Author Topic: Idea discussed at the con. (Read 10306 times)

lazs2 · « **Reply #150 on:** July 08, 2006, 10:01:53 AM »

I agreed with widewings idea when he brought it up a few years ago and agree with it now.

It makes sense and seems fair to everyone.

lazs

The Fugitive · « **Reply #151 on:** July 08, 2006, 10:09:07 AM »

I agree that something has to be done, and HT's plan here is a step in the right dirrection. Some of the suggestions here are all well and good, but implementing them may be far more time consuming than HTs has avalible right now.

I like the twist of the object smoking till the "timer" runs out and then destroying it as apposed to the "pop back up" idea.

The bases do need to be made more difficult to take. With the groups we have flying these days a single pass is enough to flatten most bases. Hardenning of the targets would help, and be easy enough to adjust. More manable guns would be good too. "IF" people wanted to defend a base they could, but this may fall into the "time problem" that HT has. I don't think increasing the hardness on the guns would be good, as straffing a gun should take it out in one pass...as long as you hit it

Granted, increasing the hardness, and setting a timer on the ordance to slow to suicide porkers are "stop gap" messures, it is "something". and I'm all for a little "something" as opposed to "nothing"

KTM520guy · « **Reply #152 on:** July 08, 2006, 10:12:41 AM »

I still fail to see how hangar rebuild time and life expectancy can be/should be related. These are two very different thngs and have nothing to do with each other.

NoBaddy · « **Reply #153 on:** July 08, 2006, 10:30:27 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by KTM520guy
I still fail to see how hangar rebuild time and life expectancy can be/should be related. These are two very different thngs and have nothing to do with each other.

That's because you continue to focus on the negative aspects of the proposal. It's not about hangers or life expectancy. It is about reducing the rewards for suicide. It's about attempting to de-Quake the game a bit.

Brenjen · « **Reply #154 on:** July 08, 2006, 10:32:42 AM »

I couldn't bring myself to read past Hitechs second post, but my thoughts are NO I do not like it, most pork 'N' auger guys don't live 2 minutes after the drop so why not make it 1 minute? Ever sit & watch a timer count off seconds; 1 minute is a long time. Esspecially when you are waiting on food in the microwave.

KTM520guy · « **Reply #155 on:** July 08, 2006, 10:49:38 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by NoBaddy
That's because you continue to focus on the negative aspects of the proposal. It's not about hangers or life expectancy. It is about reducing the rewards for suicide. It's about attempting to de-Quake the game a bit.

I understand the reason for the proposal and it's good. The effect, however, is not good.

KTM520guy · « **Reply #156 on:** July 08, 2006, 11:14:51 AM »

I think Moil is is the right track for a solution to this problem. In addition I think a change to base layout should be made. As an example, here is a cool setup for a V-base. Best of all, it's already an HTC creation.

ghi · « **Reply #157 on:** July 08, 2006, 11:29:23 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by KTM520guy
I think Moil is is the right track for a solution to this problem. In addition I think a change to base layout should be made. As an example, here is a cool setup for a V-base. Best of all, it's already an HTC creation.
]

watching surface marked yellow for sucsesful landing, i was thinking why, we get a ditch ,landing on the base on the grass 1 inch from runway !!?? Were lot of complains about this in last years, imop should get succssesfull landing anywhere on the perimeter of the base
How many bases in WW2 had concrete runways!?

cav58d · « **Reply #158 on:** July 08, 2006, 12:44:39 PM »

Lets all be realistic...This is not a big enough problem in the MA to make a MAJOR change in the game...It really isnt! I can gurantee that even if this silly idea is added into the game, there will still be massive porking and massive whining... And in regards to dive bombing lancs into cv's? Instead of waiting for them to come to whine, ya know you could always up a CHOG, CAP the CV, and get kill after kill of buffs trying to attack (conventionally or unconventionally)

Am I the only one who is seeing this as a waste of time??? Did HTC not say there will be no new developements until CT is released? So why this???? And why now??? I really dont think this "problem" is a big enough one to divert your attention from CT...I dont think this is a smart idea....All its going to do is cause more whines, and push the already unfashionably late CT back another 2 weeks, 6 months, 10 years!!! If you really want a side project to slow you down while working on CT atleast create a new map or give us a new gv or buff......

Arghhhhh:furious

MOIL · « **Reply #159 on:** July 08, 2006, 12:55:45 PM »

Thanks KTM,

I think everyone including myself would like to see a "fair" solution for everyone. I do not want to dictate how people should play the game, I do not want to take someones fun away or limit what they can do.

