Originally posted by SlapShot
Don't know why you guys continue ... ChopSaw has all the right answers ... regardless of anybody's experiences or longevity in this game.
He should probably request a private meeting with HT and pontificate his vast and superior knowledge of AH gameplay to him.
It shouldn't be too difficult to get HT to change his mind ... afterall ... the mindless furballers were able to easy get him to make all these changes. I am sure that someone of higher intellect like ChopSaw could easily persuade HT.
Ah. Sarcasm. I know it well, having employed it on occasion myself. For some reason particularly with members of the Burger Kings. If you see a person doing something obviously wrong and they say they've been doing it that way for twenty years, what do you assume? That they must be right? Or do you assume they've been doing it wrong for twenty years? It would seem from your postings, and those of your squad in general, you feel anyone with an opinion other than yours is not only wrong, but of obviously inferior stock altogether. I could be wrong. As you've sarcastically pointed out, I may not have "all the right answers" and may not be possessed of "vast and superior knowledge".
Your opinion is that I'm wrong and not as smart as you think I think I am. That doesn't bother me too much. You go on to say I characterize furballers as "the mindless furballers". That I object to. I've never said they're mindless. I've not even said that of you or your squad members nor have I implied it in anything but well deserved returns in banter. What I have said is that I consider them integral to the game and an important aspect of the game. I realize this might be construed as such an understatement as to be sarcastic, but I assure you it is not.
Do you assume that because someone has only 3 or 4 years experience in AH that all his analysis and ideas are incorrect if they contrast with those of a person who's played the game for 5 years?
Right now I fly bombers most of the time. Occasionally I fly fighters and in AH1 I predominately flew fighters, as I may again in AH2. I also man guns on cv's, fields, shore batteries and cruisers as well as drive around in gv's a bit. In short I enjoy all aspects of game play in this WWII simulator. I believe my observations and opinions are the result of a game view, not one select aspect of the game.
My sole interest in returning the fuel vulnerability of fields to 25% is simply to return a balance to the game. To return a strategic target that was an important part of the strategic system. In short, to return strategy to the game. In AH1 it was possible for a country to partially offset a numerical advantage of their opponent by temporarily destroying fuel assets over a selected area. It was even possible for a country with fewer numbers to win a map reset. In AH2 this capability has been eliminated or at best critically crippled. As a result, numbers rule. Whoever has the most pilots wins. Every time. No exception and porking their troops, while somewhat effective at slowing them down, does not slow them down enough. Superior strategy, cooperation and skill should be winning this game. Not whoever has the most guys.
You imply that I don't care what others say or think and that is patently false. I listen and discuss with everyone willing to express support for their position. I advocate certain ideas that others have had such as hardening fuel bunkers as well as ammo bunkers and indeed troops. I believe it should require ordnance to bring down these targets, either rocket, bomb or heavy cannon. It seems a bit light to allow machine guns or even fighter cannon to take them down.
Reducing field fuel supply to 25% won't ruin the game. It will rejuvenate the game play. It will mean players will have to think more about what they're doing and for a good number of us, that will make it more fun. For those that don't care for that sort of game play, the activities they enjoy will not be eliminated, they simply won't be available across the entirety of the map without restriction.
