Author Topic: HTC, pay attention on strat gameplay pls.  (Read 1344 times)

Offline Kermit de frog

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3708
      • LGM Films
HTC, pay attention on strat gameplay pls.
« Reply #15 on: November 21, 2004, 04:44:45 PM »
Kweassa, you shouldn't talk so much about fighting.  Your style of fighting, means this...

"If I think i'll lose the fight, I'll run away, or out climb the guy and wait for him to get bored and fly away, and that will be when i attack."

And you will repeat that process.

BORING  

Why don't you just try and do something other than bnz the guy.

If I'm fighting a guy and losing angles, I'll try a different approach.
If I lose, oh well, the other guy beat me.  

Some may say that your way is a smart way of fight, but your way makes it boring for others  (if you care about others and not just yourself).  Besides, you won't get any better at fighting if you continue to do what you do.

Learn to fight you PU$$.
Time's fun when you're having flies.

Offline Kweassa

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6425
HTC, pay attention on strat gameplay pls.
« Reply #16 on: November 21, 2004, 09:55:12 PM »
Awww Kermit, stop being the little man who holds an arena grudge inside himself. Only a headcase would still be mad of losing a single fight in the MA, and then involving the grudge into everything he sees on a discussion board, sheesh.

 Get a life dude.



Quote
Hmmm, and why you guys are so agressive?


Quote
The idea of structuring the MA in some military/rank type fashion is the BEST way to make sure HT goes out of business. The CT is for structured planesets, the MA is for flying/doing what you want.


 Lute, Fariz, we're not being aggressive about anything. Thinking that the current MA has no 'structuring' at all is a big sham, a fantasy.

 For instance, the perk system is a form of basic structuring in terms of gameplay balance. HTC doesn't want some planes flying too much in the MA, so they slap perks on it. It's a basic means of limitation.

 What about your suggestions of increasing a few objects or toughening some things up, and etc?

 It's also another form of limiting some actions and tendencies in the game - albeit indirectly. You hope to make some actions difficult or easier, hoping that people will stop acting in certain ways, and start acting another way. That's also a form of "structuring".

 What we're aggressive about is acknowledging what the reality is.

 The phenomenon behind the current problems in the MA is simply that people don't want "fun" in the first place. They react to the environment they're given, and find the most profittable, easiest way to do certain things, and that is creating the horde.

 The 'hordeness' is inherent in the system. Unless there is some direct means of intervention to limit the size of hordes no small change will ever influence this mainstream.

 It's not I object to your suggestions. I'm only saying it will not achieve the intended effect, and remain just another small experiment.. like the ones we had with towns, fuels, field layouts.. and etc etc. Remember those previous experiments. People came up with each of those ideas in hopes to change the gameplay to the better, stop the hording, make people practice better coordination for captures, etc etc.

 None of them worked.

 And I'm aggressive about acknowledging the fact that none of them ever will.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2004, 09:58:16 PM by Kweassa »

Offline GreenCloud

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1365
HTC, pay attention on strat gameplay pls.
« Reply #17 on: November 21, 2004, 10:50:35 PM »
I Love the MA...



IT is DAM FUN...


I love bomn CVs

I love Furballn....

I dotn like purse swingn

I love Killn GVS with planes


Its Dam FUN...Thank you HTC ...I enjoy the way this game plays in MA...So do many many many more who dotn ever visit this BB



BTW..the rest of you guys...TOD  TOD!!!!...I will love to fly msiions on a 24hour basis in there..sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeett

beetle..shut ur whole..u dont even play the game..Dont talk about limiting what i fly..screw that..

It is my money..and its CALLED THE MAIN ARENA....FREE FIRE ZONE!!!...and it is Fing GREAT...


Furballs....misssions..Duels. ...Jabo...Defense..It has it ALL!!!! 24 hours aday...

Offline beet1e

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7848
HTC, pay attention on strat gameplay pls.
« Reply #18 on: November 22, 2004, 02:35:27 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by GreenCloud
beetle..shut ur whole..u dont even play the game..Dont talk about limiting what i fly..screw that..
Oh! But aren't I even allowed to join discussions in which I talk about WHY I don't play the game?



