Base capture point system (idea)

[crockett]

I will say first off the battle over A57 on Sunday night was great fun and gave me high hope for AvA format. Then last night it was like the worst of the MA so I just logged and went to the MA.

I know this arena is somewhat still evolving into a system that works the best, so I wanted to toss this idea out.

I'm not 100% sure how the base capture system works in regards to giving out points or what they can be used for. However I've gathered that Axis or Allies can earn points by capturing bases that originally belonged to the other team.

There are also special objective bases that can be taken to gain even more points or aircraft ect.. ect. This system IMO just rewards Milkrunners, because once they take the base, who cares if they lose it 15 mins later they only have to prove they took it but don't have to defend it.

So in essence this just allows a team to avoid a fight or avoid defending a base because they can get more points by moving to the next base capture. Leaving no team resources to defend.

I propose that in order to earn the point for a base capture the team should also have to hold on to that base for a minimum of one hour to be awarded the capture point.

This would do do two things.

1) It would make the team whom captured the base use team resources to defend it.  If they lost the base then they lost the point, so this way they "have" to defend the base at all costs to keep their gained point.

2) It gives the other team an added reason to push everything they have to recapture that base before the hour is up.  This means both teams have a reason to keep fighting for that base.

A system like this would require both teams to fight rather than reward for milkrunning.


Additional idea..

You could take this a step further and have a set number of points on the map. Then only reward a point by taking it from the other team.  So you can earn points by capturing a base but can lose them if you lose the base.

This second idea would have flaws though as IMO it would encurage team hoarding. However I thought I'd toss it out there aswell as maybe someone can add to the idea.

[FrodeMk3]

I especially like the one hour for capture awarding rule-The team with bigger numbers' is usually on the offensive. If they have to defend the fields' they take in turn, then that kind of acts like an equalizer. Good Idea:aok

[republic]

Originally posted by crockett

I propose that in order to earn the point for a base capture the team should also have to hold on to that base for a minimum of one hour to be awarded the capture point.

I like this idea.  But, with the caveat that the admins would need to be a little more liberal with the deployment points awarded.

Occasionally we see a sustained fight, but seems like more often right now we see a fight here, then halfway across the map, then back again...  Be neat to actually see a push down the boot (or up...if you allies dare )

[heythere]

good idea strafing.  perhaps all the high altitude cartoon flying is responsible for lofty ideas after all.

[captain1ma]

either that or delirium from lack of oxygen......

[4440]

Here is another possibility that could compliment strafings' idea.

When the map/round begins use the 3rd country that is currently not being used as a buffer/nuetral/DMZ zone.

Since it is possible to manipulate country ownership you create a vary obvious initial territory ownership.

What this could possibly at least reduce,

HO's/ditches: if someone has to fly 15 mins every time they die, I would think they would be more likely to try and stay alive. Of course once that country establishes a foothold across the line those tactics very well may begin again. as for bombers ditching after dropping/dive bombing and augering just so as they can quickly reup and grab another set, this concept wouldn't stop that, but, you could set that as a penalized action, IF the defending country can provide footage to the staff. This penalty would encourage Country CO's to police their forces not to engage in that type of activity. You would never stop all of it but it would be reduced.

Also be creating a foothold in a distant territory, it would also encourage the capturing force to remain on station to hold it as long as possible. the country that just lost it would be encouraged to consolidate forces to take it back and drive the enemy back across the line.

Give a spot in a far off corner of the map a few bases so that they may have their battleground. surround it deeply with Country #3 bases and turn the gun lethality for those to max. In addition, create a penalty that automatically throws out a lg point penalty to any country that even dares try and capture it.

Just some viable ideas to a divided community

[Chapel]

Good show of intrest in creativity!

The problem I see about holding onto a base for an hour or so, is that there's already "issues" and "loopholes" in the proof stage in claiming territory captures.

