Q: If you make them land, you should get the kill. Another 09 F4 i've made crash land into a random field today. But couldnt strafe intime till he despawns, so i dont get the kill. If ive shot them so much they cant do anything apart from land, it should be my kill.

DOC : We agree to some extent. However it’s not as easy to correct as might be imagined, and until we can rewrite the scoring system there really isn’t anything we can do about this. We don’t award kills based on just hitting something, there is an underlying necessity to score a “critical hit” disabling the vehicles combat ability before we award kills, otherwise merely hitting a tank with a rifle would be grounds for a “kill”. The current scoring system can’t tell the difference between a tank hit by a rifle and a plane hit by a rifle, nor can it tell if the plane landed or was ditched. So deciding how to return values to a database that are different based on qualitative judgments (you say you made that plane ditch with a few MG rounds, fine, but the system must know how to differentiate that from a tank hit by a few MG rounds and despawning) requires a great deal more definition and feedback than the scoring system can use presently. Ultimately you are right, and we here at CRS agree that this is the direction we want to go in respect to better scoring of despawn situations. We don’t really like our current scoring system much at all if you need confirmation that there are changes planned for the future.

Q: How about showing Dmg aswell as killed in the CSR stats? Often you can hit alot of planes, but you only get so many kills with AAA.

GOPHUR: We currently track hits in the game under the kills tab but we've never translated that to CSR because it has no effect on scoring. I can see where it might be of some benefit to our beleaguered AAA troops though, what with kills so often hard to come by. You guys do a real service to the team though so I'll ask RAMP what he thinks can be done about it.

Q: 1.31 Weather: Any chance for snow? =] I want to take my panzer through snow like the Ardennes offensive or the bitter winters during the Eastern Front campaign.

RAFTER: Of course, not for 1.31 :) Our current "weather" really has little to do with a season like winter. It would take new textures for ground, roads, etc etc. We'd also have to swap out tree models which will make the library a lot bigger. No short term plans for winter I'm afraid.

Q: Stug 3G AP / HE rangefactor? Ok, i have my target at 1000m, firing AP.If i switch to HE, what range must i dial in? Is there any factor i can use?
 
DOC : There really isn’t anything that simple that you can just “dial in” without the practice that will teach it to you. When we play the game ourselves, we have to learn how to deal with the ballistic aspects of gunnery just like you do. Every combat unit in the game has its own properties that differ from the other units you might be familiar with (or not) and each has to be trained with to become an expert at using it. The difference between the AP and HE ballistics and down range performance in the StuG.IIIg and those of say the M10-Wolverine (or between any two different tanks to be honest) are differences that are not identical for each tank, and so you have to train on each one to become expert at using it and knowing how to employ your unit better than the guy you are fighting.
 
Q: Is just the front foyer of the new railroad station we see on the image the capture area, or is it on the platforms "downstairs"? (The platforms do still exist, right!? There's some external stairs to get down to them?) I think I will ask the obvious: The big stations are still capture-able, aren't they?

DEKARD: Yes the stations are capturable. The actual capture area is the front hallway/foyer and the two hallways on the sides. The downstairs platform is part of the city tile, not the building tile and will not trigger capture. The platforms are still there, yes, and there is a narrow stairway on both sides of the station (behind the crates leading down to them.

Q: Will there be an increase in the visible player limit with 1.31?

GOPHUR: No. we've spent most of our host time getting China working and some other things done behind the scenes to support new features. We are changing the minimum spec for our computers to require a broadband connection but the increase in player vis limit needs to be predicated on a new infantry system both host side for less bandwidth and client side for increased performance. Not quite ready to do that yet.

Q: My squad does quite a few multicrew level bombing runs. We have become pretty good at hitting the ab within 50m give or take of the veh spawn from 2k. Since we are using DB-7's considering thier speed we tried using the tools in the plane: IE he moves sight left right and I adjust from line in pilot position. If we could get a line to target similiar to the lines connecting bgds that can be toggles on and off but perhaps a little finer it would work wonders on lining up on target well before we get there that way I can adjust for any slip in the plane. The way we do it now works but the compass can be a little blurry and not as exact as we would prefer even with my res turned up fairly high.

DOC : I can see where you’re coming from, and it would make things easier. However there are a number of issues: The first would be that this isn’t actually possible at present because we have no way to plug your GUI map into the physics generator, which would be required in order to base the “line” you seek off the actual flight profile of your aircraft. Without that ability, it would never be accurate. This would be a lot of work to do in code and while I wouldn’t discount its possibility completely, it would be crazy to think it could be considered a short term proposition either. 
Secondly, I wonder if this makes it too easy? It would be a shame to remove the need for skills to be learned and to allow those hard earned skills to help separate the winners from the losers. I mean we could just create a “push button enemy die” approach that removed all skill and expertise (I exaggerate of course, but only to make the point) that in the end would simply remove all bragging rights since now … well anyone “can do it”.
 
