Author Topic: New toys!!! But...... (Read 9651 times)

MachNix · « **Reply #30 on:** February 21, 2008, 02:13:02 PM »

The strategic system should work the same as base captures. With captures, country A attacks and country B defends. Country A has to take the whole town down before thy can capture. Once the base is captured the roles are reversed with country B attacking to get their base back and country A defending. But there is a difference. Country B only has to take the town acks down because the building will stay down for 45 minuets. Once town buildings start popping, "Squatters' Rights" kick in and the base now fully belongs to country A. Country B would be starting from scratch if they want the base back. The same applies to vehicles bases except the time is only 15 minutes if all the VH are taken down. The point is the conflict has the potential of continuing after the capture.

With the strategic system, again, country A attacks and country B defends. If country A is successful in destroying a factory, country A leaves the factory for B to re-supply. In essence, the conflict is over with country A and B going their separate ways. The same thing happens with porking a field. All that can be done is increasing the number of supplies needed so re-supply so opposing the raid is preferable to just running a few goons when the raid is over. So how do you continue the conflict?

The real challenge to this game is designing in "caring." If people don’t care if they live or die in the game, how are you going to get them to care about the fuel factory or a field? The reason the mass base capture is boring is because country B didn't care to defend. If some one enters an arena and sees that their HQ is down, they can: live with it, re-supply it, switch countries, go to a different arena, or log off. The same thing would happen if it was fuel or Spits that wasn't available. You can't force them to care.

There might not be an answer to the strategic system other than a point of pride. The pride in bombing a strategic target and porking a field; and the pride in not letting it happen and seeing your bases at 100%. All you can do is up your raid and see if there is anyone on the other side willing to oppose you.

toonces3 · « **Reply #31 on:** February 21, 2008, 02:29:06 PM »

I think I more or less agree with BBBB.

I'm coming up on a year online here soon. I wouldn't say the novelty has completely worn off; there's alot to do in AH2.

But, truthfully, this game feels like Quake with wings to me. I don't see how you could really view it terribly differently. The bomb and bail pilots are my favorite part, just behind the suicide radar attack guys.

I'm not sure changing the system is the answer, and I haven't been playing long enough to even know what changes to make.

The problem lies with the player base mentality. HTC gives us the sandbox, it's up to us to figure out what to do in it.

rogerdee · « **Reply #32 on:** February 21, 2008, 02:34:01 PM »

i have only been back playing for a few days,but i haven't really missed the game play as it stands.
I like to furball some times i like to defend sometimes and i like to pork and bomb.

But at the moment there isn't much point in bombing or porking.
someone mentioned resuply and defence.

Resupply should be made a bit harder so defence is more inportant but also strat targets at bases should be toughened so that one guy canot fallatern everything in one run.

Untell the time comes when the players change how they play and make the game evolve then things will carry on the same.

maybe changing the maps and amount of targets will help but unless no ones going to use it it won't make much diference.

FiLtH · « **Reply #33 on:** February 21, 2008, 03:02:33 PM »

I too would like strat to really make a difference. But the trouble with that is if you get a big bomb run together, the enemy enjoys the few minutes of intercept, but then has to deal with the effects of the mission. Maybe they can only carry 25% fuel, or maybe no ord for a longer time. No troops for a long time, no ack at their base to defend them.

Now it becomes less a cool part of the game, and more of an irritant.

Personnally I'd like to see certin planes become unavailable, or an ENY effect applied through strat bombing. That way you feel like the time you spent mattered for something, but only effect a few plane types, for awhile rather than everyone.

FrodeMk3 · « **Reply #34 on:** February 21, 2008, 03:03:51 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by ridley1
The arena split (I beleive) was a technical issue and I don't think part of the discussion I wanted to bring up.

Hitech, I'm glad that there was nothing wrong with my post. No offence intended, none taken.

Old subscribers have, and new subscribers bring in their style of game play and there's no way that one can tell them how to spend their $15. We're gonna have HO's and Hoards...that's really not going to change. It's useless to beat the dead horse of how johnny should fly his LaLa. (apologies to La fans)

I'm not sure if we're talking about changing the overall strategic system of the game play, but I believe that we are looking at altering variables within the present system.
Several posts in this thread have addressed the effect (or lack of ) strat targets in the game. Maybe that could be looked at. Maybe not today, or in the next two weeks (there's that term), but 6 mth down the road.

