Author Topic: Id like to see new gameplay (Read 1276 times)

SKJohn · « **Reply #15 on:** October 17, 2005, 04:01:59 PM »

It really would be nice if there were targets of real value for the bombers to hit - I seem to recall hearing that AW had factories for each of the types of planes, and if you knocked out the Spitfire factory, for example, there would be no spits available for several hours.

After all, we need soemthing of worth to bomb with the new, up-coming B-29!:)

stegor · « **Reply #16 on:** October 17, 2005, 04:34:12 PM »

Whatever situation or suggestion is surely better than actual ; but given that all the tactical and strategical part of the game has been sold off in the name of a neverending furballing whirl, I doubt this thread will have some esteem
Just wait for two weeks more....

bustr · « **Reply #17 on:** October 17, 2005, 07:57:24 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by SFRT - Frenchy
5 hangars per base,

destroy 1, no 1945 planes available.
2 ... no 1944-1945
3 and more ... get lucky if u fly a 1942 flyingmachine

Whine 1 - Waaaaaaaaaaa I can't up my favorite ride to defend my feild. I have to go (X) number of feilds over to up and it takes soooo long to get back. It's sniffff my $14.95 a month and I'll use how I want to!!!!!!!!!!!

Whine 2 - Those super suicide porko Flocked Fluffs and tribbling triffies are porkin 1 fighter hanger on every base for 12 sectors around. It was bad enough porkin troops. Now they porkin planes, troops and I can't up my favorite ride and it takes too long to fly and screww alll of yall it's my $14.95 a month yadda yadda yadda!!!!!!!!!!!waaaaaaaa.......

Whine 3 - Those super suicide porko carpet bombing bomber 30 plane group 25k hi B24's are hittin every feild for 10 sectors aroung like a conga line of hi alt dweebs and taking away my favorite ride for the whole night.....yaddidy yadidy yadidy.......$14.95...yadidy. And it ain't fair how much work it takes to shoot them down....waaaaaaaaaa..........

Actually would force real war in therms of having to defend your ability to make war, take enemy feilds, and just exist..............Bet no country could get organised enough to stop the bomber conga lines killing fighter hangers while capturing feilds to reset the game. The game would get really out of balance for the fun factor in a few big missions and single suicied runs pretty quick.

Westy · « **Reply #18 on:** October 18, 2005, 08:00:24 AM »

"if you knocked out the Spitfire factory, for example, there would be no spits available for several hours."

Ahhhh. The penultimate arena disruption. Where one lone pile-it can effect the gameplay of all of the other players online. That'd be better than an a-bomb!

To make this fair though how about if a pilot flying a fighter shoots you down in a bomber that you and your whole country can no longer fly that type of bomber for several hours thereafter?

lazs2 · « **Reply #19 on:** October 18, 2005, 09:02:51 AM »

every "solution" to gameplay seems to involve hurting fighters ability to play in the game.

If you make the fields about 25% closer together then the guys who just want to fight will go to the next good fight when the mouse weilders advance... the mouse weilders will not be able to shut down every single area where fun might sprout so.... they may just concentrate on "winning the war" and milkrunning... what they were meant to do in any case.

When one who simply can't stand the lack of attention does make his sucicidal "look at me look at me" attack on the cv or fighter hangers... the fighters will just shake their heads and move to the next great furball at two fields that are 3/4 of a sector apart.

lazs
Public Relations Officer for the BK's

Clifra Jones · « **Reply #20 on:** October 18, 2005, 02:42:37 PM »

Hmmm, interesting ideas, but I tend to agree with Lazs comment. It seems that most suggestions regarding game play are based on a way to deminish the number of fighters in the air or reduce the number of fighter-v-fighter engagements.

An idea I had: Change the objective of the game.

The current Win the War strategy is for one country to be reduced to 3 bases. This IMO has a few deficiencies.

1. It encourages 2 sides to gang up on the third. We can deny this fact all we want but we all know it happens.

2. It discourages concentration of force. We see this all the time in the MA. A "hoard" takes an undefended field and instead of using that field to mount new attacks they just go off somewhere else on the map and take another undefended field. All the while the other country is doing the same. There is no incentive for driving into the other countries territory and holding that land.

3. Once a country get below say 10 bases it really increase the boredom factor for the losing country. By this time most of the perk potatos have switched to what they believe will be the winning side and the losing side has nothing to do but fight the hoard. A lot of us at this point will usually just log and wait for the reset.

My idea on how to fix this.

Instead of the goal being to reduce the number of bases, make the object of the game to capture the countries HQ. Make it so you have to land say 30 or 50 troop in to the HQ to register a the capture. Sure this would probably cause resets to happen quicker that they do now but it does bring some better battle scenarios to the game.

1. It will encourage each country to capture and HOLD bases. Especially those that will lead towards the HQ. It will discourage the "capture the undefended field" mentality. Add additional points to squads/missions that capture adjacent fields.

2. It will encourage each side to actually mount credible defenses.

3. It will ensure force concentration. It won't be hard to find a fight because you know that the enemy will be trying to attack your HQ. It will become quite obvious where the enemy is attacking.