The point is we always have to draw a line between what is too hard and what is too easy. Most games favour too easy over too hard, we know why that is, but we tend to favour leaving some difficulty in the game so you don’t become a war weary expert in 6 weeks. If you get to “I can do everything pretty good” too quickly, you aren’t playing the game 6 months from now, because it isn’t a challenge anymore. We don’t want too much challenge of course, but we also don’t want too little.

Q: New RR stations. Crates should be inside.Who is going to make defensive psoitions and then block LOS with a bunch of crates?

DEKARD: The external crates were added to create more play areas and additional concealment from tanks and other infantry. They are also ideal height for LMG/ATR deployment. The sandbag bunkers are more suited to kneeling height.

Q: New Factory System Idea: Instead of only having Axis factories and allied factories I think there should be neutral capturable factories in big towns such as Lux and Antwerp. These factories would have a timer like Abs and would be called Industry while the main factories would be Heavy Industry.

GOPHUR: It's a great idea and one we thought about when we put in the original factories like the Beer Factory in Chimay and the Bicycle Factory in Antwerp. there are just a couple of problems though. First we don't have a concept for neutral though we would like to overcome that. Secondly and more importantly it turns out the players don't like the idea of having RDP messed with. Our original plans allowed players to affect the RDP cycle times by bombing the factory and the HC could choose which weapons sets to get next. The boots on the ground really didn't like it, or at least the vocal ones. So instead we're looking at allowing Victory Points to be awarded for many aspects of the game including bombing of RDP factories. When we do this we might revisit some of those factories and new ones, to provide Victory for ownership and for bombing. Then we could have more factories that aren't in the rear and provide new targets for all to be concerned about.

Q: HC Ability to Stop FB/Veh Spawning? As we all know, one or two tanks or atg's can shut down an fb or veh spawn and cause a massive waste of equipment. What if hc had the ability through the map to shut down a veh spawn or fb? Once the threat is gone it can be opened again. It would give a tool to hc to reduce the amount of wasted equipment etc.

GOPHUR: I think that until we have more places for players to spawn it would cause a general revolt. The premise is in the right place though and when we can have dynamic origins and multiple origins I think we can look at allowing something like this. I also think we should still look at some mechanism that was spawn camped, similar to what we do with equipment that was not in combat but despawned. That equipment returns to the spawn list in 15 minutes as long as it was not damaged. I'll talk to the team about this and see what we can come up with.

Q: Will there be load out options available(1.31? 1.40? Never?) for the bombers? Choose different size bombs or even torps?

GOPHUR: Not on the horizon at this point though the horizon doesn't go much past 1.32.

Q: How easy would it be for CRS to server track DD shells? I would enjoy that, because indirect shelling currently is like shooting a needle in a haystack, and I would like to explore its potential. Maybe they could at least increse the 127mm's distance setting over 6k.

GOPHUR: I think we answered this last week but it was bombs. Same thing. It's not server tracking the bombs the way we do grenades. The issue is that we need to get the information to targets that are not currently on the vis list of the firing client. This is pretty major, which is why it has yet to be done. On the list but I don't have an answer to when.
 
Q: There is a concern, or should I say a feeling, that the air war is being slowly separated from the ground one. Ya the new toys are cool, but I'm talking about gameplay. The Hangar really want to know what is going to happen with the strategic warfare aspect of the airwar, and the tactical aspect? What kind of new targets or objectives can we expect that will diversify the air war from the simple "strafe stuff on ground and shoot the guys strafing the stuff ". What kind of game play changes can we expect that will "re-integrate" air into the war, rather than simply being a sideshow?

GOPHUR: I'm always open to suggestion but I'd say the thing I am most interested in is the Victory concept. Allowing the bombing of factories and other strategic (read new) locations to add to the winning of the map and not just having the game be a "capture the whole map" scenario.  Sure, there would still be a lot of focus on capturing and holding territory but that change would allow the air game to have multiple impacts. First you help win the war by dominating the tactical air space and helping the ground war advance.  Secondly you would have a real need to advance the strategic bombing campaign because you would directly (much more so that what we can allow with current RDP impact) influence the winning of the war. I can't think of a better way to give meaning to the air game than that.