I would argue that the actual differences go further than the colours, but there's no huge difference anywhere, but it's *obviously* just the fact that the other side has OP tanks, or more logi, or
Have you not heard? Wardens have an alt cabal, running 24/7 sabotage operations against Colonials. It was a "mathematical certainty" that Wardens were going to lose until they started doing so.
^^I ^^wish ^^I ^^was ^^kidding, ^^there's ^^people ^^overdosing ^^on ^^copium ^^right ^^now ^^that ^^believe ^^this.
Haven't played collies but I've talked with some collies and they've all seemed pretty nice(more than some wardens). Also seems like wardens had more vets and new players and collies are mostly in the middle. Haven't played I'm a few wars though
I dont think anyone on the colonial side predicted that major factions would quit all burnt out over some concrete and end up ruining it for the rest of thw colonials
It's really important to note that the deciding factor in this war was not Colonials logging off but Wardens logging on. If you look at foxholestats the total population for this war started low compared to previous wars and went even lower up til the middle of the war. Then the population spiked up and continued to ramp up as the Wardens mounted their come back. By the end of the war there were nearly the same number of players online as the 2nd day of the war, whereas usually the game is down to under 75% of day 2 population.
What all of this tells us is that far more Wardens logged on than Colonials logged off. I'm sure some Colonials did log off, but they don't deserve the blame for the loss. That's not where the population imbalance came from.
It was actually both, and colonials logging off is a big part. Much of the war was logging on and seeing low populations in every region despite the wardens being on the offensive. As a colonial, you could log on and fight, but immediately get overwhelmed because your side was underpop
When I played as warden, I never encountered this issue. Major clans ragequitting fucks over a game that relies on team play.
Seems that the only solution is to a) wait until late game to select a faction or b) have two accounts so you can play either side at will.
For the players who only play a few hours a day (not all of us have the autism necessary to spend a day or more in a session), it is ridiculous to have everything screwed over because so many people ragequit.
The population always steadily declines as the war goes on from the day 1 high. This war was unique in that the population started climbing back at the mid war point. What that tells us is that if any Colonials did log off, they were replaced by even more Wardens logging on, because the population continued to climb.
"wardens logged in more in numbers than collie vets logged out"
agreed. no arguing that. but just because wardens logging in more than collies is something that worked as a factor for the result of the war doesnt discard the fact that collies logging off at 25 VPs is also a factor for why we lost and they won.
we had shit ton of supplies in the backlines and lots of tanks yet not enough population to face warden 8+ tank columns even, let alone infantry. my point is "many collie vets and Sigil plebs being defeatist" **also** played a key factor to why the war was lost. if it sounds like im blaming them for loosing a war in a game then im not. its okay to be burned out. im only stating obvious facts here.
There have been people complaining obviously. But it hasn't been like, a melt down. The sentiment I've gathered is "wow we really should have won that one, and we need to make sure our back lines are built up better next time"
Nah, there’s been no SIGIL meltdown, there’s been a few people bitching and complaining but ultimately SIGIL was fairly dead this war.
Toward the end, SIGIL turned into “who can tell the admins to eat glass the most without getting banned”
Late war with all tech unlocked, specifically satchels, it becomes a lot easier to take ground. Wars last a long time because most defenses are as strong Day 1 as they will be at the end of the war, but the tools to destroy them unlock slowly.
They're wrong because they think that all Collie loses are always "long grindy wars" war 82 would beg to differ. This ~12 day turn around would beg to differ. Either faction can have low pop which will then lead to a quick war. Collies aren't some special bunch of super soldiers who always fight it out to the end. And of course neither are the Wardens. We're all just people playing a video game.
War 82 people stopped playing when the Devs announced they were putting a 7 day timer on the war. After which they will give the win to the side with more VP.
Why build? Why try to win when Wardens will have major tech advantage for the rest of the war?
So Wardens won before the timer even came into effect. It was a steam roll because Collies do not always fight to the bitter end like that dude claims. And what do you mean Wardens would have a major tech advantage the rest of the war?
Everyone collectively gave up on a unwinnable war, unwinnable because of a arbitrary dev timer. Nobody built backlines. Nobody did clanman logi. Why do that when the war was guaranteed to end in just a few days? The existence of a timer has a major impact on the game even if Wardens won just before the timer expired.
