Author Topic: toolshedders and Furballers, you both need each other. (Read 2668 times)

hubsonfire · « **Reply #60 on:** April 08, 2006, 10:05:32 PM »

I played AH1.99something beta. I remember when someone (either through dual accounts or cooperation with the enemy) arranged for 2 fleet groups to get the escorts all sunk, and then the 2 fleets were then put on mirror-image patterns about 5 or 10 miles apart. It was an absolute brutal furball that went on for what seemed like ages. It was perfect.

I also remember seeing, on average, between 30 and 50 guys in there. However the point could be made that it wasn't because people weren't interested in furballmania, per se, but rather they didn't want to test, preferring to log in after it went live and just *****.

Anyway, I just felt like sharing that.

SlapShot · « **Reply #61 on:** April 08, 2006, 10:09:06 PM »

not to start anything but this doesnt ring true for me slappy. clearly you DO care alot about where, when and the targets for these mishuns, as they potentially hold the power to destroy your entire night of gameplay.

Take my word for it ... I DON'T care ... one bit ... not enough to cheat (rely on a spy).

Like I said ... if one knows how to read a map ... one can tell where the fights/missions are and where they aren't ... it's way to easy to have to rely on cheating/spying.

I have nothing against valid missions ... those that actually PLAN and TRY for the capture ... all the power to them.

Missions DO NOT destroy my gameplay ... griefers DO ... griefers are one step lower on the evolutionary chain than those who spy ... and both are many rungs below the slug.

when was the last time you upped a field and flew high cap for 20 mins to defend against bombers?

sorry you expect others to defend your FHs while you furball, or do you just suggest that the buffers are not permited to play at all?

Last time ... hmmmmm ... back when I was a MAW probably. It was painfull to say the least.

I don't expect anyone to defend my FHs ... you want to take my base where I am flying out of ... go for it ... nuke it for morbid and make sure you bring some goons ... else I will consider you a griefer ... because your only intention would have been to end a fight just for the sake of ending a fight.

mars01 · « **Reply #62 on:** April 08, 2006, 10:09:12 PM »

Quote

here's an idea...

Not really. LOLH

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #63 on:** April 08, 2006, 10:28:07 PM »

Grievers do what they do largely because the game lets them. I think that's where the "problem" needs to be looked at first. Take away the impact of their deeds and you take away their satisfaction.

Shakey suggested making base damage be analog, so that the most a greiver could do is take away the better planes or make people drag 2 or 3 goons to capture a base. While that's still obviously annoying, it's not a deal killer. The dedicated strat guys will still do what they do and adjust their formations accordingly. And the dedicated furballers probably fly the middle-ENY planes anyway, so not having Spit16's won't affect them much at all.

A couple greivers can no longer stall an entire front for 40 or 50 people by killing troops; nor can they extinguish a furball for 40 or 50 folks by killing FH. A base will always be able to launch some kind of fighters on defense. And it will always be able to launch some kind of bomber and troop carrier on offense.

It also means you can leave FT just the way it is. And if people go on a bombing binge then the worst that happens is everyone bombs each other's FH and you set the Way-Back machine to 1940 in terms of what there is to fly.

This seems like a nice, balanced solution which minimizes the impact of pork-based tactics without really costing the people who want to Play The Game anything at all.

Without getting into personalities, what problems are there with such an modificaton to the MA's base handling logic?

B@tfinkV · « **Reply #64 on:** April 08, 2006, 10:43:40 PM »

fair enough slapshot, plz remember that I personally am firmly seated in the furballers camp.

I just find it important to pursue other activities ingame to protect my chance to furball. If this means flying one quick high alt run in a chog to intercept some buffs i am willing to take the time. If there is no fur i will post a mishun to capture a base and start a fight.

what i strongly disagree with is that anyone not furballing is automaticaly a griefer and doing what they do to stop the fun of others.

Shaky · « **Reply #65 on:** April 08, 2006, 11:20:46 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by DoKGonZo

Shakey suggested making base damage be analog,

Thanks for the credit DoK, but there aint no "E" in Shaky .

Here's the post....

