War Room

[BlueJ1]

Originally posted by E25280
Congrats, Furball, on the successful troll.  You actually have 4-5 guys debating this like it is a serious and somewhat good idea.

Who cares if it is or isnt? Sadly its one of the best ideas that has come across this forum in awhile. Even if it is a troll.

[Major Biggles]

i love it cause im hoping it'll get the whiny generals to quit telling me what to do, they can post their crap on the map and stop giving me an earful because i like to kill planes instead of fighter hangars...

[hacksaw1]

For the sake of argument...

If this feature were going to be added to AH, I'd think that rather than overall "rank" being the determining factor to enter the HQ War Room, it would rather be the number of successful Missions initiated and conducted by a player per Tour.

As examples, from my limited experience with the Bishies, Ghi and Thunderegg seem to plan and conduct successful missions. And there may very well be others that I do not know about because of the hours I'm on. They have low, 3 digit ranks, and they probably could work to get ranked below 100, and maybe they have been in the past. Nevertheless, if X number of successful missions per Tour were the basis of entering the HQ for stategy discussion, then "rank" high or low would not be a factor.

Just an idea.

Best Regards,

Cement

[FiLtH]

Most of the high ranked people I know arent so into mission planning.

  We called it a breifing room in AW and you could put waypoints on the map. Ive asked for this since I came here.

   If you could highlight individual bldgs on a pic and color code them, and assign to pilots it would be really nice.

    The trouble is, the game is played at such a frantic pace, alot of players are afraid the time it takes to run a mission, they will lose bases. Good missions arent about captures for me.

[soupcan]

Originally posted by hacksaw1
[.

As examples, from my limited experience with the Bishies, Ghi and Thunderegg seem to plan and conduct successful missions.
 [/B]

the reason these missions tend to be successful is because alot
of guys join up.

this is not meant to take anything away from ghi or egg both
are good sticks/leaders.

i'm just saying most planner's missions would be successful given proper numbers.

[Puck]

Wow, furball.  Nice one.  8 out of 10, at least.

[Furball]

Originally posted by Krusty
But there would be too many problems with folks just going there to argue with each other. All the "generals" would flock there in droves. Then there's the problem of having folks actually care what was decided in said war room, if/once a decision had been made.

Would be good to take the strategy arguments off the open channel, would also save people like me who do not give a damn about strategy from getting screamed at.

Maybe relax the rank thing, that just struck me as a way of deciding strategy, dont know another way of doing it though - voting system?

Originally posted by E25280
Congrats, Furball, on the successful troll.  You actually have 4-5 guys debating this like it is a serious and somewhat good idea.

 

Not a troll, genuine idea, also a good use for the currently worthless HQ.

Originally posted by Puck
Wow, furball.  Nice one.  8 out of 10, at least.

See above.

Just because i am a BK it means my ideas are worthless and just trolling?

[Puck]

Actually, no, I don't think your ideas are worthless.


It's a good idea that falls apart when you try to implement it with real people; the war room would be full of doom kiddies, wanna-be leaders, and newbies.  The old hands would be out flying goons on the deck after some base somewhere.  You don't have to be a hot stick to plan missions and lead the strike force, but you do need the respect of the people you're leading.  That doesn't show up in the stats.

Ok, we could hold elections and VOTE people access to the war room...  


If elected to the War Room, I promise to hunt down GrmRpr and vulch him until he sends entertaining personal messages!  

I further promise to hunt Scott down and remind him he is supposed to teach me that nasty-assed reveral he showed me at the con!

[Furball]

Originally posted by Puck
It's a good idea that falls apart when you try to implement it with real people; the war room would be full of doom kiddies, wanna-be leaders, and newbies.  

Originally posted by Furball
have a HQ text channel

Originally posted by Furball
Would be good to take the strategy arguments off the open channel, would also save people like me who do not give a damn about strategy from getting screamed at.

[BlueJ1]

What about only letting CO's into the room?

[Puck]

Originally posted by Furball

Oh, man.

So, would you characterize this as a rope-a-dope or an induced auger?  Either way I died ugly.

[E25280]

Originally posted by Furball
Just because i am a BK it means my ideas are worthless and just trolling?

Not at all.  The fact that it seemed to me at first glance to be both useless and totally unworkable (and still does, for that matter), combined with the fact that it encompasses four things you are known to personally dislike ("win the war" gameplay, caring about "rank", "fluffing" to take down HQ, and someone telling other people what/how they should play the game) says to me this is a TROLL vs. genuine wish for something to enhance your enjoyment of the game.

I figured from the beginning someone on your country channel was griping something to the effect of "quit furballing and help us get AXX base" or some such nonsense, and it got on your nerves, and thus you put this here as a "subtle" suggestion that they should only banter amongst like-minded people (or simply STFU) and leave you alone.

Originally posted by Furball
Would be good to take the strategy arguments off the open channel, would also save people like me who do not give a damn about strategy from getting screamed at.

Judging from this, I think I was not far off the mark.

Thusly and therefore (and whatnot), I contend my logic is sound, and stand by my original conclusion.

(the fact you are a BK only makes the logic redundant )




j/k.

[Meatwad]

WW2OL has something similiar to this, it was an idea that turned away a lot of players, myself included

[Scherf]

Just as long as we can fight in the war room.

[Reynolds]

You guys are forgetting two HUGE things:

1) If you allow someone to take anothers place you get anarchy. The only time someone would take another's place is if they want something else done, and so the objectives would constantly change. I say no taking someone else's place. But there would be time restrictions, or if all 10 people in the room could unanimously decide on someone else to take command.

2) Once the orders are given, do you actually thinking the people on your country will FOLLOW THEM?!? HELL NO!!! People never follow instructions on this game. Until you can hold their wrists and force them into your bidding on fear of death in real life, you will never get anything done.