Wardens have historically had a huge tech tree advantage over Colonials basically from T3 - T9. Depending on your metric, that's from the moment HAC or Cutler unlocks until LTD. Why even try to win in a war where tanks are *guaranteed* to never unlock?
Sidenote: This advantage has been significantly reduced over the last few wars due to some balance changes by the devs. Nowadays Cutler comes later, HAC is much more balanced (due to RAC/Gemini buffs and change in tech tree placement), and the Warden powerspike is "only" Cutler/FC/FM/ATHT deathball.
Kk, so we agree this guy referenced in the post is saying some stupid shit then? Cause Collies aren't full of people who will just always drag every war out to the bitter end. (And again neither are the Wardens, were all just people who chose blue or green in a video game.)
"I DONT WANNA BUILD UP OUR GAINS, I PREFER WAITING 3 HOURS IN QUEUE FOR A FRONTLINE REGION BECAUSE I WANNA HAVE FUN".
this is what made factions losing wars.
When people will understand that they can win this game only when they choose to do useful things over funny things, it would be a great step forward.
You need to reward people for doing the boring part. The ranking system needs a complete overhaul and the developers have spoken about this. If you have spent anytime actually building bases you would find it's very time consuming, tedious and janky as hell. And once you build a base you need to spend time hauling gsups/bsups to keep it from decaying. Which means hoping factories are not queued to hell cause you could be waiting an hour plus for them to be made. Joining a regiment really helps with this process though.
Logistics, even though it's better then before is still tedious but at least you can get rewarded. Driving freighters across five hexes while being completely defenseless is the definition of bad gameplay.
Bottom line is that rank isn't tied to enough factors. Level is but not rank. Rank should take into account a lot of different factors, building, combat, logistics. End of war stats should be a thing and they once were. Who delivered the most? Who killed the most? Who built the most? Who traveled the most in freighters? A little friendly competition in statistics would go a long way.
Give a reason for people not to sit in queues and less people will.
Queues are going to kill this game.I would be willing to give more money to devs if they could change the game engine to support 1000 players per hex but I don't think that will happen.
>War 88 11 days is a short war but the thing is one side didn't push the other to the brink of defeat just to turn it around it was just a slide
>
>Get what I mean here?
Queues are not result of maps unable to support more players but due to imbalances in between numbers on both sides.
Isn't it both? I know a queue becomes a thing if you heavily outnumber the other faction, but if both factions hit a certain number of players in a hex they can both have queues at the same time no? That's why shard 2 became a thing after the sir grafo post too many players per hex on both teams
In 2017 it was communicated maps are limited to 120v120, but then in FAQ they said
Plans to increase the player limit?
We want to! But there are risks. Every time we increase the player limit we increase the strain on some players’ lower-end systems, and the network, and the servers! That’s why the last few times we’ve increased the player count, it was only by an incremental amount. More on this in our general FAQ.
But then in FAQ
How many players will be supported in the full game?
Currently, the game is able to support up to 3000 players in the same world
This all points to game engine can handle more players without issues but your PC would melt if that ever happened.
He's... not wrong, this wan't a short war, it was much longer than 88, 88 being 11 days, this one was 23 days, twice as long.
This takes nothing away from the Warden victory tho you guys fought hard and deserve the W
I'd agree if it wasnt for the fact that the Wardens were pushed back to the point losing 2 more VPs would seal the deal and turned it around in like 12 days
These so called "short war" most were steam rolls not comeback wars
War 88 11 days is a short war but the thing is one side didn't push the other to the brink of defeat just to turn it around it was just a slide
Get what I mean here?
Ok clearly some people loyalists pride are hurt but I assure you, this isn't a faction specific thing it happens on both sides but soon as someone says "our team is better than the others" is where it baffles me
Most common foxhole player would leave either winning or losing mostly because of queues or just don't feel like it, and that is their choice
Leave cause the front is being pushed win or lose players will leave with a bunch of reasons Bunker dead leave the rest of the war, too many queues? leave the war, alts in the walls? leave the war so on and so forth.
