Author Topic: Testing Capture system in LW orange today (Read 43347 times)

Bronk · « **Reply #480 on:** December 01, 2006, 11:57:11 AM »

One thing I would like to see added though.

The low numbers side could capture any enemy base in there home territory.
This would require the high numbers side to reacquire that base before advancing.

Bronk

edit: was suppose to be reacquire .

Hap · « **Reply #481 on:** December 01, 2006, 12:00:15 PM »

oops.

Masherbrum · « **Reply #482 on:** December 01, 2006, 12:06:20 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by 1Boner
lmfao!!!! you sound like a broken record!! anything else to biotch about except taking undefended bases?? so what if some people like doing that? for most there is a strategy to what they are doing. we all get the point that you don,t "get it" and you think its stupid. we also don,t care what you think. go play the up and re-up furball game. i personally don,t care how you play, it doesn,t affect me. and i,m sure the way other people play doesn,t affect your style of play either.
if you don,t care about "winning the war" then how does how other people play affect you?

wah wah wah undefended bases !!! wah wah wah undefended bases!!
hi-tech , those guys are taking undefended bases!!! wahhhh

you have no idea, why i play like i do. but you think you know.
i have no idea why you play like you do.

i don,t care why
and i won,t biotch about it either

frickin pathetic!!

your playground buddy, Boner

If you were trying to "prove a point" to the "furballers"(even though we don't just furball, we just like to FIGHT) you failed. You only PROVED our point more and now I understand what HiTech meant about "Vocal Minority". He wasn't talking about us, but about you and your cohorts who are afraid to FIGHT.

fuzeman · « **Reply #483 on:** December 01, 2006, 12:17:40 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Bronk
One thing I would like to see added though.
The low numbers side could capture any enemy base in there home territory.
This would require the high numbers side to require that base before advancing.
Bronk

Kinda like that idea. All original home territory bases should be capturable.

1Boner · « **Reply #484 on:** December 01, 2006, 12:22:14 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Masherbrum
If you were trying to "prove a point" to the "furballers"(even though we don't just furball, we just like to FIGHT) you failed. You only PROVED our point more and now I understand what HiTech meant about "Vocal Minority". He wasn't talking about us, but about you and your cohorts who are afraid to FIGHT.

afraid to fight?

nope! wrong again einstein!! i love air to air fighting!!

just gets boring after about an hour.

other things to do in this game.

don,t just furball? just like to fight?

understand hi tech? you understand nothing.

afraid to fight!!! thats priceless!!!

your fraidy cat pal,
Boner

public relations officer for Boner

Simaril · « **Reply #485 on:** December 01, 2006, 12:23:23 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Bronk
One thing I would like to see added though.

The low numbers side could capture any enemy base in there home territory.
This would require the high numbers side to require that base before advancing.

Bronk

Great idea.

1Boner · « **Reply #486 on:** December 01, 2006, 12:27:48 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Simaril
Great idea.

did you mean re-aquire?-----if so--i think that would be a step in the right direction. it would be a step up from the existing test map.

good idea!!

Bronk · « **Reply #487 on:** December 01, 2006, 12:33:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by 1Boner
did you mean re-aquire?-----if so--i think that would be a step in the right direction. it would be a step up from the existing test map.

good idea!!

I fixed it.

Its reaCquire and was thinking faster than i can type .

Again

Bronk

BaldEagl · « **Reply #488 on:** December 01, 2006, 12:51:06 PM »

If you read my post of earlier today I don't think there is a solution following the current course even if you make all original bases re-capturable. One of the things I like to do in the game, among others, is to defend vehicle bases and ports by myself in an Ostie. I always know someone will come along thinking it's going to be an easy target and I've frustrated a lot of players and scored a lot of kills by just being there and had great fun doing it. That scenario among others will be out the window with this solution.

As I understand it, the reaon this came about is that people wanted the large maps back (myself included), but there was some fear that people wouldn't actually fight each other if they got so spread out. How about this as a solution: Reduce the size of the large maps to something bigger than the small ones but smaller than they are now? Enough room to spread out away from the furballs a little if you want to but not so large as to cause huge areas with no one in them.

