Ground Vehicles

[JMFJ]

What is with the lack of GV's?  Is this because this game is mostly air combat sided or cause of lack of request/time from design crew.  With the T34 being virtually ineffective, it funnels everyone into the panzer(free)/tiger(should cost more perks) war.  Is this because these were the main GV's used in WWII, or just some unknown reason?  Sorry i'm not a WWII buff all I know is I love this game but there is some things that need to be expanded on (I know easier said than done).

It's very frustrating, I personally can make short work out of just about any small group of panzers (up to 6 with no risk) in one tiger, let alone if I have supplies they are way to powerfull.  I feel if they would add about 3 effective tanks (No more T34's) it would really level the playing field.  Which would in turn help expand the ground war, I think if the game involved the same concepts as the planes.  Example: Plane A has advantage over plane B which has advantage over plane C which has advantage over plane A concept, creating the circle effect.  Alot more people would enjoy that side of the game, rather than just go furball cause quote "GV's are boring and everyone drives the tigers and I don't have enough perks to drive tigers every sortie."  Imagine if all you could fly was 262, spit II, and mosquito.  Wouldn't have very diverse encounters would ya.

These are just opinions and views, and will be on my Christmas list for santa this year, along with ch pro usb foot pedals.

JMFJ

[Slash27]

Man, you're gonna get flamed.


Short answer, its a flight sim. GVs are going to take a back seat to aircraft and game development right now. There are plenty of us who want more GVs and HTC knows it. All in due time.

[Golfer]

Well done on your first post...welcome to the club.

To understand where the focus of efforts of the development crew have been for the last years...take a look at the "Tour of Duty" aka TOD section.  They are developing a new addition to the game and are also devoting time to releasing new, improved verisons of and redesigning existing aircraft which will be featured in TOD.

At the moment development is and has been ongoing and been taking their time from adding new GVs which are not the focus of the game in the first place.

New vehicles and aircraft are introduced regularly, so keep looking for development updates and if you want to take these things up with HTC directly...

support@hitechcreations.com is their email.

[SkyRock]

JMFJ, it's good to see dweebs posting!  Keep up the good dweebery!

[Hornet33]

Originally posted by Slash27
Man, you're gonna get flamed.


Short answer, its a flight sim. GVs are going to take a back seat to aircraft and game development right now. There are plenty of us who want more GVs and HTC knows it. All in due time.

Oh I don't know about it being a flight sim. The TV commercial I saw that got me interested, advertised the game as a comprehensive WWII combat simulation with fighters, bombers, tanks, and ships. Other than being a first person shooter it had everything.

I would never call this game a "flight simulator"

[Zazen13]

This is a, does the dog wag the tail or the tail wag the dog debate. No offense to GV guys, ya'll are beautifull. But, all additions to the game beyond aircraft are merely to make the game more multi-dimensional and interesting. A big part of WW2 was the ground attack role of aircraft. GV's were added to a) act as AA b) act as an object for the affections of the many ground attack planes. Obviously GV's also fight each other, but that is incidental rather than the reason for their existence as is evidenced by the dubious modelling of the ground to ground dynamics in AH. GV's simply provide a potential for a combined arms approach to the strategic aspect of AH. Who knows what the future of AH holds but in this specialized niche market I would not presume to expect HTC to attempt to put serious coding effort into trying make AH more like WWII Online.

Zazen

[Curval]

There's ground vehicles in AH2?

[JMFJ]

Hornet: What do you mean i'm gonna get flamed?

Zazen: I follow in WWII that tank encounters were accidental rather than intentional.  That tank wars were rare, but I think that you'll find that records of planes furballing were even more rare, but that's what happens majority of the time in the game.  Given that the game is to be created off of actual realities of vehicles whether that be planes, bombers, gv's, or water craft.  The fact of the matter is the players aren't playing realisticly anyways.  HO's, furballs, tank town, etc...