Now to the people that saying is this IS a long war and referring to war 88? 11 days was it? The main difference between the 2 is 88 didn't have a team push the enemy on the brink of defeat only to be flipped around within said 11 days that was a steamroll this one is a comeback.
I get it some of the loyalists here would save pride by downplaying it by using all sorts of reasons like bunch of clanmen leaving, or lowpop yadda yadda, it happens to both sides and I know how some of the guys are feeling.
Nobody wants a victory rubbed on their faces as it "grinds our gears" something both sides do like A LOT, and if they managed to irritate you then congrats you fell for what they are after. SALT
I kinda wish this war lasted longer. I wanted to see a Colonial comeback too, but the wars I take part in, my team always seem to lose. Both green and blue.
Point itself still stands most wardens rage quitted after 3rd day until tanks unlocked (you can see everything in foxholestats) and consequently colonials got horrible respawn timers/Queues which lead to colonials leaving.
But this long queues and horrible respawn timers did not repeated instantly to wardens after they logged back in (tanks unlocked) so they steamrolled with 250mm, Tanks, satchels and 150mm.
Also war still took 23 day which means it was not a short war.
Unlike the war 84, 88 and 92.
I played a bit of early war Warden and this wasn't true. Aside from the big ops d1 most vets didn't even bother playing in the first place. There was a massive lack of vets and experienced players, Colonial partisans were just chilling on MAIN logi roads for hours uncontested aside from like 1-2 vets trying to do something about it.
You can kinda feel when most of the faction vets aren't playing. I did see Wardens rage quit wars. But to say Wardens rage quitted this war after the 3rd day is kinda ridiculous. Usually the rage quit comes after a week or after the main lines are broken. Nobody rage quits a war after 3 days with no vehicles and early tech lmao they just weren't here to begin with.
I don't know how Wardens pulled off the comeback I didn't really play much this war was busy with other MMOs but cudos to them. Probably their vets were not burned out since they were away so they came back in full force and kinda it spiraled out of control after collies got burned out pushing across multiple hexes and then see all their hard work undone in couple of days it probably broke their spirits (I can't blame them, would break mine too).
If anything, this war just goes to show both teams are capable of a come back and the loyalist meme of 'only my faction fights to the end' can finally be put to rest I hope.
Looking forward to playing on collies next war hopefully we finish the job this time :D
>Aside from the big ops d1 most vets didn't even bother playing in the first place. There was a massive lack of vets and experienced players
No offense wardens did their best to prevent losing early war and they manage to do at least the ones that played.
You see the "not playing" isnt same as "quitting" but i see no difference between them because they got burned out from last war and they decided quit or skip half of this war.
So according to you, if me and my faction does not bother to play in upcoming wars i can claim that it wasnt quitting but we just not bother playing with this imbalances.
>I did see Wardens rage quit wars. But to say Wardens rage quitted this war after the 3rd day is kinda ridiculous. Usually the rage quit comes after a week or after the main lines are broken. Nobody rage quits a war after 3 days with no vehicles and early tech lmao they just weren't here to begin with.
Its not ridiculus at all. If you lose 2 or more hex in first 3 days of war to a basic Mammon rushes. Check the foxholestats if you want detailed population graph.
Population itself only drops after 2nd day until tanks unlocked starting from losing side then goes to winning side because of queues/respawn timers.
>If anything, this war just goes to show both teams are capable of a come back and the loyalist meme of 'only my faction fights to the end' can finally be put to rest I hope.
I hope that as well but warden "old guard" vets prefer not playing if something goes not in their favor rather than face and overcome.
History almost repeated itself like any other short wars only if colonials had good mid game pve tools not HE and Tremolas until tanks (cutler, 40mm push and 250mm push was in further tier than they were in previous wars be so we couldnt steal enough to brute force concrete).
Note: Those "old guard" vets influence their playerbase and regiment.
**You see the "not playing" isnt same as "quitting" but i see no**
**difference between them because they got burned out from last war and**
**they decided quit or skip half of this war.**
I have no idea what individual motivations are lol I was just making a broad observation from the early war when I was playing. There was a huge lack of vets. To me rage quit = stop playing during the war. So it wasn't rage quit.
