Author Topic: The Aces High War Doctrine  (Read 10538 times)

Offline Agent360

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 780
      • http://troywardphotography.com
The Aces High War Doctrine
« on: July 10, 2010, 05:22:50 AM »
I think Hitech wants to create a situation where the game is centered around COMBAT.

I think Hitech defines "combat" as the attack of bases with an equal defense.

This is called a "doctrine".

In reality, every country in history has adopted a "war doctrine" since time immoral.

This game; this virtual reality we spend many hours in is no different. Within this construct of virtual reality there is a "doctrine" that guides the whole event.

In the most basic form the doctrine states that combat is the primary goal.

In the simplest terms...if your red your dead.

The problem arises when the doctrine is ignored. For whatever reason, the chess pieces shun combat in favor of other rewards such as score, social interaction or simple mindless game play without interuption.

But, if a well defined doctrine is set in place then victory can be defined within the Aces High construct. I believe this is the "holy grale" that HiTech is searching for. I am not sure that this is possible. However, I do believe HiTech is working extremely hard to succeed at this goal.

There have been many, many suggestions on how to improve the Aces High Doctrine. These suggestion have all centered around how to create combat in one form or another. But, these suggestions have only been minor, favoring one specific component of the doctrine of combat.

When any person chooses to pay and play this game I think it is reasonable to assume they expect to engage in combat. The simple doctrine of "combat" sounds simple but as everyone knows this seemingly simple concept becomes quite complicated.

If I am correct, the game is centered around a strategic goal of capturing enough bases to "win" the map. Thus we have a map reset. There is a concrete victory...something one can strive for...a reason to have COMBAT.

It is my opinion that as the game exists now the doctrine even in its simplest form can not be realized. The "soldiers" simply can not see any reward for their efforts.

In order for the simple doctrine of "combat" to happen the map must be set such that there is reward in a timely mannor..not weeks but days.

If it was possible to achieve victory over a shorter period of time this would put reward in perspective. As it is now there is no reward because it is impossible to achieve victory in any players time frame. There is just an endless, never ending scenario where no reward can be achieved. Only score is measured. No country can claim victory.

The scale of the war is just to big. There are not enough players to create enough critical mass for measurable victory in the minds of each individual player. It is just a mindless, never ending, black hole.

This, I believe is the result of the one thing that creates combat to begin with; Maps.

HiTech has created a most excellent game...it is perfect in almost every way. The only reason there is no holy grale is because the maps are not part of the doctrine.


Offline bmwgs

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 808
Re: The Aces High War Doctrine
« Reply #1 on: July 10, 2010, 06:20:07 AM »
A well thought out post, and in most cases I agree with you. 

As for the assumption that every player expects combat, that where I differ a bit.  First one would have to define "combat".  I'm not talking about the dictionary meaning, but what is the meaning of combat to an individual player.  Like general opinions, the personal definitions of player of what combat is will differ from player to player.  For example, one player's idea of combat is going in mass and obtaining a few kills with little or no risk, where another will only define is as a head to head contest.  This is where I believe it would be difficult for HiTech or anyone else to find the "Holy Grale" of combat, or implement a "War Doctrine" that will cover all individual's personal ideas of what combat is.

Good post.  :aok

Fred

PS: "If I am correct, the game is centered around a strategic goal of capturing enough bases to "win" the map." I may be wrong, but I'm willing to bet this statement is going to open a can of worms.   :D
One of the serious problems in planning the fight against American doctrine, is that the Americans do not read their manuals, nor do they feel any obligation to follow their doctrine... - From a Soviet Junior Lt's Notebook

Offline TEShaw

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 817
Re: The Aces High War Doctrine
« Reply #2 on: July 10, 2010, 06:57:29 AM »

In reality, every country in history has adopted a "war doctrine" since time immoral.


"immoral", really?

Offline fbWldcat

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2970
Re: The Aces High War Doctrine
« Reply #3 on: July 10, 2010, 07:09:18 AM »
"immoral", really?

Yes thank you Mrs. English.

Sounds about right Agent360. I believe that HTC has said before that the game is in truth centered around Combat, the bases and supply fields are meant to create such combat. I'm not fully comprehending how the maps come into this though. (Could just be the fact I just woke up).
Landing is overrated.
"Two roads diverged in a wood, and I: I took the one less traveled by." - Robert Frost
"Uncommon valor was a common virtue." <S>

Offline TEShaw

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 817
Re: The Aces High War Doctrine
« Reply #4 on: July 10, 2010, 07:14:50 AM »
Yes thank you Mrs. English.


There ought be a comma after, "Yes", DOLT!