So why not expand based on what the players like/want rather than "CONCEPTUAL" and "UNINFORCABLE" realities.  If you think they should stop expansion of tanks cause tank fighting was rare.  Then they should limit fuel and get rid of drop tanks to reduce the capabilities of furballing, cause that was even more rare?  This wouldn't make sense, because I too enjoy furballing.  Design around what players appreciate while keeping it within the boundaries of what was available not what actually happened/reasons of existence.

I don't totally understand your view to hold back something cause it doesn't interest you, I don't say they shouldn't of made the spitXVI and instead make a sherman tank, I say make both, or make the sherman next.

JMFJ

[Mustaine]

Originally posted by JMFJ
Hornet: What do you mean i'm gonna get flamed?

flamed means insulted and made fun of on a bulletin board.

the scarstic somments in this thread could be considered mild "flames"

it is just mostly chest puffing on the internet.

[Karnak]

Originally posted by JMFJ
(No more T34's)

T-34/85 would be a great addition.  I still don't understand why they added the T-34/76 instead.

[Furball]

this is Aces High

not Aces Crawl Around in the Mud

[Hornet33]

I didn't say you would be flamed. I was quoting anouther person who posted.

[viper215]

Originally posted by JMFJ
)/tiger(should cost more perks)
 

no way

[Zazen13]

Originally posted by JMFJ
Hornet: What do you mean i'm gonna get flamed?

Zazen: I follow in WWII that tank encounters were accidental rather than intentional.  That tank wars were rare, but I think that you'll find that records of planes furballing were even more rare, but that's what happens majority of the time in the game.  Given that the game is to be created off of actual realities of vehicles whether that be planes, bombers, gv's, or water craft.  The fact of the matter is the players aren't playing realisticly anyways.  HO's, furballs, tank town, etc...

So why not expand based on what the players like/want rather than "CONCEPTUAL" and "UNINFORCABLE" realities.  If you think they should stop expansion of tanks cause tank fighting was rare.  Then they should limit fuel and get rid of drop tanks to reduce the capabilities of furballing, cause that was even more rare?  This wouldn't make sense, because I too enjoy furballing.  Design around what players appreciate while keeping it within the boundaries of what was available not what actually happened/reasons of existence.

I don't totally understand your view to hold back something cause it doesn't interest you, I don't say they shouldn't of made the spitXVI and instead make a sherman tank, I say make both, or make the sherman next.

JMFJ

I never said tank battles were rare in real life. My point was from a marketing and implimentation point-of-view. HTC could mess the game up trying to be too many things at once. The bread and butter of HTC and AH is and always has been Air Combat. There are games of a similiar nature that were designed from a concept stage to have a visceral ground combat experience, Aces High is not one of those. AH is and has always been from the concept stage to the present an Air Combat Game, drawing on WW2 combat aircraft for it's subject matter. GV's were added after the fact and in a fashion that was designed to compliment rather than be a wholesale replacement for the air combat aspect of gameplay.

While I agree in theory a game should be everything possible all the time HTC faces daunting constraints of design, coding, implimentation and balance factors that are very complex. To say simply adding more vehicles would make AH a compelling ground pounder game is niave. AH would need totally re-worked design concepts to have the ground war facet be anywhere close to the air war aspect in terms of playability and have any semblence of fidelity to realism. That is not to say this or something like this may not occur in the future of AH, but the implimentation will likely be a piece-meal, slow, and gradual process of product evolution if it does.

Zazen

[JMFJ]

Hornet: I follow that you weren't pointing at me just quoting it, I was just curious as to what slash meant by that.

The tiger is equal in advantage to the 262, it is so advantageous that if everyone could afford to drive them they would....all the time.  The reason the tiger is probably not perked so high, is that with the lack of vehicles it doesn't make sense.  But the fact that It can single handedly hold off a vehicle base, from any gv attacks seems overkill.  No tank should be able to hold off 4+ panzers in practical application.  So I guess I feel since it can, it shouldn't be so free to use.  Just like 262's cost so much it's rare to see them.

JMFJ