Not playing at all is something different. But in the end they did come back so I guess they did play after all xD... Reverse quitting? Lol. I guess its a useful strat though it was hardly a strat it just came out this way. Stars aligned we could say for this come back.
**Its not ridiculus at all. If you lose 2 or more hex in first 3 days of**
**war to a basic Mammon rushes. Check the foxholestats if you want**
**detailed population graph.**
**Population itself only drops after 2nd day until tanks unlocked starting from**
**losing side then goes to winning side because of queues/respawn timers.**
Bro I have seen so many wars and not in a single one of them have vets played from the start to give up 3 days in. Except 82 but that was an exception and understandably so since that war was scuffed asf thanks to the devs declaring they will end it early.
No vet will ever give up before mid game because every T1-T2 base gained can easily be recaptured with mid game tech so the line is still fluid. Only when lines are broken do vets think of giving up that usually starts mid game.
**I hope that as well but warden "old guard" vets prefer not playing if**
**something goes not in their favor rather than face and overcome.**
Anyway, from what I experienced this war from Wardens it was the vets and the so called 'old guard' that were rallying up their people and pushing hard to make the come back happen so I dont think its a fair statement at all.
I do have to say though in wars 80s there was a lot of defeatism spread around, especially in the war 87 when Colonials made a come back and Wardens were all doom and gloom on Discord (not all ofc) spreading defeatism. That was probably the worst case I experienced. But it was mostly coming from randoms. I didn't see much of that anymore after playing Wardens more recently so maybe they did change in that regard. Seems like defeatism was WAAAAAY less than it was in the 80s wars.
Now days it was more of a 'hey we are losing, lets make it fun at least and see what happens' attitude now.
The only problem is you guys, you play and tryhard too much so you give the impression that the game is balanced, do the same thing than the wardens, leave the game and let the wardens have the biggest win streak possible so the next "balance update" will be brutal.
And if after 15 days the war is still on we can all reconnect and enjoy spamming tanks/satchels with our 20sc of respawn timers against a tired and outnumbered faction.
Lmao yeah just cherry pick all the war you want. Remember when collies lost in 6 days? It's just a joke war right? And also collies always have the easy win due to the insanely op early tools, not much to be proud about lmao. Cope on
Well it's true most of you guys left day 2, without the steam sale + summer + holidays + insane queues/respawn timers + lack of midgame PVE stuff this war would over before 10 days.
but... this was a slow grindy 23 day war where the only reason colonials lost is cuz they stopped playing cuz early game wardens quit and then came back...
So we didn't steamroll across the map with no major pushes by the Colonials in about 12 days? Also war 82 would like to talk to you about "slow grindy" Collie loses. This guy is cherry picking his wars. I agree that the win was due to a pop imbalance, but his whole argument was that Collies always stick it out to the very end. Which you, yourself just said that they didn't this war. So yeah, it's aged pretty poorly. Though it wasn't exactly fresh when he said it either.
you see moronic comments like that in all online games. anyone who thinks there is any difference in opposing sides in any game has the smarts of a potato.
Last war I'm sure alot of collie vets left around the same time alot of warden vets came back. That's the only was I can make since of how the war went.
Lol, as if there are any big differences between people playing in one faction or the other.
Just goes to show that if you divide people by shirt color they’ll start making up more fundamental differences between each other
Is Foxhole secretly just a social experiment on how divisions occur and eventually turn into full-scale hatred?
It may very well be one
Probably an unintended outcome. If I was a dev however I would explore that as soon as it became obvious.
I would argue that the actual differences go further than the colours, but there's no huge difference anywhere, but it's *obviously* just the fact that the other side has OP tanks, or more logi, or
Have you not heard? Wardens have an alt cabal, running 24/7 sabotage operations against Colonials. It was a "mathematical certainty" that Wardens were going to lose until they started doing so. ^^I ^^wish ^^I ^^was ^^kidding, ^^there's ^^people ^^overdosing ^^on ^^copium ^^right ^^now ^^that ^^believe ^^this.
Haven't played collies but I've talked with some collies and they've all seemed pretty nice(more than some wardens). Also seems like wardens had more vets and new players and collies are mostly in the middle. Haven't played I'm a few wars though
How can Wardens be awful people yet retain more veteran players and attract more new players? Something in this math equation does not add up.
