Any idea how long till ToD?

[Tilt]

TOD and timidity...........

I cannot envisage any version of TOD that will motivate toward less timidity.............(translated as extreme caution to sustain any  combat.....)

IMO role playing, combined with role development in a mission orientated environment will lead to more caution, not less.


If it is limited to a clever mission planner then it will just replace the CT as a "mission arena".

TOD could yet be many things.............all we know is that game play will be mission led and that avatars can be multiple and can develop over time gathering "benefits/rewards" in a WETO setting.

Given this will not be an arcadia experience then it seems to me that the only reward thru development is ride choice based........

placing this in a historical context means that the avatar may be promoted or transfered (offerred promotions or transfers)between squadrons (and therefore changing ac types) or even within squadrons (where a squadron has more than one ac type).

These become "options" in the game play.

These options allow access to certain types of mission with differing rewards. (coastal patrol may induce a quicker dog fight but bomber escort brings more rewards etc etc)

However to access a P51D for bomber escort so many "hours" in coastal patrol is required.

Stuff like that anyway..................

................plus without AI (fighters, bombers etc) folk will all too often find they have no opponents (unless we are sitting in ready rooms waiting for thier opponent to gather) hence IMO AI stuff is essential to fill in gaps.

.............of course it may not be like that but when you begin to break down the stuff that has to be done above a simple mission planner.............I reckon Hitech has many months of work to do

2006 would be good going.

[beet1e]

Originally posted by Urchin
So I'm done for a while I think.  Joysticks unplugged and sitting in a corner.  I don't really see coming back for a while, unless there is a dramatic shift in the way the game is organized.

Sorry to see you hang it up, Urchin. I'm eternally grateful to you for your 109 tutelage!

As to what you said here, the real problem for you - and for me - is the way the game is organised. Or rather NOT organised. I remember countless threads about this in the late 2002/early 2003 time frame. Threads like this, this, and  this one of mine. A common theme throughout these threads is that the furballers steadfastly refuse to accept the need for any rules or other game controlling influences.

I said all along that all games have rules, but that the absence of any rules or structure in AH was going to lead to a permanent state of anarchy, and one which would not sustain adult interest. I leave you to judge the accuracy of my prognosis for yourself. IMO, the current lamentable status quo is the RESULT of the lack of rules/controlling influences.

What I find funny is that at least two of the "no rules" proponents from 2 years ago have since departed the game because they're no longer having fun.

[TexMurphy]

ToD will NOT be a cure for timidity.

Remember ToD will promote mission success and NOT kills.

Sometimes fighting against the odds will be necessary for the mission. But some missions will not reward that.

Say a mission is a bomber escort. Then dogfighting the planes that have the mission to intercept the bombers will NOT be a priority. Get them of the bombers and stay with the bombers.

If its a recon mission and you run into a greater number of fighters then fighting them wount do the mission any good.

So timidity will not be cured by ToD.

ToD will give more meaning to sorties and will give much more immersion.

Also when it comes to MA play I think the reason some vets are "boored" is because there is so damn many players who have played the game for sooooo long. Everything gets booring after a while if you do it too much over a too long period of time.

Tex

[JimBear]

I miss seeing an enemy P51 slashing into a fight and worrying that it might be Hangtime or RWY (and then finding out it was) or having a 190 do a wicked slice back and dying to Udie and on and on. 2 v 2 fights where the victor could nurse their way home and be fairly sure that you could up and the next sortie would be a good fight. Maybe its just in my head.

Heres to hoping that TOD come some time so I may fly the AH skies again.

[DoctorYO]

Back when people had balls, this game was fun. Chasing around a bunch of eunuchs isn't.

The Old beta Ogre map with its 20k mountain wall would solve the running..
 (make all bases uncapturable and let it run for a week to break up the same ole drama)

we need a re-make of that map....


If i can solve my CTD's I might even play this game again.... (losing a 262 last week on landing is not cool.. note I never CTD in a zeke wtf is going on buzz kill.....)

those 38's do look nice though..  now up the production (breaks out cat O nine tails...)


DoctorYo

[Fariz]

Originally posted by Redd
Here's hoping they have a broad selection of vulching missions for you to choose from    

Actually I once tried to vulch during the scenario, it was first BoB in AH. Was not very successful, lost engine and died =)

[Urchin]

Originally posted by streetstang


Urchin, I've known you for a while now. I know that you've got alot of tallent, both from fighting with and against you. If you ask me I think you'd be very well suited to help some new players out. I'm only saying this because it looks like you want to change things, or help to try. It might give you that enjoyment from the game you're looking for.


morph

No, Morph... I honestly have nothing to teach anyone.  My "skill-set" is a little outdated for todays MA.  I worked at becoming good at 1v1s.  In the process, I became reasonably good at X v 1s, but that is something that is more plane dependant than pilot dependant.  

