Make Strats capturable and airfields into strats.

[TexMurphy]

An idea Ive been pondering as of late is if it wouldnt be good for gameplay if instead of capturing airfields we would be capturing strats.

Afterall cities, factories ect ect where much more of an objective to capture in WW2 then air fields.

If we would attack strats inorder to capture them main attack and defense would be moved away from the fields. This would create the need of true CAP and not just "beat enemy up and vulch" CAP.

Airfields would be attacked inorder to kill their strategical elements such as radar, ordenance and hangers. Most important though would be to take out radar as strats dont have radar and it would be very important to keep as much radar around the strats up for the defense.

It would also create the need for patrolls as you wouldnt per default know exactly where the enemy is. Now you know because you have them either over your field or pinned at their field.

Once all the strats in a zone falls the fields in that zone falls with them.

Tex

[Ghosth]

Interesting idea!

Be fun to try something different.

[mechanic]

i second that opinion.

at present the vulch or be vulched mentality is becoming boring.

unless im doing the vulching.

[TexMurphy]

Reason I just mentioned airfields is that I still thinking about Vehical Fields and Ports.

But I do think that they SHOULD still be captureable.

That would mean one could go and grab Vehical fields and Ports in strategic locations to launch attacks on strats, but one would have really hard time keeping it supplied.

Im not sure how the capturing and auto capture works.

But Im guessing.

*Everything that has a map room is capturable, map room is linked to a object (GV Base maproom to GV Base, Town maproom to airfield)
*Everything that is assigned to a zone falls when everything in that zone has fallen.

If this is how its implemented this change does NOT require coding change just map change.

Create strats with maprooms, remove maprooms from airfileds.

But Im just guessing.

Tex

[Reschke]

I like this idea for capture it puts a different spin on the way the game would be played.

[SPQR]

I'm for anything that makes strats (more) relevent to this sim!! (can't tell you how many times I bypass strats to go onto airbases). Nice thoughts Tex.

[Wolf14]

Would they be repairable?

[AcId]

geee does this concept sound vaguely familiar or what?? LOL we used to have capturable supply depots remember???

[bustr]

Can this lead to a small group of people rapidly destroying a small number of installations and locking a larger group of players out of being able to up at full strength mostly when they want to?

Having to slug it out to take every single Afeild, Vfeild, and port increases the maximum amount of time the largest group of "paying customers" in a country has to up at full fuel, ordinence and craft of choice. Once you reduce the game to a handfull of strateigic elements controlling large tracts of the map, you have committed the game to being controlled by a small number of players. This will result in abuse of the majority by a minority of game gamers.

[SlapShot]

If a strat (fuel) is 3-4 sectors away from the nearest friendly airbase, how in the heck are you going to defend it if you capture it ?

You may capture it ... but you will lose it REAL fast !!!

[TexMurphy]

Originally posted by SlapShot
If a strat (fuel) is 3-4 sectors away from the nearest friendly airbase, how in the heck are you going to defend it if you capture it ?

You may capture it ... but you will lose it REAL fast !!!

Obviously the zone size is extreamly important.

On some maps zones are really large and cover what 9+ sectors that cant be the case with this sudgestion.

Ultimate would be if this is possible to achive with just map creation and doesnt need coding because then the "game play" on each map could be different. We could both have maps as now and maps as this.

Tex