Its possible to use portions of that design to mae ofher player experiences less than enjoyable. A prime example of that is the porkers that continually roam the landscape, porking troop, ord, and hangers just to see things go "boom".

These porkers are not a reason to eliminate the core designs of the game, however they may be a reason to modify them. It is possible to keep aircraft on a field supressed without dropping the FH's , so why should the porkers have the ability to drop them completely?

Bombing the FHs should reduce the effetiveness of fighters coming up, but not eleimiate them. How to reduce effectiveness? Dunno...perhaps by limiting the types that can come up based on the damage done.

Suggestion:
5000 lbs damage: ENY<7 disabled
10000 lbs damage: ENY<15 disabled
20000 lbs damage: ENY<35 Disabled

Ordie and troops should operate the same way. Imagine if troops were damaged to the extent that you could only load 2 troops . Well..jeeps would get a lotta use then, wouldn't they?

This could even be weighted against the roster, so that is very difficult to pork fighters on a country that is vastly outnumbered.

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #66 on:** April 08, 2006, 11:37:07 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Shaky
Thanks for the credit DoK, but there aint no "E" in Shaky .

Here's the post....

...

Oh .. sorry.

I know it's an idea that's been floated before. Hell, I know I mentioned it recently. But it seems like something that would solve what both camps are complaining about and at the same time hopefully add more planes to the mix in the MA (through hangars getting blowed up).

Shaky · « **Reply #67 on:** April 09, 2006, 12:12:59 AM »

Yup DoK, its something that should be looked at seriously by the PTB. Some "ground rules" should be considered, though.

How much bombage to degrade a hanger 1 step? Personally, I think it should take 3 fighters worth of ord to drop a hanger down that first step, and take LA7, Spit16s, P51Ds and the other 7 and under ENY planes out of the mix. That translates into about 4800 lbs plus I believe, including rockets that may be carried. Of course, ALL hangers would need to be hit to drop the effectiveness of the field, so perhaps 1 fighter load could drop 1 hanger 1 step?

Dropping it 2 steps....step it up linearly, or base it on likely damage done by a certain amount of aircraft? How much damage should a box of lancs be able to do, drop 2 hangers to minimum? Dunno...have to think it through.

End results of something like this would be MUCH more than simply high ENY allowing fighters to up regardless of hwo much tonnage is dropped. It would take coordination and teamwork to drop all the hangers the same degree, it would take tactics and strategy to new areas, and thats a GOOD thing....the need for cooperation KILLS griefers

Hardening a few of the ack guns should follow the same idea. Dropping a 500 pounder dead on should kill any single field defense item though.

Also note that if something like this is put into effect, STRAT can be reenabled to mean something, like longer repair times for the hangers. Since the base will be able to up some kind of fighter defense even in the worse case, there's no reason to nueter strat.

Hell, its late, and I jsut came down here to have a cig. Should know better than to even check the damn board ...

Zazen13 · « **Reply #68 on:** April 09, 2006, 01:11:37 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
actualy batty... you are wrong.. The best furballs are between fields not at em.

lazs
Public Relations Officer for the BK's

That's very true, that is why I made it a personal goal to become the Grand Master of 37mm, to push the vulching horde tards off the fields so furballs could materialize...

Zazen

Zazen13 · « **Reply #69 on:** April 09, 2006, 01:14:18 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2

The fluffers could go away and the furballers would not be affected except in a positive way.... furballers in no way need fluffs in the game.

Now, let's turn it around.... the oppossite is not true. The game would be nothing without the furballers and fighters. Who ya gonna greif then? other fluffers? LOL.

Nope... batties original premise is wrong.. we do not "need each other" the fluffers need us but we don't need them.

Nothing you or he has said contradicts that.

Now... back to the difference in "need" and makeing available... The company needs to get as large a revenue base as possible.... that means bringing in as many mouse weilding fluffers as the game can bear... If, said mouse wielding fluffers can't feel like they are being noticed and "affecting the game".....

They won't do it. The balancing act is not about fighters vs fluffs.... it is about balancing the need to have the revenue of fluffer griefers against ruining the game for too many people.

lazs
Public Relations Officer for the BK's

Beautifully put Lazs.