Wardens are awful people?
inb4 break war
I dont think anyone on the colonial side predicted that major factions would quit all burnt out over some concrete and end up ruining it for the rest of thw colonials
It's really important to note that the deciding factor in this war was not Colonials logging off but Wardens logging on. If you look at foxholestats the total population for this war started low compared to previous wars and went even lower up til the middle of the war. Then the population spiked up and continued to ramp up as the Wardens mounted their come back. By the end of the war there were nearly the same number of players online as the 2nd day of the war, whereas usually the game is down to under 75% of day 2 population. What all of this tells us is that far more Wardens logged on than Colonials logged off. I'm sure some Colonials did log off, but they don't deserve the blame for the loss. That's not where the population imbalance came from.
It was actually both, and colonials logging off is a big part. Much of the war was logging on and seeing low populations in every region despite the wardens being on the offensive. As a colonial, you could log on and fight, but immediately get overwhelmed because your side was underpop
When I played as warden, I never encountered this issue. Major clans ragequitting fucks over a game that relies on team play. Seems that the only solution is to a) wait until late game to select a faction or b) have two accounts so you can play either side at will. For the players who only play a few hours a day (not all of us have the autism necessary to spend a day or more in a session), it is ridiculous to have everything screwed over because so many people ragequit.
nah it was both. the population fluctuated one way\[up till 30/32\] or the other \[warden comeback since fall of jade cove\]
The population always steadily declines as the war goes on from the day 1 high. This war was unique in that the population started climbing back at the mid war point. What that tells us is that if any Colonials did log off, they were replaced by even more Wardens logging on, because the population continued to climb.
"wardens logged in more in numbers than collie vets logged out" agreed. no arguing that. but just because wardens logging in more than collies is something that worked as a factor for the result of the war doesnt discard the fact that collies logging off at 25 VPs is also a factor for why we lost and they won. we had shit ton of supplies in the backlines and lots of tanks yet not enough population to face warden 8+ tank columns even, let alone infantry. my point is "many collie vets and Sigil plebs being defeatist" **also** played a key factor to why the war was lost. if it sounds like im blaming them for loosing a war in a game then im not. its okay to be burned out. im only stating obvious facts here.
I heard rumors of a meltdown on SIGIL. Are you referring to said meltdown?
There have been people complaining obviously. But it hasn't been like, a melt down. The sentiment I've gathered is "wow we really should have won that one, and we need to make sure our back lines are built up better next time"
Nah, there’s been no SIGIL meltdown, there’s been a few people bitching and complaining but ultimately SIGIL was fairly dead this war. Toward the end, SIGIL turned into “who can tell the admins to eat glass the most without getting banned”
No Im not aware of it, but then again I dont recall seeing any SIGIL players. So yeah its probably true.
As much as I don't mind showboating being that specific should render you prepared to eat your own words, applies to both sides obviously
I mean there's nearly a hundred wars to pick from, a single war being against his point isn't exactly something to put him on blast about.
Except they weren't wrong. This war has been long and grinded out.
It was only 23 days... Not even close to a long war.
longer than a short "warden's give up" war
Which both factions have a record of
What's that? I can't hear you over the bell for the Warden victory.
the Losing Phase of it wasn't, which is what the comment is about
Yeah, tbh, we cleared the whole map in around a week.
Late war with all tech unlocked, specifically satchels, it becomes a lot easier to take ground. Wars last a long time because most defenses are as strong Day 1 as they will be at the end of the war, but the tools to destroy them unlock slowly.
It also becomes a lot easier to end a war.
I BLAME THE WARDEN FOR THIS LOSS! I MEAN VICTORY IT AINT OVER YET!
The Colonials took the Wardens to 30/32 in \~12 days. War almost ended because Wardens didn't log on. How are they wrong?
They're wrong because they think that all Collie loses are always "long grindy wars" war 82 would beg to differ. This ~12 day turn around would beg to differ. Either faction can have low pop which will then lead to a quick war. Collies aren't some special bunch of super soldiers who always fight it out to the end. And of course neither are the Wardens. We're all just people playing a video game.
