Author Topic: suggestion for captures  (Read 657 times)

Offline july865

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 23
      • http://chawks.com
suggestion for captures
« on: February 12, 2007, 12:57:28 PM »
as a suggestion for captures... just a suggestion folks...
.
make the town and the base both a seperate capture, but link them together. i'll explain abit
to take the town, you would level it just like normal. send in troops to cature just the town. that would trigger a timer to cature the ajoining base. send in troops to capture the base. fail to capture the base... loose the town.
this would also work vise-a-versa. capture the base. sets the timer for the town. fail to capture the town. loose the base.
what do ya think???

Offline SkyRock

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7758
suggestion for captures
« Reply #1 on: February 12, 2007, 01:03:43 PM »
ney!:aok

Triton28 - "...his stats suggest he has a healthy combination of suck and sissy!"

Offline DREDger

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 766
suggestion for captures
« Reply #2 on: February 12, 2007, 01:06:24 PM »
What a nightmare of an idea.  I suppose you would have to d-ack the base as well.  

Why not just make bases uncapturable, they are hard enough to capture as is, you want to make it harder?

Offline Ball

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1827
suggestion for captures
« Reply #3 on: February 12, 2007, 01:08:48 PM »
it is not a bad idea, but i dont think it would work.

more troops could make the timer go quicker.  OTOH, if defending troops are brought in from another base, that should make it take longer or stop the capture all together.

Offline hammer

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2198
      • netAces
suggestion for captures
« Reply #4 on: February 12, 2007, 01:25:04 PM »
Has some merit I think. I'd make two modifications: Put an additional VH in the town, and make the airfield inoperable unless both the base and the town were owned (instead of the timer). That could lead to some quick ground battles for final control of a base.

Regards,

Hammer
Hammer

JG11
(Temporarily Retired)

Offline Simaril

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5149
suggestion for captures
« Reply #5 on: February 12, 2007, 01:31:58 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by hammer
Has some merit I think. I'd make two modifications: Put an additional VH in the town, and make the airfield inoperable unless both the base and the town were owned (instead of the timer). That could lead to some quick ground battles for final control of a base.

Regards,

Hammer


oooooo.......this has some merit....
Maturity is knowing that I've been an idiot in the past.
Wisdom is realizing I will be an idiot in the future.
Common sense is trying to not be an idiot right now

"Social Fads are for sheeple." - Meatwad

Offline Jaccpot

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 27
suggestion for captures
« Reply #6 on: February 12, 2007, 01:37:22 PM »
This is actually not a bad idea i like it. plus the following ideas aswell. i like the idea ok the vh in the town aswell. might have somethin.

I say ney!!
=MOST WANTED=
--BlacJac--
ROOKLAND*AIR*FORCE

Offline july865

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 23
      • http://chawks.com
suggestion for captures
« Reply #7 on: February 12, 2007, 03:14:31 PM »
lol.. wasnt going for a nightmare.. just thinking of a different approach.
as far as field ack. i guess what ever it would take to get the capture.
.
very good suggestions to this.. i like them

Offline ROC

  • Aces High CM Staff (Retired)
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7700
suggestion for captures
« Reply #8 on: February 12, 2007, 04:05:13 PM »
Quote
capture the base. sets the timer for the town.


If you had the base, why would you need the town?
ROC
Nothing clever here.  Please, move along.

Offline DREDger

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 766
suggestion for captures
« Reply #9 on: February 12, 2007, 04:18:05 PM »
To confusing for me, I am a very simple individual.  Would be like trying to convert the USA into metric...everyone knows how this capture is supposed to work, personally rather keep it the way it is.

It is so hard to capture a field anyway.  Drives me crazy you get guys over there to drop a town and airdrop some troops....then one la-7 (probably Ghi) comes screaming off the field and shoots ONE troop and negates the whole capture.

Or you get some friendly who thinks he's a hero and hits a town building 40 minutes ago.  Right when your troops are entering maproom the building pops...no capture for you!!!....sucks.

About once a month I see an enemy goon fly right over the airbase and release troops which is always worth a chuckle; certainly a logical assumption on the Newb's part can just hear his countrymen lambasting him for it.

:rolleyes:

Offline detch01

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1788
suggestion for captures
« Reply #10 on: February 12, 2007, 04:36:37 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by ROC
If you had the base, why would you need the town?

There's no pub on the base. Now, if you've captured the town, you'd need to capture the base too just to protect the pub. Makes sense to me :D



asw
asw
Latrine Attendant, 1st class
semper in excretio, solum profundum variat

Offline Mustaine

  • Parolee
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4139
suggestion for captures
« Reply #11 on: February 12, 2007, 05:11:54 PM »
got me to thinking about an idea proposed a long time ago...


tons of tiny little airfields, 1 FH 1 VH and not much ack, maybe 1/2 sector apart. simple grass runway,

this would "do away" with the current small airfields.

medium airfields would be central locations, with possibly 10 of these little fields surrounding each.

all of these would be independent capture.

the "land grabbers" would have a bunch of small easy targets to roll over, but they would be easily defended too, with some decent fighter jocks who want to furball.

the medium / large airfields would be strengthened a bit and still keep the town and all that for capture,

it would be sort of a nightmare to make the map I guess, with so many variables to set, and how GV spawns would work. I would say GV's don't spawn "into" those little bases.

here's a "tiny" field, 2 FH, 1 VH and 2 ORD strats, and 2 FUEL strats.


here's a map layout sample, the RED / GREEN are the main medium or large airfields. the blue ones are the tiny fields.


little furballs all over, if the land grabbers go after one, there's another close by to defend. those little ones like I said are easily captured, maybe 5 ack, 2 manned 3 auto, and the map room is right there.

needs alot of working out, but thats the premise.
Genetically engineered in a lab, and raised by wolverines -- ]V[ E G A D E T ]-[
AoM DFC ZLA BMF and a bunch of other acronyms.

Offline DREDger

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 766
suggestion for captures
« Reply #12 on: February 12, 2007, 05:14:00 PM »
die thread die

Offline crockett

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3420
suggestion for captures
« Reply #13 on: February 12, 2007, 06:14:24 PM »
lol it's hard enough to get goon pilots now..and you want to make it harder.. :furious
"strafing"

Offline Rino

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8495
suggestion for captures
« Reply #14 on: February 12, 2007, 06:45:37 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by crockett
lol it's hard enough to get goon pilots now..and you want to make it harder.. :furious


     If the pocket napoleons were serious about captures, you'd figure
they'd grab a goon themselves.  I wish I had a quarter for every "Someone
needs to bring a goon to blah blah blah".
80th FS Headhunters
PHAN
Proud veteran of the Cola Wars