OK Idea to Stop the potatods

[scot12b]

Well Put Mars:aok  We can onley hope some will get over the land grab part and just have fun fighting in the air or Gv, not 15 sets of B17`s comeing to your base with 20 or so spit16 and La7 or what ever they fancy:O  I can undersatnd having a wing man but not  half the country:eek:

[mars01]

Here's a flaw:
Base arrangement: A--B--C
A & C belong to country A
B belongs to country B
Horde leaves out of B to attack C. Your proposal would place a restriction on base B.
Country A sees the horde approaching C and since they are smart and know about the new "anti-horde" gizmo, they do not up at C to defend. Instead they up at A and attack B...fighters cannot up at B so they will cap B quickly, drop the VH, bring in the troops and take B.

No the weight only holds when the numbers in a certain area are overly lopsided.  Once the fighters up from A they are equaling the numbers in the area and thus fighters may be open at B to defend depending on the ratio.

But honestly, indy is right this can happen now and does.

So you can launch large attacks, everyone up at the same time, but the follow up numbers to continue saturating the area detered.  Therefore the guys that just look for the largest friendly dar bar and jump in will be the only ones affected.  Thus reducing the size and lenght of time you can sustain the horde.

[mars01]

You can't be serious. For those that like to organize large strikes (a "horde") and want to go for bases then overwhelming numbers are important and realistic. Many RL doctrines call for 2 or 3 times your opponent's numbers, that's life. If you don't like flying in a horde (I'll bet you have, haven't you?) then don't. Remember, one man's "horde" is another man's mutual support :-) If you don't like being on the receiving end then move to a different field or wait them out. It's fun to up at a field at the tail end of a horde after many are RTB and out of rounds after shooting up everything important or unimportant. It's also fun to launch with a counter horde from an adjacent field and slaughter all the porkers and vulchers. I'll sometimes fly in a horde, particularly when my squad wants everyone together but I don't care much about capturing fields unless we're at a major disadvantage and the whole country is pushed back to a few fields. I'll typically fly either alone or with one or two squadmates and have no trouble finding smaller engagements.

Overwhelming numbers are only needed for those that cant fight!  

Read my sig, the quote from Hub, on real life.  

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

This is a game, one I would hope that promote Air to Air combat.  Unfortunately today it just promotes gangs of dweebs, ganging up on people looking for a fight.

If you don't like being on the receiving end then move to a different field or wait them out.

As if this were an option most nights?  LOLH:rofl

It's also fun to launch with a counter horde from an adjacent field and slaughter all the porkers and vulchers.

Still possible and would be more probable with the change I am suggesting.

[mars01]

Originally posted by storch
make it so you need 30+ troops to capture, harden the CVs to somewhat more realistic levels. CVs were very difficult to sink in the big un (dubya-dubya two) IIRC only six CVs were ever lost to direct enemy action. wouldn't hurt to have an additional VH at or near the town and to allow certain planes to be upped outta the VHs. add manable 88mm AAA and there you may have a formula to create fights and stop the potatoding (good phrase btw)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To go with that, why not have Satellite fields nearby that fighters up from? More often then not, any airfield had 'fighter strips' nearby so it wasn't just one field that had to be put out of action.

I love the satellite fields Idea!

Although harder objects might make the Capture job harder it would emphasize the need for the horde more than it is now.

[Clifra Jones]

Restricting peoples ability to up a particular plane/gv from a particular field will not solve the issue. I twill only generate a huge amount a discontent. Look at the whines we get when ENY kicks in.

The real issue is map design. There are some real flaws IMO in some of the maps we are using. Bases are to far away, air fields surrounded by 4 vehical fields, etc.. This only engourages the potatoding and discourages the defenders. What I have seen is when you have to fly a sectors and a half to get to the capped field most people won't do it. When I have, I am ussually 1 of about 2 or 3 players who show up to try and defend.

Not only that but maps that never go anywhere. The current map that thankfully will end today is one that the battle just doesn't progress, it stagnates. Most of the engagements are all in the same places and it results in one side potatoding the other in one spot and the opposite in some other.

It's unfortunate that map disign, from what I've read, is not an easy thing to do.

[mars01]

I agree with everything except this Cliff,

Restricting peoples ability to up a particular plane/gv from a particular field will not solve the issue. I twill only generate a huge amount a discontent. Look at the whines we get when ENY kicks in.

The proposed, only restricts people in that specific area, they still have the rest of the map to do anything they want.

The goal would be to have many smaller hordes all over the map, and hopefully increase the number of defending hordes due to more manageable numbers in a specific area.

[Donzo]

Mars,
Would it be acceptable to you for a small force to take out all the FH's at surrounding bases in order to take a base?  In other words, no horde rolling over bases...just planned surpression of defenses in the area.

[Clifra Jones]

Originally posted by mars01
I agree with everything except this Cliff,



The proposed, only restricts people in that specific area, they still have the rest of the map to do anything they want.

The goal would be to have many smaller hordes all over the map, and hopefully increase the number of defending hordes due to more manageable numbers in a specific area.

I'm not saying your idea is good or bad just that I am pretty sure what the reaction would be. One need only read these boards when ever something like this is put in place to see that.

They will listen to no explination regarding how it works or why it is needed they will only see it as affecting them and they don't like it.

[MotorOil1]

Originally posted by mars01

Man why is so hard for people to understand this game is about the fight, not just flying from base to base unopposed.. [rollseyes]

I don't know about that.  I've never had a hard time finding a fight in the MA.

 "Oh, look that base is undefended, I'm going in, wont' that be fun! "

Perhaps I just don't go looking for that type of play.  If you're looking for a fair fight try one of the other arenas like the DA, play a CAP, king of the hill or a scenario.  