War 82 people stopped playing when the Devs announced they were putting a 7 day timer on the war. After which they will give the win to the side with more VP. Why build? Why try to win when Wardens will have major tech advantage for the rest of the war?
So Wardens won before the timer even came into effect. It was a steam roll because Collies do not always fight to the bitter end like that dude claims. And what do you mean Wardens would have a major tech advantage the rest of the war?
Everyone collectively gave up on a unwinnable war, unwinnable because of a arbitrary dev timer. Nobody built backlines. Nobody did clanman logi. Why do that when the war was guaranteed to end in just a few days? The existence of a timer has a major impact on the game even if Wardens won just before the timer expired. Wardens have historically had a huge tech tree advantage over Colonials basically from T3 - T9. Depending on your metric, that's from the moment HAC or Cutler unlocks until LTD. Why even try to win in a war where tanks are *guaranteed* to never unlock? Sidenote: This advantage has been significantly reduced over the last few wars due to some balance changes by the devs. Nowadays Cutler comes later, HAC is much more balanced (due to RAC/Gemini buffs and change in tech tree placement), and the Warden powerspike is "only" Cutler/FC/FM/ATHT deathball.
Kk, so we agree this guy referenced in the post is saying some stupid shit then? Cause Collies aren't full of people who will just always drag every war out to the bitter end. (And again neither are the Wardens, were all just people who chose blue or green in a video game.)
"I DONT WANNA BUILD UP OUR GAINS, I PREFER WAITING 3 HOURS IN QUEUE FOR A FRONTLINE REGION BECAUSE I WANNA HAVE FUN". this is what made factions losing wars. When people will understand that they can win this game only when they choose to do useful things over funny things, it would be a great step forward.
You need to reward people for doing the boring part. The ranking system needs a complete overhaul and the developers have spoken about this. If you have spent anytime actually building bases you would find it's very time consuming, tedious and janky as hell. And once you build a base you need to spend time hauling gsups/bsups to keep it from decaying. Which means hoping factories are not queued to hell cause you could be waiting an hour plus for them to be made. Joining a regiment really helps with this process though. Logistics, even though it's better then before is still tedious but at least you can get rewarded. Driving freighters across five hexes while being completely defenseless is the definition of bad gameplay. Bottom line is that rank isn't tied to enough factors. Level is but not rank. Rank should take into account a lot of different factors, building, combat, logistics. End of war stats should be a thing and they once were. Who delivered the most? Who killed the most? Who built the most? Who traveled the most in freighters? A little friendly competition in statistics would go a long way. Give a reason for people not to sit in queues and less people will.
Ah yes, just like war 90.
Clearly a nub never attended to war 75, the bloodiest and longest war before map expansion
How long was this war?
23 days, according to foxholestats
Queues are going to kill this game.I would be willing to give more money to devs if they could change the game engine to support 1000 players per hex but I don't think that will happen.
>War 88 11 days is a short war but the thing is one side didn't push the other to the brink of defeat just to turn it around it was just a slide > >Get what I mean here? Queues are not result of maps unable to support more players but due to imbalances in between numbers on both sides.
Isn't it both? I know a queue becomes a thing if you heavily outnumber the other faction, but if both factions hit a certain number of players in a hex they can both have queues at the same time no? That's why shard 2 became a thing after the sir grafo post too many players per hex on both teams
In 2017 it was communicated maps are limited to 120v120, but then in FAQ they said Plans to increase the player limit? We want to! But there are risks. Every time we increase the player limit we increase the strain on some players’ lower-end systems, and the network, and the servers! That’s why the last few times we’ve increased the player count, it was only by an incremental amount. More on this in our general FAQ. But then in FAQ How many players will be supported in the full game? Currently, the game is able to support up to 3000 players in the same world This all points to game engine can handle more players without issues but your PC would melt if that ever happened.
He's... not wrong, this wan't a short war, it was much longer than 88, 88 being 11 days, this one was 23 days, twice as long. This takes nothing away from the Warden victory tho you guys fought hard and deserve the W
I'd agree if it wasnt for the fact that the Wardens were pushed back to the point losing 2 more VPs would seal the deal and turned it around in like 12 days These so called "short war" most were steam rolls not comeback wars War 88 11 days is a short war but the thing is one side didn't push the other to the brink of defeat just to turn it around it was just a slide Get what I mean here?