Fariz - my "aggressive" comments were not directed at you. When I flew Bish, I remember you as a good tactician/strategist, although you tended to use the numerical supremacy smashdown/horde option.

I still think of Rod367 as the master strategist. :aok

Offline mechanic

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11327
HTC, pay attention on strat gameplay pls.
« Reply #19 on: November 22, 2004, 03:00:42 AM »
to be honest beetle, MA is sometimes alot of fun, and you're not giving any possitive view, so i agree with BGB. SHUT YA HOLE
:)

batfink
And I don't know much, but I do know this. With a golden heart comes a rebel fist.

Offline beet1e

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7848
HTC, pay attention on strat gameplay pls.
« Reply #20 on: November 22, 2004, 05:45:04 AM »
Whoa there, BGB/Mechanic. I spoke to agree with something Kweassa posted, and then to recall past posts. I could see nothing in Pyro's list of BBS rules preventing me as a retired player from doing this.

However, I should draw your attention to Rule 6, which states
Quote
6- Members are asked to not act as "back seat moderators". Issues with any breach of rules should be brought to HTC's attention via email at support@hitechcreations.com.
:)

Offline Tilt

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7358
      • FullTilt
HTC, pay attention on strat gameplay pls.
« Reply #21 on: November 22, 2004, 06:11:43 AM »
I am not sure whether or not it would change horde stuff but I would like the field strat objects to be either more numerous or harder............

presently........

A single Typhoon with cannon can

kill all the infantry

destroy all the supplies

destroy all the ordinance

reduce fuel to 75%

on any field (large or small)


With the new bombing model and the B24J a single formation can kill all fighter hangers and the VH on a small base................

Whilst this is so easy we stop the land grab by entering into pork wars............. its a matter of balance IMO.

Whilst the land grab focusses on field v field attrition and capture, pork will always be a feature........... hence its  balance is critical.

The only horde limiter I have ever seen work (to any extent) is a field player limit........... AW's zone limit.
Ludere Vincere

Offline Simaril

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5149
HTC, pay attention on strat gameplay pls.
« Reply #22 on: November 22, 2004, 06:36:27 AM »
If we agree that horde=bad, we have to find another way to capture bases. As it is, the only way to get a base down and hold the area down long enough to keep it safe for goons is with persistantly overwhelming numbers. Anything less is furballing with a target, likely to go on for hours. Unless you have swarms overhead, it is simply too hard to get the FHs down, the VH down, clear previously upped enemies, protect from neighboring base ingresses, and sneak the goon in before hangars are up again. So, you have either the horde or the undefended sneak.

Strat targets are one approach, but our current system evolved for specific reasons, treating specific problems. I find it very unlikely that HTC will go back to older systems, because we'll just be trading current problems for old ones.

I suspect that simpler interventions would make smaller attack units workable. Why not just add 5 or 10 minutes to hangar down time?
Maturity is knowing that I've been an idiot in the past.
Wisdom is realizing I will be an idiot in the future.
Common sense is trying to not be an idiot right now

"Social Fads are for sheeple." - Meatwad

Offline beet1e

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7848
HTC, pay attention on strat gameplay pls.
« Reply #23 on: November 22, 2004, 06:46:16 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Simaril
If we agree that horde=bad, we have to find another way to capture bases. As it is, the only way to get a base down and hold the area down long enough to keep it safe for goons is with persistantly overwhelming numbers. Anything less is furballing with a target, likely to go on for hours. Unless you have swarms overhead, it is simply too hard to get the FHs down, the VH down, clear previously upped enemies, protect from neighboring base ingresses, and sneak the goon in before hangars are up again. So, you have either the horde or the undefended sneak.
Sim - the undefended sneaks won't always work because there are so many warning systems in AH that give the game away before it's started. More than two years ago, I suggested that bardar should be turned off (to give sneaks a better chance) and for the mission editor to be turned off (to steer the game away from the horde mentality). Of course, both of my suggestions were ignored, as I predicted in the thread in which I suggested these changes. What you see now (viz. the hordes) is the result.

