Author Topic: FesterMA2 (Read 4049 times)

Anyone · « **Reply #30 on:** April 15, 2007, 06:17:14 PM »

one thing fester... could you please group the strat's within 50miles of the HQ, so its more like the capital is in real life.

i hate it (and love it) when strats are on front lines, which soon get swallowed up by the "war".

The Fugitive · « **Reply #31 on:** April 15, 2007, 06:52:31 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by uptown
come on man!!! Bish don't have a chance on this map. Why not just put bish HQ behind Rooks lines and make this battle short and sweet.

I think we should remember that when the map is opened at the beginning of its run the countrys are randomly set. So sometimes the bish will be england, others rook and so on.

If this is the biggest complaint you get on this one Fester, I think you'll have a real winner !

uptown · « **Reply #32 on:** April 16, 2007, 06:31:28 AM »

Yes, as usual, I spoke first and thunk later:( My hats off to anyone wanting to make a new map. I just wish I had the brains for such an endeavor. <>

Anyone · « **Reply #33 on:** April 22, 2007, 03:19:51 AM »

bump.... any updates?

couldnt the "german" HQ be moved down a bit?

OddCAF · « **Reply #34 on:** April 22, 2007, 06:13:43 AM »

Edited...got the pic to show

I hope I'm not stepping on Fester's toes here, but I have been and remain so fascinated by his work in progress that I thought it might be fun to see how it looked with some historical areas/cities depicted on it.

There were, as many of you know, huge, flowing tank battles around the areas of North Africa (Tunesia/El Alamein) and one of the largest tank versus tank engagements in history occured at Kursk in Russia. Both of these areas are as you can see, set up for some wonderful GV battles within the context of Aces High.

As well, one sees the Normandy area depicted with a line of ground vehicle bases which show nicely the Allied drive inland off the beaches.

I personally think these strings of GV bases are not only going to provide the GV guys with a hell of a lot of fun, but are going to naturally draw a horde of ground attack and level buffs. Prime fodder for light fighters cruising the corridor and looking for action. As well, those fighters looking for something "meaningful" to do, might launch some escort or high cover fighters to defend the jabos and buffs which will be attacking both the GVs and vehicles at or near them. IMHO these areas alone are going to provide an absolute ton of fun for all.

I don't care about "balance" when the map is first loaded for play on the AH server(s). It will take some time to see from firsthand experience how the generals go about their business. And my own hope is that there actually is one chess-piece seemingly outnumbered and facing overwhelming odds (sound familiar ?). It will in a way perhaps, engender some teamwork and esprit de corps battling against "the beasts from the east".

Fester, I'm thoroughly enjoying myself stopping in here in anticipation of seeing the results of your latest tinkering. This is going to be absolutely outstanding!

Best regards, Odd

OddCAF · « **Reply #35 on:** April 22, 2007, 07:08:28 AM »

Hey Fester,
Would comprising London, Berlin, and Moscow of three or more "towns" in order to replicate a siege requirement to capture such historically important areas be a possible addition?

An offshoot of this might be that such areas might be where the goal-oriented pilots and GV guys might coordinate things together, and the furballers could play anywhere on the map. "Forcing" larger scale attacks on these areas by imposing stiffer requirements for capture due to the larger amount of buildings (and ack) to destroy might set the groundwork for some beautiful, coordinated bomber raids, rather than allowing one or two buff pilots with formations to level and prepare a town for capture quickly.

As only three areas on the map would be composed of these "high density" town areas, it would not then have a deleterious effect on how the standard attack and capture teams proceed on the vast majority of the map.

Regards, Odd
PS:
Sorry for blathering. This new map of yours has got my imagination running at full tilt.

Kweassa · « **Reply #36 on:** April 22, 2007, 07:49:37 AM »

Er.. Stalingrad should be something like Bucharest or Bran.. that's the Balkans down there.

Gatr · « **Reply #37 on:** April 22, 2007, 08:45:45 AM »

Fester....
many thanks for the hard work on this map and for putting up w/ the crap from folks who don't get how much work this is......
I would like so SMACK the punks who will be crying about everything they think is not up to thier standard.....
It takes a tough dude to put up with that...
Again thanks for your hard work and giving of your time......
SALUTE!!!
Gatr
Flying 81st for the Rooks for a long time........

republic · « **Reply #38 on:** April 22, 2007, 09:38:16 AM »

I hope I hope I hope I hope I see this map in rotation soon! I hope I hope!

croduh · « **Reply #39 on:** April 22, 2007, 09:56:25 AM »

Salute Fester for taking your time to make a ma map.I know how it is to make one.

