Come on rookland !!

[SFCHONDO]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by SFCHONDO
Stang Good luck on Christmas Eve.

Bet you a friendly Buck I win.  

Originally posted by MINNOW
I'll be at that one

I Hate you....LOL...Well you better enjoy yourself enough for the both of us dam it.

[INSANO2]

you guys should come fly with the knights. we don't have that problem because we are always outnumbered 2-1

[TequilaChaser]

er my apologies to HTC & the community, btw I also broke forum rules #2, #4, #5, #9,  & #15 along with the original Rule #7..........

film on the way................

[MINNOW]

Originally posted by SFCHONDO
I Hate you....LOL...Well you better enjoy yourself enough for the both of us dam it. [/B]

lol Just lucky actually... Where I work has season tix and they are all old guys that dont wanna sit in the stands in the cold!


I'll be at the Raider game too WOOT!


GO BRONCOS!!!!      

[SFCHONDO]

I'll be deployed this season, get to watch the games at 3am...LOL

[Schatzi]

Originally posted by TequilaChaser
er my apologies to HTC & the community, btw I also broke forum rules #2, #4, #5, #9,  & #15 along with the original Rule #7..........
 

In other words...


You have been a very bad boy!

[Mugzeee]

Originally posted by detch01
Kinda makes me wish moving a CV required that a player take and retain command of it and to take command of it he/she must be and remain onboard or lose command of it. This low rank has the right-of-way method doesn't seem to be working out very well these days.
 

Yet another genius idea that is fuel for argument in the MA. I agree with ya 150% detch01.
This has been visited many times in the past. It is a totally ludicrous idea to assume that "High Rank" has the ability, sense, tactical planning or even the concern to command a fleet effectively. Its simply WRONG WRONG WRONG. I think it CV operations could be sooooo much more effective if we didn't let it be used as a furball island.  A player of 1200 Rank should be given a chance to prove their ability to attack a base with a Task Group. I am certain that there are many players that have excellent tactical skills to use a TG effectively even though their rank is that of a noob or someone that has only logged a few flights a month.

[Lusche]

Originally posted by Mugzeee
Yet another genius idea that is fuel for argument in the MA. I agree with ya 150% detch01.
This has been visited many times in the past. It is a totally ludicrous idea to assume that "High Rank" has the ability, sense, tactical planning or even the concern to command a fleet effectively. Its simply WRONG WRONG WRONG. I think it CV operations could be sooooo much more effective if we didn't let it be used as a furball island.  A player of 1200 Rank should be given a chance to prove their ability to attack a base with a Task Group. I am certain that there are many players that have excellent tactical skills to use a TG effectively even though their rank is that of a noob or someone that has only logged a few flights a month.

I agree with most of your thoughts. High rank does not mean neccesarily a grasp for good CV tactics.
But what is the alternative? If we just discard the rank limitation so that the player who is in command stays in command until he resigns, it would get worse IMHO. Any noob (and there are a lot of them )could take command of a cv group in the morning when numbers are low and then mess with it or just go afk for the day without any chance to stop him. Even with the "stay onboard " limitation for control.  CV groups would get even more "private" property than they are today.
Other possible solution foregoing rank limitation: Anybody can take command anytime regardless of other players in command. I think that would mess it up, too. (Think of all the new, >3000 rank "WUTS THIS? COOL" guys...   )

[detch01]

Originally posted by Lusche
CV groups would get even more "private" property than they are today.
Other possible solution foregoing rank limitation: Anybody can take command anytime regardless of other players in command. I think that would mess it up, too. (Think of all the new, >3000 rank "WUTS THIS? COOL" guys...   )

As it stands right now one score monkey can affect the game play of a bunch of other players on a whim from a distance - whether the intent is malicious or to "protect the CV".  But you are right, TG's could become "private property" and that would be just as bad if not a worse problem. One griefer with a shade account could wreak havoc.
A different approach:
Base TG command priority on missions. Add a duration value to the mission planner and if a player runs a mission from a TG he/she gets and retains command for the duration of the mission, regardless of rank. Top out the mission duration value at some reasonable time from submission so that one player can't set up a mission with an unreasonable duration. Also have the server track mission attendance - if at launch time there isn't more than one player attached to the mission it gets scrubbed and TG command is lost. With all current TG requirements remaining as they are outside of missions being run off a TG.
This isn't a perfect solution but the current ability of one player to adversely affect the game play of a number of other players makes the idea of running squad ops or missions off of TG's a less than attractive one and this might help to alleviate that.

... just a thought.


Cheers,
asw

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by Roscoroo
Theres no co-op in rookland anymore ...

When your own country stops a 3 squad co-op offensive Roll by stealing the cvs  there using with 50+ players and spinning them so much they cant up and keep on the offensive ... Its Time for something to be said ...



Note : we captured the port and the cv and could of had alot more ... it was ruined by Players that have no clue .. and certianly cant listen .

Funny how last night there was a massive air battle between 60 and 61.  Had to be 50-60 planes having at it.  It went on for a couple hours I think, swinging between the two bases, drifting towards theirs, then back towards ours.  I hadn't had that much fun in the game in a while.

But true to form somoneone, this time from my 'team' flattened the FH's at the other guys base and killed it.  End of fun for that large group of players

I suppose in the overall scheme of things if your game is strategy and land grab, he did the right thing, but his 'strategy' ruined a lot of fun for the rest of us.

I guess it's all a matter of your perspective.  I would agree however that one guy ruining it for many is not a good thing, regardless of your take on the game.

What was funny last night was the guy who flattened the FH's seemed to expect a WTG from the rest of us for doing it.  The 'silence' on country was deafening.

[lazs2]

Don't you toolshed killers ever get the urge to fight the rest of the guys on?

Or is the strat so complex to you  that it keeps you interested building after building after building after...

lazs
Public Relations Officer for the BK's

[ozrocker]

Agree with Hondo
               Oz