4. There will be more air-to-air/fighter-v-fighter engagements. Because we will know what the enemies objective is and the map will show their encroachment into our territory. It will be easier to determine where they will strike next. Thus allowing defenders to up fighters to cover those areas. It will also make bomber take escort fighters along because they will know that they will encounter fighter intercept on their missions.

5. It will require that much more strategic thought be put into porking troops and ord as you know you will need them to advance your position. Not only that but you will know you will need to protect your troops and ord for future use. Example: You know the enemy is going to go after your troops and ord in your front line bases you have just captured. Therefor fighters can up to intercept them. No searching the map for a fight. It will be quite obvious what the enemies primary targets will be.

I'm sure that there are problems with this idea I've not thought of. Feel free to express them. I just think that anything we can do to encourage what I call "concentration of force" will improve game play. Currently we have far to many players off in their own section of the map doing what ever they can to avoid the enemy. IMO, the whole point of this game is to engage the enemy, is it not?

Karnak · « **Reply #21 on:** October 18, 2005, 03:58:22 PM »

This one is for Lazs,

I'd like to see it changed so that winning the war was based on the destruction/capture of strategic targets and defensive hard points. Change it so that airfields are part of the territory capatured and not capture targets themselves.

It would still be a tactic to suppress enemy fighters from lifting, but it would not be required. Move the focus off of the airfields. Fighters can fight and the strat guys can fight the war.

DipStick · « **Reply #22 on:** October 18, 2005, 06:02:40 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Karnak
This one is for Lazs,

I'd like to see it changed so that winning the war was based on the destruction/capture of strategic targets and defensive hard points. Change it so that airfields are part of the territory capatured and not capture targets themselves.

It would still be a tactic to suppress enemy fighters from lifting, but it would not be required. Move the focus off of the airfields. Fighters can fight and the strat guys can fight the war.

That don't sound too bad but throw in a Lala factory too. Getting sick of seeing 50% Lalas running every where I go.

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #23 on:** October 18, 2005, 08:30:59 PM »

Let me get this straight.

You want to make the defending base unable to up decent fighters as it's being rolled by a rook hoarde?

Just bloody brilliant.

lazs2 · « **Reply #24 on:** October 19, 2005, 07:53:57 AM »

My point is that the furballers don't care what the object of the game is... We allready have an object.... To find a spot where there are a lot of red and green planes and to kill all the little red planes.

If the war get's "won" while this is happening that is just a minor inconvienence (no matter who wins)... we might have to switch the fight to a different area. Any "strat" that depends on fighters ability to fly except for 1 sector or 3 away from each other is bad news for a furballer.

Win the war? who cares but... make it so that to "win" you have to drop so much bombs on some huge city capital... Have to flatten everything... those who want to defend can. I wouldn't.

lazs
Public Relations Officer for the BK's

Clifra Jones · « **Reply #25 on:** October 19, 2005, 09:09:53 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
My point is that the furballers don't care what the object of the game is... We allready have an object.... To find a spot where there are a lot of red and green planes and to kill all the little red planes.

If the war get's "won" while this is happening that is just a minor inconvienence (no matter who wins)... we might have to switch the fight to a different area. Any "strat" that depends on fighters ability to fly except for 1 sector or 3 away from each other is bad news for a furballer.

Win the war? who cares but... make it so that to "win" you have to drop so much bombs on some huge city capital... Have to flatten everything... those who want to defend can. I wouldn't.

lazs
Public Relations Officer for the BK's

I understand, Lazs. Under the current conditions I am of the same mind as you. I am much more concerned with finding a decent fight than capturing bases or winning the "war".

My thoughts were to design a way to bring the 2 aspects together in some way that would accommodate both sides without diminishing one or the other. And I am quite aware that is is by no means a perfect solution.

Note: If we can, please post any additional comments on my suggestion to the post in the Wish List forum. That way we ar enot completely hijacking Filths thread.

lazs2 · « **Reply #26 on:** October 19, 2005, 09:19:52 AM »

my comment was on topic.

lazs
Public Relations Officer for the BK's

Clifra Jones · « **Reply #27 on:** October 19, 2005, 09:26:03 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
my comment was on topic.

lazs
Public Relations Officer for the BK's

Yes it was. The note was not directed specifically to you.

Blammo · « **Reply #28 on:** October 19, 2005, 10:47:23 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Clifra Jones
My idea on how to fix this.

Instead of the goal being to reduce the number of bases, make the object of the game to capture the countries HQ. Make it so you have to land say 30 or 50 troop in to the HQ to register a the capture. Sure this would probably cause resets to happen quicker that they do now but it does bring some better battle scenarios to the game.

I like this idea, Clifra, but how about this just to add a bit more to the "Win the War" effort:

Start out each side with three strategic points--one of which is the HQ. If a side loses control of all three of those strategic points, no matter who has control of them, the war is over. The winning side would be awarded the perks for winning based on how many of there own and how many enemy strategic points they held.

This would still fulfull the heart of what you were talking about while still giving the "War Winners" an attainable goal.

SFRT - Frenchy · « **Reply #29 on:** October 19, 2005, 11:01:11 AM »

Just go to the duel arena if you want to furball (take off, shoot, die, repeat), as you don't need all the fancy stuff that the MA tries to offer.

Oh and, don't gangrape my D25 with 3 LA7s and 2 spits when I'm trying to drop my 1000lb of bomb to contribute to the war effort.