Question?

[68DevilM]

whats the purpose of the cities, flack factories, fuel, and ammo depoes in the MA anyways?

other than to give the tool shed killers someting to do?

[Urchin]

They used to affect the respawn time for the buildings on the airfields, I'm not sure if they still do.

[Panzzer]

Aces High Gameplay: Strategy Guide.

[68DevilM]

Originally posted by Urchin
They used to affect the respawn time for the buildings on the airfields, I'm not sure if they still do.

hmm i see a game request forming here, mabey go with limiting a countrys resources for real and abilty to wage war...ie realistic......well if were gonna have them in the map, might as well be there for a reason....HTC where ya at onn this one?

heck i we drop a countries fuel to 25% then all bases attached to the fuel refinery,  max fuel is limited too, same for ammo and whatever.

[68DevilM]

Originally posted by Panzzer
Aces High Gameplay: Strategy Guide.

ok didnt think this still had effect.

[BBQ_Bob]

Originally posted by Panzzer
Aces High Gameplay: Strategy Guide.

What I need is the AH Wife ACK Strategy Guide.

[68DevilM]

Originally posted by BBQ_Bob
What I need is the AH Wife ACK Strategy Guide.

lol...ur not gonna like that guide book.......

not sure about the spelling but it goes sumting like this.....

D.I.O.V.O.R.C.E


and then my all time favirote

child support..........

[SlapShot]

Originally posted by 68DevilM
ok didnt think this still had effect.

Problem is that most don't know this ... and the ones that do ... it's too much work for them to try and take advantage of it. It's much easier to have an effect on people to take out FHs than it is too cripple a whole country.

[Bronk]

Originally posted by BBQ_Bob
What I need is the AH Wife ACK Strategy Guide.

Here is what ya do.
Get a nice warm bath going for her .
Put candles, and rose petals  all around the tub.
Get the potpourri going.
Nice soothing music in the background.
Let her slip into the tub then make sure she is nice and comfortable.
Then
























Rush out and nail gun the door shut. It'll work until the neighbors call the cops anyway.


Bronk

[Simaril]

Lifetime TV

or the one that works at my house,

Gilmore Girls DVD from Netflix. One of those comes, and my son and I know we have a whole evening of uninterrupted computer time while the wimmenfolk relax!

[FiLtH]

This is my take on it. The game will likely not go in the direction where a team can be effectively reduced to a point where they cant fly. There are too many in here who prefer just going up and finding a fight rather than patroling a city sector to protect it every mission. Although thats why there were bombers, and therefore fighters to stop them in WW2. In a game like this with so many freelancers and lone wolves who play their own way, I dont think it would go over big.

  Imagine one team fielding a really effective bomber squad that constantly shut down a teams strats. Having the opposing team field a large intercept force to constantly thwart them is rather unlikely.

[Krusty]

I think it's likely. When I see bombers I report them. Repeatedly. Often folks will muster a defense. I would like to think that's not only because their field is at risk. Taking down bombers can be fun. I used to like it a lot (kind of a phase I went through), and to some extent I still do.

I lose a little respect for some folks that say "Oh, I don't go after bombers. Too much effort, I can get 2-3 fighter kills in the time it takes me to hit those bombers". I don't think bombers are perfect (usually flying upwards of 100-150mph too fast for historical comparison), but I think they are still easily destroyed. I think some folks like hunting bombers, too, because it's a different kind of attack. They're on course, you have to fly around them, no give-and-take like dogfighting.

If (hypothetically) you got big missions hitting strat all the time, you'd get big missions intercepting them. Why? Because it's action! It's getting kills! It's having fun!

Then again, most of this is my opinion (lol), and may not apply to the greater MA.

[NHawk]

Originally posted by FiLtH
This is my take on it. The game will likely not go in the direction where a team can be effectively reduced to a point where they cant fly. There are too many in here who prefer just going up and finding a fight rather than patroling a city sector to protect it every mission. Although thats why there were bombers, and therefore fighters to stop them in WW2. In a game like this with so many freelancers and lone wolves who play their own way, I dont think it would go over big.

  Imagine one team fielding a really effective bomber squad that constantly shut down a teams strats. Having the opposing team field a large intercept force to constantly thwart them is rather unlikely.

Actually the game has gone the other direction. We USE to be able to drop field resources to affect game play. dropping fuel down to 25% was the biggie. Now, you get 100% no matter what. I don't know why it changed, but it did.

[Ghosth]

It changed because  HT made it  impossible to drop fuel below 75%.
It was a concession to the furballers who'd been screaming bloody murder for years.

So now its pork ord & troops at individual bases.

The problem with the strat objects is that if a country is really on a roll. By the time you can get a strike of bombers & escorts together to do something about it. All the strats are ussually so far behind the lines that getting in is virtually impossible.

So we have strat objects sitting there doing nothing. With the exception of a couple of maps, where they'll be hit ruthlessly for the first 3 days of a new tour as people run their rank down.

IMO we need to change a couple of things to make strats viable.

Put a 20 mile "no mans land" with no airfields between the fronts.
Put flack, ammo, radar, city strats there for both sides. Cluster them, like the Ruhr valley in Germany. Line air & vehicle fields down the sides for defense.
Put the zone base for the front line strats WELL back.

Put the HQ, city, fuel in the rear near a 5k field where it can be defended.

[NoBaddy]

Originally posted by Ghosth

IMO we need to change a couple of things to make strats viable.

Put a 20 mile "no mans land" with no airfields between the fronts.
Put flack, ammo, radar, city strats there for both sides. Cluster them, like the Ruhr valley in Germany. Line air & vehicle fields down the sides for defense.
Put the zone base for the front line strats WELL back.

Put the HQ, city, fuel in the rear near a 5k field where it can be defended.

Ghosth...

The problem is that there are two diametrically opposed forces at work in the game. One side is "I want to pop in and have a little fun", the other is "I want to win the war". HT is attempting to balance them in the MA.

One can only be made more viable at the expense of the other. So, the question for HT becomes, who do you alienate....and to what extent? Since I only rarely drive bombers, I would vote for the low impact strat we have now.  With the setup the game has now, it is simply to easy for a small group to negatively impact a large segment of players.

It might be that the "zone" concept should be expanded. Make more, smaller zones. Instead of having an easily visible factory complex that just needs to be flattened to destroy its strategic usefulness, have multiple cities where the factories are not easily identifiable.

I believe the only balanced way to make strat targets move viable is to make them less easy to find and destroy. I also believe the problem is more than simply redesigning maps.