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

[Krusty]

I wonder if Hitech would entertain the idea of enabling full dot dar for all cons over 5k, no matter where they are on the map?

I wonder if that would change gameplay a little? Change the way folks steamroll across a map and whatnot.

[dedalos]

Originally posted by Krusty
I wonder if Hitech would entertain the idea of enabling full dot dar for all cons over 5k, no matter where they are on the map?

I wonder if that would change gameplay a little? Change the way folks steamroll across a map and whatnot.

now we are talking

[The Fugitive]

Originally posted by Tilt
....... indeed the ability to "furball" is the minimum basic requirement (IMO).  

 

This is where your theory falls apart. My opinion is just as important in this game as your. Your "style" of play does NOT out weigh my "style" of play.

Most furballs are made due to a big darbar. It is not necessarily due to "defending" a base, more often than not you won't find any more than a few planes loaded with bombs for an attack.  Its just a bunch of folk duking it out and having a good time with it.

[rabbidrabbit]

Originally posted by hitech
A few thoughts.

First do not confuse the words guard, and defend. People do not mind defending once they are attacked. But most people do not wish to stand guard duty.  So when you make a blanket statement
"This will force a country to defend the factories"

It will not happen , unless you make sure there is a way it can be defend with out standing guard.

2nd , notice all items damaged in strat , only lower a countries offensive ability. We do not lower fuel octain, because this gives an advantage in a fight. That is complete different than giving and advantage in the war.

The same would go for eliminating some plane types it would give one side an advantage in the actual fight , not the war game.

Any strat design must not have a steam roller effect that once a threshold is crossed , the defending side becomes hopeless.

If I understand you correctly, the goals are:

To promote a fight and provide some buffer to outnumbered sides.

A more meaningful use of strat will help promote a fight and give more purpose to a MA that is essentially a "quake" air fight as per the common complaint.

To make things more "defensible" why not put factories nearer the HQ and a few higher alt bases to allow a more reasonable prop plane climb to intercept?  No one wants to climb for 20 mins to intercept on short notice and relying just on 163's incite complaints as well.

Rolex has a decent idea on how strats can be more valuable and thus worth defending.  If they are worth defending and more defendable you are promoting a fight and giving greater purpose to teamwork.

You could reduce the "steamroller" effect by having the perk modifier affect strats.  For example; if you are at 1.5 then hitting strats only has half the effect as 1.0.

What people are saying with "stale" is the system is lacking purpose and does little to enhance the game in its current state.  It's not about changing the rules on something that works its about maturing something that by consensus never did work particularly well.

[ghi]

If you read the thread below posted by MjTalon, with his bombing raid, it's easy to understand that are lots of players , not very noisy on this BB,that enjoy this kind of partialy  organized , historic more realistic,strategic fights in MA format, and i don't understand how they interfere with the 'Furballer" type of player, disturbing his fun??!!
That's what makes memories on this game, a huge raid,or shooting them down, scramble all resources to defend the country assets . Does this promote the aircombat? imop, yes and in the right more realistic way, But unfortunatly this doesn't happen very often, because the tactic/strategic value of those assets(specialy HQ) is reduced to zero , are just uselless spots on the map,
You guys modeled 8 great bombers with formation option wich are used 90% of the flights to bomb bases, CVs , Is that what they were mainly  used for in WW2?

[MjTalon]

Thanks Ghi .  

Heres what my opinion is to try and bring back the popularity of bombing strats.              

Introduce a new strat system, or currently fix the current one. Bombing refineries have no affect anymore, since HTC reduced the amount of gas at the airfields to be porked too.  Back in the day, porking the fuel depots on the base reduced the gas allowed to take off from the field all the way to 25%.

Well, with those La7 pilot whined hard and long about not being to stay airborne for more than 5mins. So HTC made it to be porked to 75%. At least switch the % to 50, that way they'll still have time to fly, and we will have a strat worth bombing. I only nailed the City, the radar, and AAA factory because they DO have a major impact on the corresponding country.


Limit the amount of 163s that can be in flight at one time. Sure it's a long shot, but 163s are what discourages alot of bomber pilots from trying to take them down. I still run raids to the HQ regardless of the current system, because i love to have fun, and i love to make bomber raids.

