Htc Please

[loony1]

fix the hardness on troop barracks......it is not right that a single 109 come swooping in on a base and pork the troops in one pass or that any single plane pork the troops in one or two passes. I  know this works the same on both sides and both sides do it but something still needs to be done. Today 5min after new map was up a single 109 had porked the troops all along the front line. I have even tried parking an osty right next to the troop barracks and they still get strafed down by a single plane even if i shoot him down at 1k away. 1500lb hardness would be much better. just an idea...please look into this.

[ghi]

Originally posted by loony1
fix the hardness on troop barracks......]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 <--porker,
   The hardness doesn't bother me, what i don't like in AH2, is Vbases, have 3 tents + 2 barracks with troops=5, and a small Abase has 1 , medium and large field has 2 barracks, Why a small Vbase should storage more troops/barracks than a large airfield:(

[Krusty]

Because airfields are taken up by other personnel... It takes a LOT more people to support flight operations than to support ground operations. And they usually take up more room with equipment.

So with a V-field, you get more room that's not taken up by all the flight personnel, and support personnel that keep the planes up and running. So hypothetically speaking, V fields actually have the room, A fields don't.

[SFCHONDO]

How about getting rid of the ability to porks troops all together and just make it take, say for example 40 troops with in 10 min to take a field. This way it makes the defender defend his field as apposed to just porking troops 4 sectors back and not have to worry about it.

[Schatzi]

I dont think getting 40 troopers to a field to take it would be managable. Said MA truth is, that even 10 is difficult enough.

But how about being able to pork troops like you can pork fuel? Reduce the loadout for a C47/M3 if troops are porked. Maybe down to 50% or even 40%. That way youd need more Goons when a base is porked, but dont make it impossible (with current ability for teamwork in MA) to take bases.

[Krusty]

Because with the MA mentality, as it is any given country will amass a huge horde as far from the front as possible and steamroll undefended fields. There's no way you'll cap fields that take more than 2 c47s... and it'd be rare to see the horde take more than 1 c47 at a time.

So that, and base capture stops... Oh, wait...

[loony1]

i just feel like raising the hardness does not make it impossable to pork troops, it just makes it harder to pork them, than a single, cannon plane or  a plane with a couple hundred pounds of bombs. It's just to easy. As it is a single 109 or LA7 can pork troops at 3 or 4 bases with no bombs at all.

[SFCHONDO]

I like  Schatzi idea. never thought of that one.
Loony, I agree with you also on making it more difficult to pork troops.
Would be nice to see a reply from HT on this. Even if it's a no, I'd like to know if he has even thought about it.

[Flit]

Or reduce the time troops are dead;)

[FiLtH]

The only bad thing with that is, the more goons, the lower the fights.

[NUKE]

Originally posted by Schatzi
But how about being able to pork troops like you can pork fuel? Reduce the loadout for a C47/M3 if troops are porked. Maybe down to 50% or even 40%. That way youd need more Goons when a base is porked, but dont make it impossible (with current ability for teamwork in MA) to take bases.

I don't think that makes sense really. If troops were porked, but you could get 2 or 3 goons to take a total of ten troops, why couldn't all ten troops just get in one goon?

I don't think it's the same as fuel or ord. being rationed per plane when those are porked.

If you reduce the overall numbers of troops at a base, 10 could still fit in one goon.... unless there were less than 10 troops availible at the base.

[Simaril]

Originally posted by NUKE
I don't think that makes sense really. If troops were porked, but you could get 2 or 3 goons to take a total of ten troops, why couldn't all ten troops just get in one goon?

I don't think it's the same as fuel or ord. being rationed per plane when those are porked.

If you reduce the overall numbers of troops at a base, 10 could still fit in one goon.... unless there were less than 10 troops availible at the base.

I hear what you're saying, but I think we're talking about different things. You're absolutely right that realistically a goon carries 10 guys, period. So, from that perspective it shoudl be all or nothing -- either you can up a goon or you cant.

I think Schatzi's idea is a good one because with base captuer we really ARENT talking about realism AT ALL. Seriously -- 10 guys run unopposed into an undefended maproom and a big chunk or real estate gets transferred?

No, base capture is supposed to be gamey because this is an AIR combat game. The real issue is how best to balance the gameplay so the core -- the very accurate simulations -- stays fun and interesting.

Things arent too bad right now, so honestly this is tweaking. That being said, the porking can be very frustrating, and the counter to porking -- CAP -- is too dull for game words. I was strongly behind the "hardened target" idea, because that still allows the pork strategy but tones it down some, while givng the opponent a viable countermeasure (hit ord). Scahtzi's idea accomplishes the same tactical goal with a different approach, and its in her idea's advantage that this system ahs proven effective (in fuel supply) already in the game.


By preventing air-to-air cannons from being able to completely deprive a base of capture ability, the game would be enhanced. The gameplay is grossly out of balance now, since a single FIGHTER can pork troops at 4-5 bases easily.