~~Zazen~~

Zazen13 · « **Reply #70 on:** April 09, 2006, 01:19:40 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by mars01
You could go to the FT/TT on the current map and have a great time every time you log in, happily thinking "HT is great" and thrilled that your spending 15 bucks to do it.

AND

All the Strategist can wack each other off all night long killing each others hangers and stopping every fight that starts on the WHOLE REST OF THE MAP. Notice the rest of the map is for you startegerisat so I could care less how you play, I just want to be able to play my way thats all.

If you guys couldn't bomb outhouses every night your whining would make our whining look like a whisper.

Haha! also Beeeeeautifull! mars01

Zazen

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #71 on:** April 09, 2006, 02:50:41 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Shaky
...

How much bombage to degrade a hanger 1 step? Personally, I think it should take 3 fighters worth of ord to drop a hanger down that first step, and take LA7, Spit16s, P51Ds and the other 7 and under ENY planes out of the mix. That translates into about 4800 lbs plus I believe, including rockets that may be carried. Of course, ALL hangers would need to be hit to drop the effectiveness of the field, so perhaps 1 fighter load could drop 1 hanger 1 step?

...

I never even considered that the base degrades to the highest level of all available hangars instead of just a progression. Thats bucking frilliant! The attack groups will need to coordinate their target selection to make sure all FH get hit equally to get the desired effect.

And of course if your own base gets hit and you lose the use of 1000 pounders (degraded ord) then such a strike requires more planes, or mixing in bombers to make up for what the Jabo's can't carry now.

Enhances gameplay and also shoves a dead armadillo up the collective backsides of the grievers. Perfect.

Strats do start to become important because if you do get a good hit on the FH's or AAA or whatever you want to retain that advantage. And it means folks may spend more time bombing towns and flying CAP since that requires less coordination than near-synchronous FH strikes.

I have mixed feelings on AAA. Realistically 6 .50 cal's would pretty much shred the gun crew and knock the gun out of commission. But in AH2 they don't, so cannon-birds tend to dominate. So saying that AAA are only vulnerable to ord would balance things in terms of Jabo's. Then it'd require a little more effort to de-ack a field ... so you'd correspondingly want the down-time to be a little longer.

I like it. I like it a lot.

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #72 on:** April 09, 2006, 03:00:54 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by mars01

If you guys couldn't bomb outhouses every night your whining would make our whining look like a whisper.

LMAO I highly doubt that.

Wouldnt be any better but I doubt their whines would be any worse.
They couldnt possibly be.

Just curious.
What mindless dink coined the terms "outhouses" and "Toolsheds"?
I assume they are feeble attempts at insults?
And did they realy think such terms would actually shame people into playing the game "their" way?

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #73 on:** April 09, 2006, 03:23:39 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by DREDIOCK
...

What mindless dink coined the terms "outhouses" and "Toolsheds"?

... /B]

I started calling them outhouses because any time I play, from every base I launch (even 1 or 2 levels rearward), there's a procession of solo pork-based dweebs who do nothing but strafe barracks and ord. Then they either run (half the time the wrong way) or vultch the field for two passes and die.

I just found "toolshed" gave them more credit than they were due.

Flayed1 · « **Reply #74 on:** April 09, 2006, 05:14:09 AM »

What I see alot is that for a furballer you see all kinds of dots at so and so base and you think good furball. I up at said base and get vulched several times and say screw this, up my bombers and take out the oposing FH's to give my side a chance to up. This is what happens most of the time when I'm at a base that has a so called furball at it. Just a bunch of vulching. So maybe it isn't the furballers or the bomber types that mess up the fun but the guys that hang over the field looking for free kills that mess it up for all.

I have no problem with vulching if it is for some purpose like taking the base or stoping people from defending the next base over that we are trying to take. But most of the time it's just guys that have more #'s vulching a field and I get pissed because there is no hint of a real fight and so I go over at 20K and kill the NME FH's to let my side get up for a min or two. But half the time when I do this I get *****ed at for ruining the furball when in reality I just ruined the vulch.