I can maybe keep track of 4 guys, 5 at the outside.  3v1 I'm usually alright.  But even then, I need to be in a plane that can take advantage of the mistakes that people make, or I'm just as impotent as anyone else.  Furthermore, once you get past 1v1, you are relying on a healthy dose of suckiness from your opponents.. 2v1 in anything vs anything will usually come down to the 2 winning if they have half a clue.  It gets exponentially harder the more people pile in.

So, my options are to fly a manueverable plane that hits hard (i.e. a Spit or Nik), and hope for the best, fly an La-7 timidly, or fly whatever I want in the horde.  Those aren't just my options, those are everyone's options.  

Being able to survive a sortie is actually important to some (I'd say most) people.  So for most, option 1 is out right at the start, even if they'd like to learn how to fight.  That leaves option 2, which is becoming quite popular (well, when combined with option 3 anyway), and option 3.  

You don't need to learn how to run away in an La-7, it is pretty much level out and leave.  And do you seriously think people need help when they are fighting 5 on 1?  About the only thing I could think would be "How do I kill this guy before everyone else does, I keep getting assists".  Yea, that'd be a wonderful thread in the Training Forum.

It basically boils down to this game has become an exercise in frustration for me.  I don't have any fun playing it, and I typically log out a lot more pissed off than when I logged in.  So I think at long last, the time has come for me to hang it up.

[Wotan]

TOD and timidity...........

I cannot envisage any version of TOD that will motivate toward less timidity.............(translated as extreme caution to sustain any combat.....)

IMO role playing, combined with role development in a mission orientated environment will lead to more caution, not less.


If it is limited to a clever mission planner then it will just replace the CT as a "mission arena".

TOD could yet be many things.............all we know is that game play will be mission led and that avatars can be multiple and can develop over time gathering "benefits/rewards" in a WETO setting.

Given this will not be an arcadia experience then it seems to me that the only reward thru development is ride choice based........

placing this in a historical context means that the avatar may be promoted or transfered (offerred promotions or transfers)between squadrons (and therefore changing ac types) or even within squadrons (where a squadron has more than one ac type).

These become "options" in the game play.

These options allow access to certain types of mission with differing rewards. (coastal patrol may induce a quicker dog fight but bomber escort brings more rewards etc etc)

However to access a P51D for bomber escort so many "hours" in coastal patrol is required.

Stuff like that anyway..................

................plus without AI (fighters, bombers etc) folk will all too often find they have no opponents (unless we are sitting in ready rooms waiting for thier opponent to gather) hence IMO AI stuff is essential to fill in gaps.

.............of course it may not be like that but when you begin to break down the stuff that has to be done above a simple mission planner.............I reckon Hitech has many months of work to do

2006 would be good going.

Not necessarily. First there will be no base capture so that rules out 90% of main players right away.

Second it all depends on the depth of the mission victory conditions.

An escort mission should require that XX% of bombers (or what ever you are escorting) make it to and from target and that your XX% of the players in your mission survive.

A bomber mission should require that XX% of the bombers survive and that XX% of the target gets destroyed.

A defense or bomber intercept mission would require that XX% of the bombers get shot down and that XX% of the target remains intact and that XX% of the players in your mission survive.

Fighter intercept or sweep missions would require you to 'sweep point XXX' and kill XX% of the opposing fighters and that XX% of your own survive.

I would also suggest a time limit for the mission to be completed so that you don't have the bombers/escorts just flying around until the other side runs out of fuel.

This way both sides will be forced to make contact with the enemy rather then avoid them. It would be possible for both sides to fail their respective missions.

Just taking off and landing should not be rewarded. There should be  very low minimum points for completing the mission, then a high multiplier for the number of kills. You would deduct for bails and ditches. Capture should be treated the same as a death. Deaths should have a very high penalty in terms of point loss or demotion.

With a harsh death penalty you get rid of the suiciding 'at least I got the hangar / CV / building' types.  With very low points for just completing a mission and a high multiplies for enemy kills the timid or avoiders of combat will progress very slowly and be forced to come out from behind their mothers skirt (ie hiding behind the horde).

With a penalty for ditches and bails the player will be encouraged to make it home in his plane. If not he may just bail out whenever he gets in trouble.

ToD is not necessarily a new thing. It maybe new in terms of on line subscription flight games but in some box games this very thing takes place in the good on line wars.

Missions should be significantly difficult and the victory conditions need to be in depth enough to encourage combat not just surviving the sortie.

HT has also mentioned player rating. This would allow folks in a mission to vote or rate a player or mission leaders performance.

If you go hide while the rest of the guys are out fighting those other players can let you know how they felt about that.

It's not the kills that the timid haters like, it's the fights. It doesn't necessarily matter if someone gets killed, it's the human v. human competition that makes these types of games fun.