If the axis for example, capture a base, or even notice a huge push for a spicific base, what's to prevent the allied forces from logging off during either that attack, or the hour long hold period? This would nullify the conditions for capture and be a real pain in the butt.

(Not saying allied pilots or axis pilots would do this, just using it as an example in theory holes)

It's complex enough right now, in that the arena creators are having to keep tabs on the ebb and flow of the event. Not to mention, if someone spent a great deal of time helping to capture a base, he/she might have to log off, having spent a great deal of time capturing in the first place.

It does present some intresting questions though on where this thing is going long term. I love the way things are evolving and players are offering up some great positive suggestions!

It's great to see the community so involved in a common goal and accomplishment.

[FrodeMk3]

Originally posted by Chapel
Good show of intrest in creativity!

The problem I see about holding onto a base for an hour or so, is that there's already "issues" and "loopholes" in the proof stage in claiming territory captures.

If the axis for example, capture a base, or even notice a huge push for a spicific base, what's to prevent the allied forces from logging off during either that attack, or the hour long hold period? This would nullify the conditions for capture and be a real pain in the butt.

(Not saying allied pilots or axis pilots would do this, just using it as an example in theory holes)

It's complex enough right now, in that the arena creators are having to keep tabs on the ebb and flow of the event. Not to mention, if someone spent a great deal of time helping to capture a base, he/she might have to log off, having spent a great deal of time capturing in the first place.

It does present some intresting questions though on where this thing is going long term. I love the way things are evolving and players are offering up some great positive suggestions!

It's great to see the community so involved in a common goal and accomplishment.

You could have a forfeiture penalty to prevent this from happening. The team that tries to 'game' this by logging, would not only lose the base, but say, some of their deployment points, as well...

[E25280]

Since holding a base for an hour is a hard thing to verify (was that 60 minutes or only 59:48?) how about making the objectives groups of two or three bases in close proximity?  Both or all three of the bases must be held simultaneously.

This is easily verified through a screen shot.

This will usually mean objectives can't be captured "by surprise" as the first base to fall tips off the opposition a push is being made somewhere.

It will force the attacker to defend what they just captured as they push for the second or third part of the objective.  They can't act as a plague of locusts heading in one direction devouring everything in their path if the opposition can easily come behind them and re-capture the first part of their objective.  They will have to leave a rear guard to prevent it.

Since objectives should be harder to achieve, you might need to bump up the points or whatever rewards you are using for each objective met.

[Oldman731]

Originally posted by E25280
Since holding a base for an hour is a hard thing to verify (was that 60 minutes or only 59:48?) how about making the objectives groups of two or three bases in close proximity?  Both or all three of the bases must be held simultaneously.

This is easily verified through a screen shot.

This will usually mean objectives can't be captured "by surprise" as the first base to fall tips off the opposition a push is being made somewhere.

It will force the attacker to defend what they just captured as they push for the second or third part of the objective.  They can't act as a plague of locusts heading in one direction devouring everything in their path if the opposition can easily come behind them and re-capture the first part of their objective.  They will have to leave a rear guard to prevent it.

Since objectives should be harder to achieve, you might need to bump up the points or whatever rewards you are using for each objective met.

Was thinking about this, too.  Capture and maintain control of a geographic area, or a certain percentage of bases within a geographic area, so that at the Moment of Truth someone can take a screen shot for all to view.  Really, it's just a variation of what we had the first two weeks, but harder to swarm right at the end.

This would cut down on some of the maps we could use.  Tunisia, for example, probably wouldn't work because it doesn't have enough bases in any one area.  Italy, Finland, the two Rhine maps would be good, possibly even the Battle of Britain map.  

Keeping track under the current system puts a lot of pressure on the commanders and Soda.

- oldman

[crockett]

Originally posted by Chapel
Good show of intrest in creativity!

The problem I see about holding onto a base for an hour or so, is that there's already "issues" and "loopholes" in the proof stage in claiming territory captures.