Or at least make it so the HQ cannot be resupplied. If it goes down, it stays down for 2 hours, period.  Now trying to take down a HQ and it can be resupplied within 3 minutes? What's the point of doing a 1-2hr HQ run, if we know that the thing will be up and running within 3 minutes of it going down.

[Krusty]

If one side *CAN* pull off a HQ raid on the other, and bring the HQ down, it usually ONLY happens when the side that just lost HQ is already being steamrolled on both fronts, and is the underdog.

Further reducing the gameplay of that team by removing all radar for hours on end leads only to players logging off.


Asking for a HQ that cannot resupply is like asking for hangars that never re-up. You get that wish, and the folks it affects stop playing when it happens.

[MjTalon]

Originally posted by Krusty
If one side *CAN* pull off a HQ raid on the other, and bring the HQ down, it usually ONLY happens when the side that just lost HQ is already being steamrolled on both fronts, and is the underdog.

Further reducing the gameplay of that team by removing all radar for hours on end leads only to players logging off.


Asking for a HQ that cannot resupply is like asking for hangars that never re-up. You get that wish, and the folks it affects stop playing when it happens.

Seriously though krusty, you have a point sir. But honestly, what's the point of doing a 1-2 hour hq run, if the thing can be re supplied within 3mins? At least alter the re supply time.

[Krusty]

I've not seen it resupplied that fast, but yes I agree in the current system it's pointless. I guess you could have a hard-coded down time like FHs, say 20 minutes? That's enough time that (if coordinated right) missions could be launched to take bases as soon as the dar is down.


EDIT: But again, if the side losing its HQ is the underdog, there's nothing to stop the others from just rolling mission after mission to keep the HQ down.

[BaldEagl]

Originally posted by Krusty
Here's an idea that won't require you to "guard" anything, but will help in defenses for sure.

Historically with radar ranges and advance ground spotters, NO big bombing raid would go unnoticed. Defensive fighters could have more than enough notice to scramble, climb, and meet the bombers at alt in force.

Both sides could tell when large missions were forming.


In this game we barely have 5 minutes' warning (the time it takes for a bomber to cross a sector).


I would suggest the gameplay would change if ALL enemy bombers show up on dar if they pass 15k alt. Unlimited dot dar ANYwhere on the map, for bomber formations above 15k.

That would give us enough ready-alert time to scramble and climb out to meet them.

Otherwise, bombers fly too high, too fast, and too undetected. They are the stealth bombers of the modern era, only without the miniscule bombload.

How about just doubling the size of the current dar rings.  There would still be a lot of overlap and decent coverage as long as they are up.  It might also encourage base re-supply to get them back up if they are down, something I rarely see now.

[Krusty]

Doubling the size of radar rings would only give you 5 minutes' warning, and very few craft can get to 20k in 5 minutes, let alone up to 20k, up to 300mph speed, engage and attack bombers before they drop. A few (spits, 109s) might barely get to 20k in 5 minutes, but would need to then accelerate to the speed of the bombers (and faster) to attack them.



It still wouldn't solve much, IMO. Might negatively affect "furball" type fights though.

[BaldEagl]

Originally posted by Krusty
Doubling the size of radar rings would only give you 5 minutes' warning, and very few craft can get to 20k in 5 minutes, let alone up to 20k, up to 300mph speed, engage and attack bombers before they drop. A few (spits, 109s) might barely get to 20k in 5 minutes, but would need to then accelerate to the speed of the bombers (and faster) to attack them.



It still wouldn't solve much, IMO. Might negatively affect "furball" type fights though.

But the part you are missing as that most strats aren't on the front lines.  They are somwhere further back.  This leaves several fields of overlapping dar circles before the strats are reached.  It also pretty much eliminates the no radar coverage areas buffs use to try to sneak into a target now (that is as long as the local radars are up).

[Krusty]

Perhaps, but that doesn't warn you about anything within 1 sector of an enemy base. It only warns you of deep runs into your territory. Not all maps are the same. Many have strat and other items close to the front.

[Tilt]

I suppose if strat had its own peculiar radar?

[rabbidrabbit]

Or if the bases near the strat were at higher alt...>  or both.