However, it appears most (not all) seem to keep wanting more & more realism in the game (myself included) vs easy mode or relaxed.

I beleive all players should be rewarded for accomplishing thier missions and helping their Countymen. If one or two guys wants to attack, de-ack or pork a field then they should be met with heavy AA fire and chances of survival or doing any damage will be little to none. No different than me trying to attack a port in Jeep by myself, sure I CAN try it but what do you think the outcome will be?

It should take planning, teamwork and communication to achieve a victory at a base or airfield.

I know there is a lot of guys that like to furball and are not looking to take bases or vulch. This is great too, they (the furballers) can furball all day, get in those white-knuckle fights and have the bragging rights if they wish.

Just keep in mind if you want to furball over an enemy base or vulch an airfield be prepared to be shot at with a lot of guns, you want to furball just off base, over the water or in the hills, have at it.

There is no single "fix" or "solution" to all that happens in the MA, most will come from us the players. For myself I just grow tired of the wash, rinse & repeat scenario that takes place everyday.

nopoop · « **Reply #160 on:** July 08, 2006, 12:56:30 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by cav58d
Am I the only one who is seeing this as a waste of time???

Ahh..

Pretty much.

Kev367th · « **Reply #161 on:** July 08, 2006, 01:07:11 PM »

Spent last night mulling it over -

There are two pork/auger types:
a) Drop eggs then bail
b) Drop eggs then lawndart in right after them.

The proposed solution won't affect (a) they'll just stay in the aircraft a little longer.

It would affect (b), but in their case you only need seconds not minutes.

Frankly HT never really said in either of his original posts what exactly the proposed change was meant to counter.

If (a) - It won't
If (b) - It will, but timer only needs to be 5- 10 secs.

Even for dive bombing buffs you don't need 1 or even 2 minutes.

Lye-El · « **Reply #162 on:** July 08, 2006, 03:28:45 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by NoBaddy

My second reason was my growing weariness with guys that climb a 51 or La7 to 15k then dive past a lower enemy fighter to drop a bomb, then circle in the ack shooting a hanger (or some such) until killed by an ack o

Uh, If I upped with bombs my intent is NOT to engage fighters no matter how bad they want me to.

If my intent is to engage enemy fighters, I will not be heavy with ord.

As for the circleing in the ack, as I have stated in a previous post, the ack isn't that deadly a threat because it is hard to hit with it. Except for Zazen of course. If everybody could hit as much as him nobody would be circleing in the ack for long.

Maybe the ack needs to be modeled with Zazen as the gunner.

Simaril · « **Reply #163 on:** July 08, 2006, 04:11:13 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by cav58d
Am I the only one who is seeing this as a waste of time??? Did HTC not say there will be no new developements until CT is released? So why this???? And why now??? I really dont think this "problem" is a big enough one to divert your attention from CT...I dont think this is a smart idea....All its going to do is cause more whines, and push the already unfashionably late CT back another 2 weeks, 6 months, 10 years!!! If you really want a side project to slow you down while working on CT at least create a new map or give us a new gv or buff......

Arghhhhh:furious [/B]

Chill a bit. HT's suggestion is nothing like coding out with a new plane or map -- I'd bet that the code involved would be minimal.

Think about it:

IF player doing damage dies under 2:00 THEN hangar damage erased (or whatever).

I'm no coder, but you have to be looking at a days work or less. And, if it makes the gameplay better, why not do it?

Lastly, dont forget that it IS HiTech's company, he's been in the business for more than a decade, and he's the guy who takes a hit if bad decisions are made. With that in mind, I'll bet he's being more careful than any back seat strategist ever could be when it comes to allocating assets and time!

EagleDNY · « **Reply #164 on:** July 08, 2006, 04:59:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Kev367th
CC Moil totally agree.
A timer is just ignoring the fact the problem really isn't pork/auger, but the fact the fields are so pitifully defended.

Hell the choo choo train of death is worse than the small/medium fields.

Agree totally with the need for more and better ack ack at fields, and like the the idea of having escalating lethality (larger guns) at big fields too.

We really need big-gun (88mm or 5") ack ack mannable at fields. The 37mm stuff is virtually useless unless someone is diving right in on you. Having mannable big gun ack ack also gives a single defender a chance to stop the single porker.

EagleDNY
$.02