I rarely (but sometimes do) follow the large packs, either in attack or defense. Part of the reason is that I have an older computer and I sometimes experience frame rate drops when around too many others. I know I need a new machine but I just can't afford it at the moment. I still want to fight, just not in a furball (although I sometimes join furballs too) where my frames drop to 5-10.

There has to be a solution that maintains the diversity available within the game as it currently exists.

Laurie · « **Reply #489 on:** December 01, 2006, 12:51:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Quah!
I read what you wrote, twice now, my reply still stands, why all the fuss if you got to do what you always do.

How is this any different?? Why would you need to attack a different base, what was wrong with the one you had to attack that you would need to go somewhere else. It seems a lot of you guys are made because you dont have total control any more.

The game is still the same. At least now if people wanted to defend they know you would be there and that you couldn't run to another base as soon as they showed up to defend.

If youve have two braincells you could tell if a base as under attack... red dots and read bars do stand out... so does red falshing,

its a matter of keeping an eye of the whole game, rather than one sector.

Also how can you say the game is still the same?,

It is for you, excpet theres a higher grid player number concentration, wich for you is great...

But it has changed hugely for the other types of players. being told waht to take rather than choosing is a pretty big change isn't it,

so is having 4 arenas instead of one, isn't it?

Laurie · « **Reply #490 on:** December 01, 2006, 12:54:27 PM »

evidence to suggest stale mate.

Base numbers have ended up in a diff of 1 at the end of two days,

P.S. how long is this test lasting for?
and shouldnt there be a poll to record oppinions accurately?

Quah! · « **Reply #491 on:** December 01, 2006, 12:59:07 PM »

Quote

But it has changed hugely for the other types of players. being told waht to take rather than choosing is a pretty big change isn't it,

so is having 4 arenas instead of one, isn't it?

The way I see it, it was always follow the leader. Where ever the main group went so did the rest of you. So what is the difference, now you have a little help in deciding where to go next.

Like I said au nauseum, but gets lost on you guys is,

Quote

The game is very much still the same. At least now if people wanted to defend they know you would be there and that you couldn't run to another base as soon as they showed up to defend.

John pointed this out quite clearly in his posts above.

Quah! · « **Reply #492 on:** December 01, 2006, 01:03:14 PM »

Quote

evidence to suggest stale mate.

Base numbers have ended up in a diff of 1 at the end of two days,

P.S. how long is this test lasting for?
and shouldnt there be a poll to record oppinions accurately?

Why does it matter when there is an arena that is completely the same without the change, if you hate it that much you can go there, no?

Or are you saying that the majority of the player base is in there, maybe because they like it, and you have to be where the numbers are???

It's just like last night, there were a handful of people in LWO crying about the change. My question was if they didnt like it go to the other LW arena.

I wish HT would do this in the EW, MW arenas. This is where people avoiding each other gets real bad, due to low numbers and depending on if the avoidance players are in there en mass.

SlapShot · « **Reply #493 on:** December 01, 2006, 01:04:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Laurie
evidence to suggest stale mate.

Base numbers have ended up in a diff of 1 at the end of two days,

P.S. how long is this test lasting for?
and shouldnt there be a poll to record oppinions accurately?

Yup ... thats a stalemate.

I guess one side isn't any smarted than the other which usually results in a stalemate.

If you think this stalemate proves anything ... your wrong.

HTC doesn't do polls ... this thread and those who constructively add to it with ideas and suggestions is what HT listens to ... I think he flys right by the

Laurie · « **Reply #494 on:** December 01, 2006, 01:04:38 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by soupcan
As a player who enjoys all aspects of AH (base defence, base capture, A2A)
it has been my experience that capture attempts are met with light, moderate, heavy and yes sometimes no resistance. To say that all who are against the
current test configuration always avoid fighting and don't enjoy fighting is
complete rubbish.

do bases sometimes get captured with no defence?........ yes.
So what? don't you think that most would eventually get bored
of "rolling undefended bases" and start seeking out a more challenging
engagement?

there are already 2 LW arenas so why not raise caps and keep 1 as is and the other with the "restricted" capture rules. put the same map in both and see where the players go.

my thoughts exaclty,

have 'late war trail', cap 400(can rise if gets full)
and 'late war norm' 'Ditto'