If you don't like Monopoly, don't play it, there are options.  I think HT has done a great job to cater to the community.  

I've never had a problem taking on LA7s or Spit 16s in my HurrIIC which has been plane of choice lately.  Most guys in the MA don't know how to fly em anyway.

Come on over, I'll show you how to play monopoly and manage not to take any real-estate at all.

[mars01]

Mars,
Would it be acceptable to you for a small force to take out all the FH's at surrounding bases in order to take a base? In other words, no horde rolling over bases...just planned surpression of defenses in the area.,

I am not against the Base Capture, even tho I don't like it.  I understand there are those that do, so have at it.  Yeah it's acceptable and to a degree defendable.  Still sucks for those that want to fight, but hey they are supposed to be big maps right.

[storch]

true about possibly creating even more hording but there would be more stuff with which to resist.  they would need to cap two fields fairly far for capping puposes but not for responing defenders.  also the attacks would need to be simultaneous for a shut out.  consider our current VH set up as compared to the previous ones in AH1.  now imagine three hangers but about 1km away from each other.  1 buff could not take out all three easily. now if from this base we could up single engined fighters?  the actual fighting might be better.  then again who knows, I'm often wrong about stuff.

[mars01]

How Junior are you Motor?  What is your ingame Id?

Most guys that fly in the horde don't have a problem finding a fight, because they really aren't looking for one, nor would know a good one if they were in it, cause they would most likely be dead in one turn.

I don't care about fair fights either, just manageable.  I don't mind going into 10 V 1, especially against potatod mongers cause they aren't that good anyway.  

The problem is when it bleeds past 10 guys, I'm just getting the upper hand in a 10 V 1 and then in come 5 more guys that just pick what the 10 guys couldn't get done.  Yeah that is fun. [rollseyes]

I don't need lessons from you either, I have played this game since Feb 02.  I have wathced it go from and all out Fighter game, where the general Air to Air skills were much higher and more valued, to lower skilled, boring land grab, potatod warrior game -  but thanks for the offer.

Come on over, I'll show you how to play monopoly and manage not to take any real-estate at all.

Been there done that, and without the horde, I'd rather just fight.

[mars01]

Storch,

We kinda got what you are talking about when we moved to AHII.  I thought the same way.  Things were hardened and made bigger, and that just created bigger potatods, and hanger dropping.

I would like to see, at least, the ability to reload at VH bases.  Upping from them would be even better.

[LYNX]

Originally posted by mars01
Maybe this has been thought out before, I didn't have any luck in search tho.

The Problem:  Too many people overwhelming a field where the defending numbers are low or non existent.

1)  Put a limit on the number of planes based on a weighted scale and a percentage.  

For example:  

0 the numbers in the area a equal.  
-1 to -n the numbers for your country are lower than enemy.  
1 to n the numbers for your country are greater than the enemy for the area in question.

2)  When the weights reach a percentage that is defined as a hored, limit or deny the plane set from the supporting fields, in that area, of the overwhelming country.  

This should have the intended affect of making the overflow of people move to another area of the map or wait for the numbers to equalize.

Of course people that just have to be part of the whorde can up from a base farther away that is enabled.


This could change the way maps are designed and involve more tactics other than just pure numbers and overwhelming the opponent.

OK I'v taken the bait. From a guy that promotes the "furball" so much your post is way off.    



I have seen nothing but "furball" and anti "Strat" posts from yourself and now your suggesting restricting the amount of "targets" for a potencial "furball".



I'm not promoting the "Hord" nor am I dismissing the "Mission Planer" but as has been previously said.  One side needs to out number the other 2,3 & 4 times to 1 for an effective 1 attack capture.

There is an ability to use "mission planer" in this game and I'm sure HTC will be accepted beyond the pearly gates for his sin.  As for the "mission planner" there is alot more to it than just setting a mission / hord, depending upon ones view, and thats gaining recognition with ones peers.  Every man and his dog at some time has set a mission but if your not "recognised" no one joins.  So mission planners need to prove thier ability, their standing in the game,let alone win the capture in a well planed way.  

Getting to be accepted as the person known as a good mission planner takes a very long time and for this reason I applaud them as do others.


 I do not agree with your suggestion.  It's just some feeble attempt to do down the MA from a guy (you)with just 7 hrs this TOD, 9 hrs last TOD and 6 hrs previous to that.  If you spent more time in the game than typing about it folks may pay some attention.  Do you really need to be told that the M A J O R I T Y are happy with the MA as it is ?  For the little time you spend on this Hobby would the 8 man "furball" free arenas be more to your cup of tea ?

Excuse me being personal or rude but your flogging a dead horse.

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by mars01
I love the satellite fields Idea!

Although harder objects might make the Capture job harder it would emphasize the need for the horde more than it is now.

This was kind of my thought, thrown together fast obviously. You end up with a larger airfield system in a sector, but again that was common.  Tangmere for example had Westhampnett as one of it's satelite fields during the B of B and beyond.  The 5th AF base at Port Morseby had numerous strips in the area for the same reasons. With VHs near the "Fighter Strips", at least you could be rolling Flaks if need be since the VH usually goes right away in base taking.  A lot tougher to coordinate hitting 3 VHs instead of 1.

I'd even go so far as to make the fighter fields undestroyable so that fighters can always launch regardless of Hangers being down.  If the main fields hangers are dead it's going to force folks to cap all three in some regards, thus thinning the crowd a bit.  The capture is the main base so you'd end up with the satilite fields if you really got it.

I suppose it's going to encourage the vulchers, but at least they might have to work for it, and it gives the defenders a chance to fight back regardless in support of the larger field.   And if you have VHs at the fighter strips and even manned acks, the vulchers are at risk while the fighters are rolling.

All the 'coordinated mission' disciples would really have to work together then.