Offline mettech

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 25
troops and resupply suggestions
« Reply #24 on: November 22, 2004, 07:47:28 AM »
Let a base get resupply with troops on one troop load

Have the field cargo resupply trips for bases count for more perks

Have another field ack (m16 .50 cal?) at each troop station to simulate the troops return fire

have mini towns around main bases... they too would have to come down before base capture.. this would spread out the furball some.

Any other suggestions?
« Last Edit: November 22, 2004, 07:50:06 AM by mettech »

Offline Citabria

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5149
HTC, pay attention on strat gameplay pls.
« Reply #25 on: November 22, 2004, 08:13:57 AM »
its all symptomatic of the broken strat system.

changing the strat system back to the way it was before zone bases and resupply will solve this.

changing barracks will only be a bandaid
Fester was my in game name until September 2013

Offline Kev367th

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5290
HTC, pay attention on strat gameplay pls.
« Reply #26 on: November 22, 2004, 09:10:32 AM »
Base supply with one load - No thanks.

How easy do guys want this game to get?
We have double HQ hardness to keep DAR basically up all the time, minimum fuel of 75% etc.
Make it 1 load to resupply a base you effectively negate the point of having jabos in the game apart from hitting GVs.
Buffs already have a diminished role since the strats and HQ were changed, doing this would diminish the role of jabos.

More perks for resupply - Yup why not.

Field acks - More should be mannable, and add some mannable with proxy fuses.

Few changes I would like to see -
NOE - Should not be visible to friendlies. This would stop the 'must have a spy' accusations that always start if they are intercepted.

CVs - If you have just switched countries should not be visible and you should not be able to control them. This stops the change sides to see where CV is. More importantly as happened recently (captured CV) it stops someone with a high GV rank from switching sides taking control of it and running it into an enemy base to get sunk.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T
Asus M3N-HT mobo
2 x 2Gb Corsair 1066 DDR2 memory

Offline TexMurphy

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1488
HTC, pay attention on strat gameplay pls.
« Reply #27 on: November 22, 2004, 09:23:43 AM »
The problem is that when one has a few option limmiting strategic objects one creates a single point of whinage.

People will whine about that single issue that limmits game play because it gets frustrating and repetetive. Its always the same issue that pisses them off.

If instead of limmiting critical strategical objects in game one would expand them the players would face different situations more often. Even if these would limmit the ability to play the game the way the pilot wants to it would be in a different way all the time. Meaning not always would it hurt him and sometimes more and sometmes less.

For example if each nation had a factory for each plane then there would be strategical targets to bomb that had effect on the game world but would not always affect the same players.

For example if a nation was on the offence then it would be a good idea to down the factories that produce good base defense planes.

If a nation was beeing massivly bombed it would be a good idea to do strike missions to take out bomber factories.

This would also move pilots from the front line fields to the strategic targets as it would be really important to defend them.

Today all attacks are focused on fields and hence everyone is around the frontline fields.

The way to decrease the hoards is to make attacking other objects then fields meaningfull.

Tex.

Offline Zanth

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1052
      • http://www.a-26legacy.org/photo.htm
HTC, pay attention on strat gameplay pls.
« Reply #28 on: November 22, 2004, 09:36:25 AM »
The strat layout on this map is very poor, they are for all intents and purposes inaccessible.  It is a dozen sectors (and more!)round trip to reach the strats (at least on the right side of the map).  Strats play an important role in the movement of a front.  With such distances is it any surprise that we have this result?  I really dont think it is any more complicated than a poor strat layout.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2004, 09:38:57 AM by Zanth »

Offline Overlag

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3888
HTC, pay attention on strat gameplay pls.
« Reply #29 on: November 22, 2004, 11:00:01 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Citabria
its all symptomatic of the broken strat system.

changing the strat system back to the way it was before zone bases and resupply will solve this.

changing barracks will only be a bandaid
Adam Webb - 71st (Eagle) Squadron RAF Wing B
This post has a Krusty rating of 37