Offline fbWldcat

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2970
Re: The Aces High War Doctrine
« Reply #5 on: July 10, 2010, 07:17:33 AM »
(Could just be the fact I just woke up).

Hint hint. Get it?
Landing is overrated.
"Two roads diverged in a wood, and I: I took the one less traveled by." - Robert Frost
"Uncommon valor was a common virtue." <S>

Offline TEShaw

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 817
Re: The Aces High War Doctrine
« Reply #6 on: July 10, 2010, 07:20:51 AM »
Hint hint. Get it?

Hint [comma] hint [semi-colon] get it?

Offline fudgums

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3870
Re: The Aces High War Doctrine
« Reply #7 on: July 10, 2010, 07:23:46 AM »
 :lol fail wildcat
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27

Offline fbWldcat

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2970
Re: The Aces High War Doctrine
« Reply #8 on: July 10, 2010, 07:23:55 AM »
Hint [comma] hint [semi-colon] get it?

You're taking up vital bandwidth and also hijacking the thread.

Landing is overrated.
"Two roads diverged in a wood, and I: I took the one less traveled by." - Robert Frost
"Uncommon valor was a common virtue." <S>

Offline fbWldcat

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2970
Re: The Aces High War Doctrine
« Reply #9 on: July 10, 2010, 07:27:01 AM »
Fly far away, Mrs. English.

Fudgums do you have to have Phil Harris as your Avatar? I miss that guy! Best Skipper in the fleet!

Now I have to root for Sig and the Northwestern.  :noid

Anyway, back to the original intent of the thread.
Landing is overrated.
"Two roads diverged in a wood, and I: I took the one less traveled by." - Robert Frost
"Uncommon valor was a common virtue." <S>

Offline fudgums

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3870
Re: The Aces High War Doctrine
« Reply #10 on: July 10, 2010, 07:36:59 AM »
Fly far away, Mrs. English.

Fudgums do you have to have Phil Harris as your Avatar? I miss that guy! Best Skipper in the fleet!

Now I have to root for Sig and the Northwestern.  :noid

Anyway, back to the original intent of the thread.

yep thats him   :(
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27

Offline Tec

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1738
Re: The Aces High War Doctrine
« Reply #11 on: July 10, 2010, 07:46:25 AM »
Don't mind TE, he's just killing time while his Dora is at 20k on autopilot running from cons 5k below him.
To each their pwn.
K$22L7AoH

Offline TnDep

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1705
Re: The Aces High War Doctrine
« Reply #12 on: July 10, 2010, 08:16:09 AM »
Very well spoken Agent and I would just like to add one other equation to this:

The reward factor for putting up a fight to not lose your bases is not enough.  25 points per category for the amount of time spent is hardly worth the effort this is why the majority isn't worried about base captures or defending against base captures.

Now if this was changed to lets say 50 points per category per hour spent in the game on that country side I believe it'd be a different story.

Example: 10 hours spent in game on winning country side and your online at the time of the war being won you'd receive 500 points per category

Example: 50 hours spent in game on winning country side and your online at the time of the war being won you'd receive 2500 points per category


~XO Top Gun~ Retired
When you think you know it all, someone almost always proves you wrong.  Always strive to be better then who you are as a person, a believer, a husband, a father, and a friend.  May peace be in your life and God Bless - TnDep

Offline OOZ662

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7019
Re: The Aces High War Doctrine
« Reply #13 on: July 10, 2010, 08:25:23 AM »
There ought be a comma after, "Yes", DOLT!

When quoting, the comma goes inside the quotes. I believe the first comma was also unnecessary as well as the capitalization, but those I'm not sure of.

As to the OP, I agree. To achieve a point where the "furballers" and the "land grabbers" can move toward the same goal (fight over a base until it is captured) would be perfect. Personally, I think we were closer to that back in Aces High I. Then again, we didn't have as many players back then.
A Rook who first flew 09/26/03 at the age of 13, has been a GL in 10+ Scenarios, and was two-time Points and First Annual 68KO Cup winner of the AH Extreme Air Racing League.

Offline ink

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11274
Re: The Aces High War Doctrine
« Reply #14 on: July 10, 2010, 08:27:40 AM »
Very well spoken Agent and I would just like to add one other equation to this:

The reward factor for putting up a fight to not lose your bases is not enough.  25 points per category for the amount of time spent is hardly worth the effort this is why the majority isn't worried about base captures or defending against base captures.

Now if this was changed to lets say 50 points per category per hour spent in the game on that country side I believe it'd be a different story.

Example: 10 hours spent in game on winning country side and your online at the time of the war being won you'd receive 500 points per category

Example: 50 hours spent in game on winning country side and your online at the time of the war being won you'd receive 2500 points per category

that would promote not switching sides to even numbers or find a fight.