Ok clearly some people loyalists pride are hurt but I assure you, this isn't a faction specific thing it happens on both sides but soon as someone says "our team is better than the others" is where it baffles me Most common foxhole player would leave either winning or losing mostly because of queues or just don't feel like it, and that is their choice Leave cause the front is being pushed win or lose players will leave with a bunch of reasons Bunker dead leave the rest of the war, too many queues? leave the war, alts in the walls? leave the war so on and so forth. Now to the people that saying is this IS a long war and referring to war 88? 11 days was it? The main difference between the 2 is 88 didn't have a team push the enemy on the brink of defeat only to be flipped around within said 11 days that was a steamroll this one is a comeback. I get it some of the loyalists here would save pride by downplaying it by using all sorts of reasons like bunch of clanmen leaving, or lowpop yadda yadda, it happens to both sides and I know how some of the guys are feeling. Nobody wants a victory rubbed on their faces as it "grinds our gears" something both sides do like A LOT, and if they managed to irritate you then congrats you fell for what they are after. SALT
I kinda wish this war lasted longer. I wanted to see a Colonial comeback too, but the wars I take part in, my team always seem to lose. Both green and blue.
*warden rips bong* WOOOOO HOOOO, ok shit lips *biggest cumback war to date*
I would still rate 61 as the biggest warden comeback.
that was a fantastic war
Point itself still stands most wardens rage quitted after 3rd day until tanks unlocked (you can see everything in foxholestats) and consequently colonials got horrible respawn timers/Queues which lead to colonials leaving. But this long queues and horrible respawn timers did not repeated instantly to wardens after they logged back in (tanks unlocked) so they steamrolled with 250mm, Tanks, satchels and 150mm. Also war still took 23 day which means it was not a short war. Unlike the war 84, 88 and 92.
I played a bit of early war Warden and this wasn't true. Aside from the big ops d1 most vets didn't even bother playing in the first place. There was a massive lack of vets and experienced players, Colonial partisans were just chilling on MAIN logi roads for hours uncontested aside from like 1-2 vets trying to do something about it. You can kinda feel when most of the faction vets aren't playing. I did see Wardens rage quit wars. But to say Wardens rage quitted this war after the 3rd day is kinda ridiculous. Usually the rage quit comes after a week or after the main lines are broken. Nobody rage quits a war after 3 days with no vehicles and early tech lmao they just weren't here to begin with. I don't know how Wardens pulled off the comeback I didn't really play much this war was busy with other MMOs but cudos to them. Probably their vets were not burned out since they were away so they came back in full force and kinda it spiraled out of control after collies got burned out pushing across multiple hexes and then see all their hard work undone in couple of days it probably broke their spirits (I can't blame them, would break mine too). If anything, this war just goes to show both teams are capable of a come back and the loyalist meme of 'only my faction fights to the end' can finally be put to rest I hope. Looking forward to playing on collies next war hopefully we finish the job this time :D
>Aside from the big ops d1 most vets didn't even bother playing in the first place. There was a massive lack of vets and experienced players No offense wardens did their best to prevent losing early war and they manage to do at least the ones that played. You see the "not playing" isnt same as "quitting" but i see no difference between them because they got burned out from last war and they decided quit or skip half of this war. So according to you, if me and my faction does not bother to play in upcoming wars i can claim that it wasnt quitting but we just not bother playing with this imbalances. >I did see Wardens rage quit wars. But to say Wardens rage quitted this war after the 3rd day is kinda ridiculous. Usually the rage quit comes after a week or after the main lines are broken. Nobody rage quits a war after 3 days with no vehicles and early tech lmao they just weren't here to begin with. Its not ridiculus at all. If you lose 2 or more hex in first 3 days of war to a basic Mammon rushes. Check the foxholestats if you want detailed population graph. Population itself only drops after 2nd day until tanks unlocked starting from losing side then goes to winning side because of queues/respawn timers. >If anything, this war just goes to show both teams are capable of a come back and the loyalist meme of 'only my faction fights to the end' can finally be put to rest I hope. I hope that as well but warden "old guard" vets prefer not playing if something goes not in their favor rather than face and overcome. History almost repeated itself like any other short wars only if colonials had good mid game pve tools not HE and Tremolas until tanks (cutler, 40mm push and 250mm push was in further tier than they were in previous wars be so we couldnt steal enough to brute force concrete). Note: Those "old guard" vets influence their playerbase and regiment.