One suggestion though;)
Add an airfield in this place:

There was a historical airfield there and the town was bombed many times,it's my home town, small wish for me, easy work for you;)

eskimo2 · « **Reply #40 on:** April 22, 2007, 10:37:02 AM »

Citabria,

One idea that I plugged a long time ago was for a semi historical map two sided Axis Allies map that included “Era Bases”. The center starting point bases would provide aircraft from the early war only. As bases are captured and the front line moves right or left more and more planes become available. Perhaps the center cluster of 6 bases would have 1941 & earlier only Europe planes. The next clusters to either the right or left would have 1942 planes, etc. It would be an uphill battle for the aggressors since they would on occasion have to take bases while fighting later war planes, or shuttle later planes from further bases. Your first map above looks similar to what I has sketched and reminded me of it. Another section would have a chain of islands along the same concept except Japanese Vs Allies, with carriers that have era based planes – early war ports near the center, late war on the ends.

Just another interesting idea that will never happen

VansCrew1 · « **Reply #41 on:** April 22, 2007, 10:41:19 AM »

looks great

,did you sent it in yet?

~~~VansCrew~~~

Husky01 · « **Reply #42 on:** April 22, 2007, 10:48:17 AM »

I can hear the newbs now on county vox.

Newb: DEFEND ROME ITS ARE STRONGEST POINT ON THE MAP WE CANT LOOSE IT!

SkyRock: <---owns Newb

Someguy: There isnt anything special about Rome new guy its just a air feild like any other.

Newb: R U JOKIN ME? DONT YOU KNOW ANY THING AZBOUT HISTORY? ROME IS A MAJOR PART WE CANT LOOSE IT HELP ROOM ITS ON FIRE!

Someguy: Ok, in this game Rome is jsut any other airbase kid there isnt anything special about it.

Newb: YES THERE IS EVEVY1 HELP ROME!

Someguy: Well since you insist I quess I can help you out a lil hit Alt-F4 for the fire people to come put out the water.

Newb: Really Thanks!

Newb: Pooof

Someguy:

Anyone · « **Reply #43 on:** April 22, 2007, 11:26:09 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by OddCAF
Hey Fester,
Would comprising London, Berlin, and Moscow of three or more "towns" in order to replicate a siege requirement to capture such historically important areas be a possible addition?

An offshoot of this might be that such areas might be where the goal-oriented pilots and GV guys might coordinate things together, and the furballers could play anywhere on the map. "Forcing" larger scale attacks on these areas by imposing stiffer requirements for capture due to the larger amount of buildings (and ack) to destroy might set the groundwork for some beautiful, coordinated bomber raids, rather than allowing one or two buff pilots with formations to level and prepare a town for capture quickly.

As only three areas on the map would be composed of these "high density" town areas, it would not then have a deleterious effect on how the standard attack and capture teams proceed on the vast majority of the map.

Regards, Odd
PS:
Sorry for blathering. This new map of yours has got my imagination running at full tilt.

Cites are part of the strat system though.... they effect rebuild time of the other factories (and the HQ). Sticking too many of these on the map will create some "issues" plus sticking them on gv routes, while a good idea, would be a good way of making "milkrunning" easy..... which isnt a good thing.

sure, if the base next to the city is the zone base, then yes, make it this way, then as you attack the city and take the zone, the city becomes yours so you cant milk it.

im not sure you are allowed multiple zones on a small map though?

yanksfan · « **Reply #44 on:** April 22, 2007, 12:43:55 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Citabria
updated the top pic. with a simple base layout nothing specific but laid out in a way that will make lots of good fights.

I don't know about anybody else but im about sick of balanced maps so I am giving this one historic disadvantages and advantages.

I decided to use the uncapturable GV bases in a way that actually matters for GV lovers who want a certain chance of a tank fight.

there will be very few spawn points on this map. its a driving war.

How bout some long spawns connecting major groups of gv bases so as to connect the distant groups.
maybe just one really long spawn for each country with its next closest base uncapturable