[Guppy35]

I've been reading the 370th FG history lately.  They flew 38s with the 9th AF in support of the ground troops in 44-45 from prior to the invasion through the end of the war, transitioning to 51s in late March 45.

I'd love to be able to try and fly a tour like that in TOD.  It was a mix and match of ground attack, escort, airfield strafing etc.  Tons of flak, getting bounced by always higher bad guys etc.  Bombs, napalm, flak damage, engines out, poor weather.  The worst of the worst.

No idea how they managed to keep going.

Don't know if that's something that would be a part of TOD, but I'd sign up for that tour.

Dan/Slack

[Fariz]

Originally posted by Guppy35
I've been reading the 370th FG history lately.  They flew 38s with the 9th AF in support of the ground troops in 44-45 from prior to the invasion through the end of the war, transitioning to 51s in late March 45.

I'd love to be able to try and fly a tour like that in TOD.  It was a mix and match of ground attack, escort, airfield strafing etc.  Tons of flak, getting bounced by always higher bad guys etc.  Bombs, napalm, flak damage, engines out, poor weather.  The worst of the worst.

No idea how they managed to keep going.

Don't know if that's something that would be a part of TOD, but I'd sign up for that tour.

Dan/Slack

I am almost sure ground targets attack is (or will be) implemented. There are trucks convoys, trains, depots, shore batteries already in the game, it shall be just codded into a mission system: "Train left point A and moving to point B. In shall be probably in sectors this and that. Your flight will be splitted into attackers and escort, expect light enemy fighters presence in the sector".

After the "invation" they may even make the AI convoys of panzers moving to "front", with flaks and trucks, so you can attack it with p47s, etc.

[Fariz]

Originally posted by Wotan
Not necessarily. First there will be no base capture so that rules out 90% of main players right away.

etc.

Wingman shall get bonus if his leader survivies. For wingman it shall be the bigger bonus, than for killing anything. This will encorage wingmans to stay with leaders, and will be another way to make people want to get promossions (to fly leaders next time).

[beet1e]

The TOD arena with its realism and immersion would be wonderful. But look at how other proposals have been taken on board.

Mention "RPS" to some AH players, and the effect is like holding an inverted cross in front on Count Dracula's face. And yet if people had half an interest in WW2 combat, they'd go along with an RPS.

Look at the mass whining when P8/ENY limiting was introduced. There are some 70 different planes in AH, but some guys whined their way through a whole box of kleenex if they couldn't have a P51 or LA7. And yet if people had half an interest in WW2 combat, they'd want to try some of the other planes.

I don't buy all this crap about the "sandbox" - being a place where people can have "fun".

The TOD arena would be great, but the outrage shown by a whole mass of AH players towards other realism proposals leaves me with grave doubts about whether it will ever see more than 25 players, and indeed whether it will be deployed at all.

[Rolex]

Only 24 more to go then

I'm looking forward to it as a change of pace - something new.

Urchin has expressed my current state of burnout completely

How ironic that one of the great things about AH, and one of the worst things about AH are the same: People.

[Wotan]

Wingman shall get bonus if his leader survivies. For wingman it shall be the bigger bonus, than for killing anything. This will encorage wingmans to stay with leaders, and will be another way to make people want to get promossions (to fly leaders next time).

I think that's what HT was implying with the playing 'rating'. After the mission your wing man and others in your flight will rate how you did. If you are a terrible wingmen or don't stay with your group then I would imagine you would have a low rating.

What this rating will actually mean I don't know.

I'd love to be able to try and fly a tour like that in TOD. It was a mix and match of ground attack, escort, airfield strafing etc. Tons of flak, getting bounced by always higher bad guys etc. Bombs, napalm, flak damage, engines out, poor weather. The worst of the worst.

With the new te and ability to create objects to place in the maps I hope we see bridges and airfields that are laid out differently with static aircraft waiting to get hit.

I hope its possible to create an active front where you have GV spawns behind the front so that when the GVs spawn they drive down the roads back toward the front just asking to be strafed, bombed and rocketed...

Similiar to how the trains currently work.

HT has implied that AI ground vehicles are planned and I magine there will plenty for fighter bombers pilots to do.

[Wotan]

The TOD arena would be great, but the outrage shown by a whole mass of AH players towards other realism proposals leaves me with grave doubts about whether it will ever see more than 25 players, and indeed whether it will be deployed at all.

Well what's good about the arena being mission based is that the arena doesn't need to sustain large areas of combat like the main.

The mission you are in only needs enough active players to make that mission fun.

I would agree the larger the better but say there's only 25 guys , 15 allied 10 axis (hell that's packed by Ct standards )

You could still have some fun and good fights with 15 escorts, 10 AI bombers and 8 LW interceptors etc...