**You see the "not playing" isnt same as "quitting" but i see no** **difference between them because they got burned out from last war and** **they decided quit or skip half of this war.** I have no idea what individual motivations are lol I was just making a broad observation from the early war when I was playing. There was a huge lack of vets. To me rage quit = stop playing during the war. So it wasn't rage quit. Not playing at all is something different. But in the end they did come back so I guess they did play after all xD... Reverse quitting? Lol. I guess its a useful strat though it was hardly a strat it just came out this way. Stars aligned we could say for this come back. **Its not ridiculus at all. If you lose 2 or more hex in first 3 days of** **war to a basic Mammon rushes. Check the foxholestats if you want** **detailed population graph.** **Population itself only drops after 2nd day until tanks unlocked starting from** **losing side then goes to winning side because of queues/respawn timers.** Bro I have seen so many wars and not in a single one of them have vets played from the start to give up 3 days in. Except 82 but that was an exception and understandably so since that war was scuffed asf thanks to the devs declaring they will end it early. No vet will ever give up before mid game because every T1-T2 base gained can easily be recaptured with mid game tech so the line is still fluid. Only when lines are broken do vets think of giving up that usually starts mid game. **I hope that as well but warden "old guard" vets prefer not playing if** **something goes not in their favor rather than face and overcome.** Anyway, from what I experienced this war from Wardens it was the vets and the so called 'old guard' that were rallying up their people and pushing hard to make the come back happen so I dont think its a fair statement at all. I do have to say though in wars 80s there was a lot of defeatism spread around, especially in the war 87 when Colonials made a come back and Wardens were all doom and gloom on Discord (not all ofc) spreading defeatism. That was probably the worst case I experienced. But it was mostly coming from randoms. I didn't see much of that anymore after playing Wardens more recently so maybe they did change in that regard. Seems like defeatism was WAAAAAY less than it was in the 80s wars. Now days it was more of a 'hey we are losing, lets make it fun at least and see what happens' attitude now.
The only problem is you guys, you play and tryhard too much so you give the impression that the game is balanced, do the same thing than the wardens, leave the game and let the wardens have the biggest win streak possible so the next "balance update" will be brutal. And if after 15 days the war is still on we can all reconnect and enjoy spamming tanks/satchels with our 20sc of respawn timers against a tired and outnumbered faction.
Lmao yeah just cherry pick all the war you want. Remember when collies lost in 6 days? It's just a joke war right? And also collies always have the easy win due to the insanely op early tools, not much to be proud about lmao. Cope on
This is the Copium equivalent of Yellowcake Uranium.
Well it's true most of you guys left day 2, without the steam sale + summer + holidays + insane queues/respawn timers + lack of midgame PVE stuff this war would over before 10 days.
but... this was a slow grindy 23 day war where the only reason colonials lost is cuz they stopped playing cuz early game wardens quit and then came back...
So we didn't steamroll across the map with no major pushes by the Colonials in about 12 days? Also war 82 would like to talk to you about "slow grindy" Collie loses. This guy is cherry picking his wars. I agree that the win was due to a pop imbalance, but his whole argument was that Collies always stick it out to the very end. Which you, yourself just said that they didn't this war. So yeah, it's aged pretty poorly. Though it wasn't exactly fresh when he said it either.
so we made cheesE?
Well ,T3C lad said truth we fought to last man , we just runner out of manpower.
That grammar has me smelling burnt toast and tasting pennies.
you see moronic comments like that in all online games. anyone who thinks there is any difference in opposing sides in any game has the smarts of a potato.
war 88 wasn't even a real war. We all let it end because we were getting Logi update in war 89 so no one actually fought back.
Last war I'm sure alot of collie vets left around the same time alot of warden vets came back. That's the only was I can make since of how the war went.