What ever happened to AH of old?

[Slow Dog]

I am just wondering why is it that when a few people complain they have the right to ruin AH for everyone? I was here when you could take a fields fuel down to 25%. I know this is to be considered only a war game but what gives the few the right to make it so unrealistic for all of the rest of us PAYING CUSTOMERS?

[GunnerCAF]

Oh great... just one more complaint, and HT will change it back to the way it was!

[hubsonfire]

Originally posted by Slow Dog
I am just wondering why is it that when a few people complain they have the right to ruin AH for everyone? I was here when you could take a fields fuel down to 25%. I know this is to be considered only a war game but what gives the few the right to make it so unrealistic for all of the rest of us PAYING CUSTOMERS?

Because being able to pork fuel to that extent would allow the few to **** over the rest of us PAYING CUSTOMERS.

That's why. You want realism? Kill yourself the next time you get shot down. I'll take fun and balanced gameplay with slightly reduced realism.

[bagrat]

See Rule #7, #16

[ALF]

What happened was AH became a commercial success, and as numbers grew, and tactics became perfected.  One of the reasons any game must evolve is becuase eventually, everyone knows the 'best' way to do things.

We were in the unfortunate state of having fuel porked 95% of the time on all frontline bases, and this reduced the effective usable planeset by about 2/3rds, along with other issues,

Tour of Duty should help those who want more strategy, as living to fight another day will mean something in there.

[WilldCrd]

You want realism? Kill yourself the next time you get shot down. I'll take fun and balanced gameplay with slightly reduced realism.

Now thats funny right there! I dont care who ya are thats funny

[Slow Dog]

Oh now that was funny. But it took alot of crying and whing on BBS and then poof, a couple of guys get the game turned the way they want it. Hell, how many thousands of people on here? I would have been happy for at least a vote. After all, this is a site for us, about us. Right?

[Simaril]

I think what you're missing is that "us" includes people other than YOU.


By taking down fuel, one guy can prevent many from even taking off. This is not fun.

It also makes base taking way too easy...and many have found that after a while, games that are too easy stop being interesting. That's why most adults dont spend every afternoon playing tic tac toe. (is it called Naughts and crosses across the pond?)

[straffo]

Originally posted by Slow Dog
I am just wondering why is it that when a few people complain they have the right to ruin AH for everyone? I was here when you could take a fields fuel down to 25%. I know this is to be considered only a war game but what gives the few the right to make it so unrealistic for all of the rest of us PAYING CUSTOMERS?

Clic here

[Grits]

Originally posted by Slow Dog
I would have been happy for at least a vote.

HiTech has the only vote that counts.

[NAVCAD]

Simaril:

Just playing devils advocate here...so don't go flaming me...but:

"By taking down fuel.....It also makes base taking way too easy (para-phrased)"

The argument could be the same for ORD and the ease of killing troops.  

This IS a GAME and WE ALL work the gamesmenship.  ALL OF US!!!

That being said I personally would like to see the fuel affected, but also a change to the troop strat as well.  Instead of killing ALL the troops with a couple of rounds, cut the troops down like the fuel.  Instead of ten troops per load, make the number less (3-5).  this would still allow base catures, just make it harder.

Also make the fuel a little harder to hit, wither by putting more fuel tanks on feild, or by increasing the amount of hits it takes.

Just a thought.....Not a sermon...

NAVCAD

[mars01]

The one and only reason HT changed the fuel porkage is because he upped the fuel burn to 2 to make ESB and minor engine management  mean anything.

Did the overall affect reduce the lack of game play caused by one moron in a typhoon or the like, thank god, YES!

Why is it Strat potatos always want to stop people from fighting?  If you can't take a base swiftly and skillfully go to the TA.  But stop looking for HT to make it easier for you.  :rollseyes:

[SlapShot]

Originally posted by Slow Dog
Oh now that was funny. But it took alot of crying and whing on BBS and then poof, a couple of guys get the game turned the way they want it. Hell, how many thousands of people on here? I would have been happy for at least a vote. After all, this is a site for us, about us. Right?

LOL ... yeah ... it was just a "couple of guys" that got HT to change it ...  

Actually it was only one guy that got it changed ... his call sign is "HiTech" ... take it up with him.

[Simaril]

Originally posted by NAVCAD
Simaril:

...snip....

The argument could be the same for ORD and the ease of killing troops.  

This IS a GAME and WE ALL work the gamesmenship.  ALL OF US!!!

That being said I personally would like to see the fuel affected, but also a change to the troop strat as well.  Instead of killing ALL the troops with a couple of rounds, cut the troops down like the fuel.  Instead of ten troops per load, make the number less (3-5).  this would still allow base catures, just make it harder.

Also make the fuel a little harder to hit, wither by putting more fuel tanks on feild, or by increasing the amount of hits it takes.

Just a thought.....Not a sermon...

NAVCAD

Agree...flame free zone!

It seems to me that the whole issue is one of balance, and play balance is probably the hardest thing to do well. I think HT has done a very good job, and that mechanics are fairly well balanced out as they are -- including things like troop and ord porkage. IMHO, those are fine.

Fundamentally fuel is different, because inadequate fuel can keep you from even playing. It doesnt take away a function in the game, it takes away the entire game for that base. It seems to me that kind of outcome should pretty be hard to do, as it is now -- you have to take down a whole lot of hangars. With fuel as it used to be, it only took a few cannon rounds.





I also agree that it would be nice to see a tactical/strategic rework. The numbers in the arena make the game play out differently than it did a couple years ago. Since there are enough people to populate a big map, it would be great to increase the variety of things they could do to affect outcomes....if strat targets had bigger effects, so they not only were attractive targets but also warranted defense, it could only add interest and spread players out beyond the 1-2 bases that are often the only places with action.

I'd bet strategic revamp is on the "to do" list, but like many things its on hold until TOD/CT is out and fine tuned.

[forHIM]

Originally posted by NAVCAD

That being said I personally would like to see the fuel affected, but also a change to the troop strat as well.  Instead of killing ALL the troops with a couple of rounds, cut the troops down like the fuel.  Instead of ten troops per load, make the number less (3-5).  this would still allow base catures, just make it harder.

On first read / thought this seems like a good idea for the underdog, but it might not allow the underdog team to stop the steam roll by "porking" the troops.  The  overwelhmed still get pounded, but they loose ground less quickly.  Maybe combine this with harder to destroy / more numerous "barracks" on the base.  So instead off the 2 or 3 barracks today, up it to 10 or 12 and make them take at least two rockets worth of damage versus the hardness today.