Author Topic: How i'd like to see stratergy evolve. What do you think?  (Read 862 times)

Offline ft

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 39
      • http://www.sparta.lu.se/~ft/
How i'd like to see stratergy evolve. What do you think?
« Reply #15 on: October 07, 1999, 07:19:00 AM »
Another example of good thinking on here.

Why would this give an FPS hit? It'd all be handled on the server. We'd probably need more ground targets, but except for that...

Offline Jekyll

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 89
      • http://www.bigpond.net.au/phoenix
How i'd like to see stratergy evolve. What do you think?
« Reply #16 on: October 07, 1999, 09:21:00 AM »
I may be preaching to the converted here, but after quite a few years playing other online flight sims I've come to the conclusion that the key to strategy are the buffs.

But more importantly, the ACCURACY of the buffs.  

Why do you need an armada of 5 buffs to close/capture a field, bridge, target etc when 1 buff, flying at 25k can carry 12 500 pounders and drop them one at a time and never miss?

If the buffs in WW2 had been that accurate, would they have needed thousand plane raids?

But if your bombsight in a buff was not a crosshair, but a circle which grew larger with altitude, then buffs would need to pattern bomb in order to have a fair chance of getting their targets.  Therefore, more buffs needed to take down all the targets at a field etc.

The more buffs you put together in formation, the more escorts you need to fend off enemy fighters (which would need to attack in squad strength against combined otto).

Stepping down from my soapbox now  

------------------
C.O. Phoenix Squadron
www.users.bigpond.com/afinlayson/index.htm
'feel the heat .......'

Offline jmccaul

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1
How i'd like to see stratergy evolve. What do you think?
« Reply #17 on: October 08, 1999, 06:16:00 PM »
I like the idea rojo and would like to see it implemented somewhere at some time. The only problems would be fine tuning it so it didn't depend on everyone following every directive it gives (I mean if it gives you a message defend the bridge from the enemy aramarda and only a P51 and a b17 turn up it rather negates the point)Also there should be room for those who don't want to follow a system rigorously. The other problem is someone has to work out and write the system  
Hope some one will do this soon but in the meanwhile i still would like to see just a need for lots of bombs on a target in a short space of time to encourage more loose formation flying in the main arena's with objectives to bomb and escort.  

[This message has been edited by jmccaul (edited 10-08-1999).]

Herc

  • Guest
How i'd like to see stratergy evolve. What do you think?
« Reply #18 on: October 10, 1999, 08:20:00 PM »
I like the dynamic campaign idea.  It would set this sim apart from previous on-line sims.  You have to walk before you run, hopefully we'll see something like this once they get the basics done.

The fields are far enough apart in my opinion.  I wouldn't want a 10 minute commute just to find a fight.  It seems that alot of the big furballs are between fields which seems ideal to me.

I also don't think it's fair to limit plane availablity in any way.  This will punish new players or sides with the fewer numbers.