If the axis for example, capture a base, or even notice a huge push for a spicific base, what's to prevent the allied forces from logging off during either that attack, or the hour long hold period? This would nullify the conditions for capture and be a real pain in the butt.

(Not saying allied pilots or axis pilots would do this, just using it as an example in theory holes)

It's complex enough right now, in that the arena creators are having to keep tabs on the ebb and flow of the event. Not to mention, if someone spent a great deal of time helping to capture a base, he/she might have to log off, having spent a great deal of time capturing in the first place.

It does present some intresting questions though on where this thing is going long term. I love the way things are evolving and players are offering up some great positive suggestions!

It's great to see the community so involved in a common goal and accomplishment.

Well it's why I suggested only 1 hour hold time.. Call it the golden hour if you will.  If one team logs off, it's their problem and they shouldn't take the base if they won't be around to defend it. If the base is in the "golden hour" ratios should not matter for the recapture.

We already have a clock in the tower and I'm pretty sure it works doesn't it?. A simple screen shot showing the clock time at capture then a SS one hour later could suffice.

Something needs to be done to force the fight otherwise you will end up with nothing but milk runners whom won't fight. If that keeps up Im' sure you will see people start losing intrest in the AvA.

I looked forward to playing last night because of the good fights we had Sunday night. Milkruns pretty much ruled the day last night to the point I just logged and went to the MA for some real fights.

[crockett]

Originally posted by E25280
Since holding a base for an hour is a hard thing to verify (was that 60 minutes or only 59:48?) how about making the objectives groups of two or three bases in close proximity?  Both or all three of the bases must be held simultaneously.

This is easily verified through a screen shot.

This will usually mean objectives can't be captured "by surprise" as the first base to fall tips off the opposition a push is being made somewhere.

It will force the attacker to defend what they just captured as they push for the second or third part of the objective.  They can't act as a plague of locusts heading in one direction devouring everything in their path if the opposition can easily come behind them and re-capture the first part of their objective.  They will have to leave a rear guard to prevent it.

Since objectives should be harder to achieve, you might need to bump up the points or whatever rewards you are using for each objective met.

I just double checked the clock in the tower does work. You can also simply open up the mission planner and it gives you the current server time.

So it's not that hard to verify it just requires 2 screen shots rather than one.

The reason behind this topic stems from last night. One group of Axis players rolled 3 easy to capture Vbases using Ju88s and a bunch of goons. They then left the bases undefended so they could move to the next base.

They managed to get 3 vbases and almost a 4th before we could get enough guys there to defend and start recapturing the bases.  Allies went right back in and recaptured each of the bases with zero resistance within 20 mins of their captures.

The milk runners didn't care about defending they were only after lame capture points. To get the points they only had to "capture" not "hold" the base, hence the reason behind my idea of being required to hold for 1 hour.

I have no issues with a good sneak attack, but the fact they only held the bases for 20 mins at tops .. well to put it short that's just lame gaming the game.

If you tell them they need a group of bases I think it will stop any sort of tactics for surprise attacks and will likely push more of the rolling horde MA mentality.

[E25280]

I perfectly understand your reasoning which is why I offered a suggestion of my own.

Again, though, there is a problem with verification with the one hour method.  Were those two screen shots you propose interrupted by a (very) temporary re-take?  Can't tell that from screen shots.  You are also necessitating the claimer and two verifiers stay on during that entire time.  That could cause all sorts of trouble as not everyone always has that amount of uninterrupted time, especially if the capture comes late in their gaming day.

Not to say the challenges are insurmountable, but there is a lot more room for interpretation and bending of rules attempting to incorporate stretches of time than there is with an instantaneous snapshot.

[FiLtH]

Why not set objective time between 8-12 pm et, all other times the map capture is turned off. If people dont want to just dogfight, they can go MA, and come back in when the AvA is active.

[Chapel]

I don't really like the idea that I have to fly at a certain time. Kinda punish's people who can't fly at the specified times.