliantly avoids the question posed. Which would be for the third time in this thread;; WHY don't you like it. Still failing to list the reasons.

Salz
Back to top Go down
View user profile
{1.SS}Ostheim

avatar

Posts : 2
Join date : 2009-03-26

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Wed Apr 01, 2009 7:50 pm

Makes a lot of sense using AB from 1943 onwards doesn't it? It's okay if the laws of physics change mid-war--I understand that. Rolling Eyes I also understand the problem with a league under the control of one person, especially one professing to be for 'realism'. It's sad that the one person we are all at the mercy of here is influenced by people with or has himself questionable judgment and general lack of understanding of critical subjects related to 'realism'.

Schmidt: I know who you are. Win some battles or earn a medal and then run your chops. You are useless.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Werner Jungmann

avatar

Posts : 80
Join date : 2009-01-18
Age : 28
Location : Fulton, Wisconsin, USA

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:44 pm

Well, "Herr" Salz.

If the additude you guys have about AB isn't pathetic, your additude right now is.

Longest RO unit, or brand new one, I fail to see how that has ANYTHING to do with ANYTHING.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
{1.SS}Ostheim

avatar

Posts : 2
Join date : 2009-03-26

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:03 pm

It has to do with we resist bandwagon thinking 'cause we've seen the same crap over and over again. ie. the Soviet side bitched and complained about AB since they were losing and now we have a half-assed 'compromise' and we're just supposed to go along with it 'cause everyone else is? No, screw that. No AB vs AB is a major change, and the rug was pulled out from under our feet. No warning, no debate, nothing. The reason we joined this realism campaign was primarily because it was the first promising campaign to require AB. We are resistant to peer pressure. Of course you're going to just lay down and take it because your unit runs this damn thing, what choice do you have?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Friedrich Werner
Admin
avatar

Posts : 262
Join date : 2009-01-01
Age : 30
Location : US of A

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Wed Apr 01, 2009 10:32 pm

I don't even know how to comment to these disrespectful messages.

I am very sad to see that my decision (which I replied to several times) has forced you both from the 1SS to use that tone. I took a survey that was 50/50 and did some ingame recon on the subject more thoroughly.

One example I was presented with was the panzer III's that had compariable frontal armor values to kv1's (not realistic)

I did however enjoy the results of my finds in the later war tanks (tigers, panthers, is2's etc...)
For example the IS2 had stronger armor (realistic) but with ab also a slower reload time (also realistic since the IS2 had two charges and often took several minutes to load and were thus used primarily in sieges or more defensive operations of the late war period)

I am sorry I havn't given you a written report with flow charts and a utube video with a voiced over walkthrough of my experiments. I took what everyone said, spoke with allied and german players alike. Read a few posts on other ro forums about the subject and even asked some pubbers on an AB server what they believed the pros and cons were. If that isn't enough for you then why didn't you come to me with a fistful of paperwork and charts that could perhaps sway my opinion in the opposite direction.

Now going to something you said I take more offense. If you think I have been a dictator and biased I would like you to point out where. Am i biased to the russians? Doubt it since my favorite past time next to hearing your gripes (drastic sarcasim used here)is actually destroying their armor and chasing their fleeeing infantry with my hull gunner's machinegun. (russians don't take offense Smile ) To say my unit, the 2nd SS, is getting better treatment or is secretly in command and pulling strings behind the scene you are mistaken. You couldn't be farther from the truth and I know Ernst is probably looking around the forum right now trying to figure out where he got his bigger "cut" of the pie. This is the only time i will use a harsh tone with you... If you comment about my unit like that again I will take great offense and i will kick your unit right out of this campaign and fill Sud's spot in an instant.

Back to polite me...

I know for a fact that the way you have demonstrated your beliefs to me in this "roasting" manner is very disrespectful to me and Metal as he is my co-creator/ co-admin for the campaign and has a say in rules and events just as much as I do. So really you think you are pointing at me when you just said "screw you" to both of us. (Metal if I am wrong then I'd like you to pm me and set me straight)

On a personal level don't start this bullshit drama and ruin the campaign i have been working on each day since December 27th 2008.
On a community level, don't ruin the one thing we all have and has so far received such great reviews from everyone (everyone but 1st ss naturally)

If you would like to stay in this campaign I will gladly keep you guys and we can forgive and forget. Remember I have said several times that if you can give me good proof, I will bring AB in for mid 42 and the new tanks that roll in then. However if you would like to leave this campaign please don't make a demonstration, send me a pm, and we'll leave it at that.


I am leaving this topic open for a little, if we go abck to a civil tone then we can carry on with talks about the AB in 42.


Still need Centrals, Norths or 8th's map requests and unit info... Sud v South information will be out shortly

vr,
Friedrich Werner
SS Rottenführer u. Panzerführer
SS-Pz.Rgt.2 "Das Reich"
T.O.C. Co- Administrator u. Creator

_________________
Back to top Go down
View user profile
{1.SS}Behncke

avatar

Posts : 18
Join date : 2009-01-26
Location : Missouri

PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   Thu Apr 02, 2009 1:57 am

We are staying to help 187th with infantry. The guys in our unit that want to play will. So 1st SS is not leaving, just changing our plan. We will be back as a Panzer Regiment in 43 or whenever AB gets turned back on. So cut it out guys with the mean comments.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Werner, one question.   

Back to top Go down
 
Werner, one question.
Back to top 
Page 1 of 2Go to page : 1, 2  Next
 Similar topics
-
» Question on Lambda symbol for light
» Question re generational curses/ healing prayer
» Question your conduct
» A question for mediums
» CS Professional (New Syllabus) Question Papers

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
 :: General Discussion :: General Topics-
Jump to: