New toys!!! But......

[Rich46yo]

Ah well, if it wasnt aimed at me then I apologize. These Liberals in the open forum have me all worked up.

                   Now I can go back to vulching, spawn camping, and baby seal clubbing.  Sorry Moot.

[LYNX]

Originally posted by hubsonfire
It's been suggested twice already in this thread. You were saying?

No such thing has been mentioned in this thread.  Go re-read Haps post.  He's "suggesting" a whole new system.  Although I never played Air Warrior I believe reading from other posts that that game had a similar system.

What I was saying was as disproportionate as

For some, it is because that's what they think the point of the game is, and for others it's simply about control over how others play the game

Aside from the handbag slinging the thread has fallen into a couple of  factions with regard to enhancing strategical game play.  Those that wish for a whole new strat system and or involving mass recoding.  Then those that advocate tweaking of the present system.  In my opinion the former is unreasonable where as the later is do-able.   In measures of cause and effect.

In either case the desire was to put an importance into strat.  Make it worth fighting for and defending.  Bringing that fight up into the air (yer I know it's a filthy suggestion what with all those skilled acm field vulcher, runway divers and massed Noe HO attackers, we so longingly look up to).  As for my brief input with regards to the fuel strat it's less of an effect to game play than our present day 5% ENY.  That's about as disproportionate to game play as I would want to get and I'm not advocating removing ENY.

Reading through the lines nothings up for consideration anyways.  Perhaps I'm just an "old timer" looking for another challenge  but the fuel and troop factories are little more than score point opportunities at the moment.  As for HQ......... I'll be polite and stop now.

[Rolex]

I think good maps are the true building blocks of "strategy," if that is your goal. Good, small maps with 250 players seem like the perfect recipe to cook up action, which is what everyone wants - furballers, mission guys, bomber guys, bomber killers, vehicle guys, toolshedders, vulchers, vulchees, pickers and pickees...

I'd like to see 2 capped late-war Main Arenas with small maps, one with an ETO feeling (land based, no or limited cvs) and the other with a PTO atmosphere (cvs and islands galore). And a 3rd one opened during peak times, with maybe new "medium-sized" maps. I think the large maps promote timidity and less massive, multi-player fun.

I also think these threads go away when new patches and new maps come out.  The boxed-game people have to constantly create new games with new goals and strategies. The concept remains the same here, so that is why I think maps create a freshness, along with the new models and textures.

[uberslet]

See rule 4

[toonces3]

Originally posted by Rolex
I think good maps are the true building blocks of "strategy," if that is your goal. Good, small maps with 250 players seem like the perfect recipe to cook up action, which is what everyone wants - furballers, mission guys, bomber guys, bomber killers, vehicle guys, toolshedders, vulchers, vulchees, pickers and pickees...

I'd like to see 2 capped late-war Main Arenas with small maps, one with an ETO feeling (land based, no or limited cvs) and the other with a PTO atmosphere (cvs and islands galore). And a 3rd one opened during peak times, with maybe new "medium-sized" maps. I think the large maps promote timidity and less massive, multi-player fun.

 

Agree in full.  Excellent ideas Rolex.

[ridley1]

Rolex, those are good ideas...and your comment about how these threads go away when a new patch comes along are correct.  "They create a freshness", is how you put it.  But these effects are only short term. Billions will up the p-39 to try it out...then it'll become just another plane to fly.

I Just came across another thread about HQ raids....I'll post just after this to link to it....

Ghastly (?) brought up the problem that HQ raids basically get brought up against the team already getting beat the baddest, and maybe that's where a lot of this "you toolshedders want to dictate how the game is played" comments are coming from.  I agree that it sucks....you're getting beat bad...and then they start blinding you...that's not fun...for anyone.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Hitech try to even out unbalanced fights? I mean, the ENY thing and all?

Earlier I said, one thing about being pushed back...is your strats, and supply become stronger......as you advance and expand, your logistics become weaker.

So, an unbalanced fight in the arena......ENY starts to kick in (insert arguements about how that is implented and imposed here)

Could there be an ENY for strat effects?  Say A's down to 20% of the map....you need to nook HQ to take effect.......B has 70% of the map....peeing on an ammo factory will disable their ords....

[ridley1]

there we go......

http://forums.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=226517

[Tilt]

Just did a deep mission in lancs from A32 to the ammo factory and two cities in the SW corner of the map.

I returneed intact to 32 earning 9.6 perks with a perk multiplier of about 1.16.

The mission took well over an hour.


I was able to get in and out virtually unchallenged even though I knocked cites down to 39% and the ammo factory down to 49%.

But then my return alt was at 30K.

I think if we want to get stuff focussed more in this area we have to make the rewards and the consequences higher plus players should be more aware of the consequences.

The rammifications of strat attrition are very vague to most players and as Lynx points out some strat is less than vital even if totally lost.

So tweaks to what we have

Increase the perk earning potential of strat attrition.
Make strat objects worth more perk points
Integrate this with using bomber perks to buy formations and bombsi.e greater "currency" earning and more stuff to spend it on
Increase the consequenses of strat attrition.
Defending countries should be worried about their strat health it could be that they do not defend it because it make little difference to them. Increasing down times may make a difference. Provided it is properly communicated(see below)
Communicate a countries strat health in a more meaningfull way.
There are several ways of achieving this.

We could express strat factory health not as a % but as a number representing the time to rebuild the relevant air field objects.

We could express strat city health not as a % but as a number representing the time to rebuild factory objects.

We could add audible warnings when strat health falls below certain levels.

We could change the strat colour when its low.

This may spread combat away from the sole focus of combat via the capture of airfields and vehicle fields by mass attrition.

I would also wish (and probably should do so in wishlist) for the return of depots.
They could be introduced in several ways.

Simply one would be at the road origin point feeding each airfield. Ownership of the depot would be essential for that field to recieve supplies. The airfields  would be conciderably hardened and have normal resupply of defences made quicker (ack down times reduced). But with the depot lost the airfield gradually dies as nothing is resupplied.

The depot would then be the focus  for primary capture,  both sides able to access the air over the area of combat, both sides having spawns points for their GV's toward nieghbouring depots. Even when a depot is lost there is a chance for recapture..prolonging the battle. But if a depot is lost for too long then eventually its air field is not able to recover from such attacks as it recieves.

[FrodeMk3]

Originally posted by Rolex
I think good maps are the true building blocks of "strategy," if that is your goal. Good, small maps with 250 players seem like the perfect recipe to cook up action, which is what everyone wants - furballers, mission guys, bomber guys, bomber killers, vehicle guys, toolshedders, vulchers, vulchees, pickers and pickees...

I'd like to see 2 capped late-war Main Arenas with small maps, one with an ETO feeling (land based, no or limited cvs) and the other with a PTO atmosphere (cvs and islands galore). And a 3rd one opened during peak times, with maybe new "medium-sized" maps. I think the large maps promote timidity and less massive, multi-player fun.

I also think these threads go away when new patches and new maps come out.  The boxed-game people have to constantly create new games with new goals and strategies. The concept remains the same here, so that is why I think maps create a freshness, along with the new models and textures.

I've kinda been thinking the same thing, Rolex. But the way I see it, looking at all the maps' we have, we can only do minor Variations' on a basic theme.

I'm all for HTC loosening up the restrictions' on placing/re-arranging field objects.

If he can see through to allowing this, we can set up fields' and strat that have more going for them than just a 30 building knock-down, then 10 troops.

You could put 3 different town's around an airfield, close, to confuse attackers' as to which one to take. You could make a bridge over a river or to an island, defended by Auto-guns' at the ends, which GV's would have to seize, to get to the town. You could put an Airfield with either 15k or more alt, or an airstart over a strat target, so people might just up to defend them. But to do these things', Like I said, Hitechs' gotta loosen the current restriction's.

[DREDIOCK]

Originally posted by Saxman
I'm disappointed in you two. Ridley brings up a valid point.

The strat side of the game is EXTREMELY weak. The only strategic target in the game of any real value right now is the HQ, which "Value" is a bit of a stretch.

I strongly agree.

I'd like to see the start targets have more impact thus giving people more of a reason to both attack them (to build up ranking) and to defend them.

Now the only reason people bonb the strat targets is because they are there and because they can. and because it helps them gain rank.

Nobody has any real incentive to stop them.

[blkmgc]

Very good Stuff Tilt.

[hyster]

ok my 2 pennies!!!!!!
 
ill use fuel as an example in this one but can be used for all factories.
fuel factory supplies fuel, it has NO effect on fuel at a base.
factory can supply fuel at 1,000,000 gallons an hour.
each field can hold 100,000 gallons
spit holds 40 gallons of fuel with DT.
when spit takes off 40 gallons are deducted from the base store so it comes down to 999,960 gallons
a b-17 takes off after the spit which holds 100 gallons so the base store drops down to 998,860 gallons so on and so on.
 
run a fuel convoy every 10-20 mins to re-supply the base fuel store to 100% available fuel.
 
if you take out a fuel dump at a base ( assume there's 4 ) then base fuel store drops to 75%, now this doesn't mean planes can only have a 75% fuel load out but the base store only has 750,000 of fuel available. if all 4 dumps are destroyed the nothing can up till base is resupplied (max 10-20 mins). possibly a small "reserve" of around 10,000 so at least some planes can up for a while.
 
if the fuel factory is down to 50% capacity then it can only supply 500,000 gallons of fuel an hour instead of 1,000,000
the way i see it this will have 3 different ways to hamper fuel.
hit the factories
hit convoys (adds a new dimension to game play)
hit fuel dumps
 
most fuel dumps in fixed bases where hardened or under ground so strafing them will have no effect, would need 2,000 lbs of ords to destroy them.

the fuel figures i pulled out of thin air to give an example.

[MachNix]

For simplicity, let's say there are only two types of players: Furballers and War Fighters.  The Furballers don't care about capturing bases or wining the war; they just want some quick action in fighters or GVs.  War Fighters are the opposite.  They care about capturing bases and wining the war.

Now let's look at the strategic targets and see who is impacted by it:

F = Firballers
W = War Fighters
X = Major impact
x = Minor impact
- = No impact

F W Strategic Element
X X HQ (Loss of Dar Bar keeps people from locating the fights or attacks.)
x X City (Reduces ability for other strategic elements to repair.)
x x Radar (Localized loss of Dots but Dar Bar and base flashing still work.)
x x Ack (Takes longer for field ack to repair?)
- - Fuel (Used to limit fighters to defense-only roles, but I don't think it has any impact now.)
- X Ammo (Loss of bombs/rockets and use of bombers which reduces ability to attack.)
- X Training (Loss of ability to capture.)

Ammo and Training clearly fall under the War Fighter category.  Making changes to these elements should have no impact on the way Furballers play the game.  So let's focus on those two elements.  How would you change them to make them more important?  Remember it just War Fighter to War Fighter.

There are base-level elements – ammo bunkers and barracks.  Should it be an all or nothing?  Take all the bunker or barracks down to eliminate the use of bombs and troops.  Or a scaled impact where the size or number is decreased as bunkers or barracks get destroyed?

There are factory-level elements – ammo factory and training facilities.  As these get destroyed, should it impact base-level elements such as the size of bombes available?  I would certainly like it to impact the quantity/quality of supplies being delivered (both automatically and manually) to repair base-level elements.

Now Cities impact both Furballers and War Fighters with the greatest impact on the War Fighter.  I think cities should remain as they are – increase time/supplies need to repair factories based on the percentage of the city destroyed; and not repairable manually.

Resupply. The basic element seems to be a crate that knocks off something like 15 minuets of repair time.  A jeep should carry one crate, an M3 carry 2 crates, and a C-47 carry 4 or 6 crates.  What I'm really after is a C-47 carrying enough supplies to get awarded an "average" number of bomber points for resupplying a base – or capturing a field for that mater.  A player should not be penalized in their bombers scores by resupplying.  The number or crates/boxes carried and needed to repair an element can hopefully be adjusted to make the numbers work.

Should you be able to pick the type or mix of supplies you carry?

HT has probably been over all this before and knows all the pros and cons.

Do we already have what we need?

---
I see hyster's post about fuel just before posting.  At first read, I like the idea.  (I have similar thoughts about propeller blades when I see someone take a perfectly good airplane and land wheels up.)  But fuel impacts the Furballers and I really don't want to force them into the War Fighter category.  Forgeting about the coding needed, can the idea be applied to bombs and rockets?

[Rino]

Ah yes, the age old gripe of "wah, I can't ruin the entire arena by my
lonesome" thing.  With the expected group of professional toolshed
artists decrying any opposition to their plans to make "world domination"
easier.

     Playability means nothing to those people, it's all about "winning the
war!"  Who cares if anyone else has fun, it's me that's important!  The
fact that bombing has been "easy moded" to the point of idiocy isn't
enough, now there must be tickertape parades and perks galore!

     Guys, just once consider that your suggestions to have an effect all
out of porportion to your effort may negatively impact others.

[ridley1]

But it's ok, to make the strat side useless?
That's right! I want world domination.   Go back 9 posts.  I suggested when a country is down, strats could be used to rebalance the fight.

It's not me.  It appears to be (by the fact that there are over 100 posts in this trhread, and many other similar topics) that there is a significant amount of other me's  who have taken the time to write down their considered thoughts.

One theme is that how do we get a more balanced game that keeps everybody happy....yet can somhow move the game forward? Radical change ain't gonna happen.
Bombing furballers into oblivion would bore the snot out of me.  Trying to up from a vulched field bores the snot out of me.  Running headlong into the same base all night.......Make bombing tougher? why not?

Explore options to diversify and improve, and keep everybody happy. I tactical bomb, I furball, I strafe.....but bombing strats is only good for putting her on auto pilot and grabbing a beer.

 People throw up the
 "I don't want to play the game the way you guys want to!!" But I guess it's alright for me to play the way you want to.