But one hope I have is that someone out there pops up with a "simple" idea that stirs things up, adds a new dimension,produces a new challange, within the present system..As I said earlier, the huge increase in ack at fields and towns changed the game; didn't change the system, but changed the methods we had to use. It was refreshing.

At least we know you're reading. Maybe we can come up with something.

Ridley, I thought long and hard before I brought up the subject of the Arena split. However, it has pertinence to the present subject. Because nothing's really changed since 9/13. We still have all of the gameplay problems' that were alledgedly the cause of the split in the first place. Only now, they are spread across 4 arena's instead of 1. You still have Milkrunning. You still have Hording. You still have a fractured community. I was quiet on the day of the split, because I wanted to adopt a 'wait and see' attitude. Well, I've waited. You know what I've noticed in the last Year and almost a half? Nothing, as far as the community and gameplay are concerned. All the problems' that were evident before the split, are still here almost 17 months' later. I'll also add, that creating an EW and MW arena was premature, without a complete planeset for those. The current ones' we have barely scratch the surface.

I do believe that HTC was trying to make a positive modification on the community's behaviour. However, what I believe should be done here, would result in quite a bit of recoding. Namely, SCRAPPING THE ENTIRE CAPTURE SYSTEM.

All the current strategies' (Hording, NOE's, etc.) are there because of the current capture system. It need's to be changed so that the desired form of gameplay is achieved for both sides (i.e., furballer, and toolshedder).

hitech · « **Reply #35 on:** February 21, 2008, 03:18:05 PM »

Quote

Because nothing's really changed since 9/13. We still have all of the gameplay problems' that were alledgedly the cause of the split in the first place. Only now, they are spread across 4 arena's instead of 1.

And we now cross 1000 players online at the same time on busy nights.

HiTech

Bronk · « **Reply #36 on:** February 21, 2008, 03:22:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hitech
And we now cross 1000 players online at the same time on busy nights.

HiTech

LOL you're loving that problem I bet.

ridley1 · « **Reply #37 on:** February 21, 2008, 04:11:05 PM »

Frode:
I went back and read the thread on the arena split. From what I read, hoarding and big squads were one (possible) reason for the split. But whether or not we share the same opinion on why the split occured....it's here. And by now...it looks like its here to stay. I don't think that discussing the split is going to be productive.

In you last post you talk about scrapping the entire capture system. Well, that's where Hitech came up with the re-inventing football analogy....we both know that's not going to happen. But then...you'd have to come up with a whole new set of objectives for side 'A' to be considered victorious. But this is a combat sim..so how else would you dole out victory, other than controlling your enemy's territory?

Capture is the basis of the game, I can't in any way see that changing; just adding dimensions as to how one team achieves it.

A quick example off the top of my head in regard to bringing strats into the mix..
troop training bases......wipe out the training base; you're troops aren't as good....you need 15 troops to capture now.

you wipe out an ammo factory...you can only equip aircraft with smaller gun packages in the hangar

Bronk · « **Reply #38 on:** February 21, 2008, 04:14:55 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by ridley1

Capture is the basis of the game, I can't in any way see that changing; just adding dimensions as to how one team achieves it.

No it's not. Combat is the basis of the game, capture just promotes combat.

Tilt · « **Reply #39 on:** February 21, 2008, 05:17:48 PM »

I think that if AH is attracting a steady growth in its player base, then from a HTC point of view the present product aint broke and does not need fixing.

We are getting some new toys .............. indeed quite a few by comparison to past updates............ plus we may get some changes to the perk system (I speculate)

The rules of football do change with time ............

I too would like to see a landgrab system that did not hinge so totally on the capture of air fields and vehicle bases. I would like to see a system that mimiced the methods of territorial gains made in WWII if only biased to the role of those ac and Gv rides we have "in game". Where the air war was fought over objectives other than airfields.

Its a big ask however. The arena concept of sides atritting and capturing air fields supported by strat systems predates AH going back into AW. Seriously re modelling this affects the arena/terrain set up and build systems at multiple levels.

Its not just a "tweak". Further its makes a hit directly upon game play and HTC have to be very sure that modifications to game play actually enhance what the bulk of players (not just the vociferous ones) want.

Because getting it wrong can switch large numbers of players off almost overnight.

Hence this stuff has always happened very slowly tweaking what can be tweaked testing the reaction and then moving on (or not as the case may be)

and if the player base "demographics" are saying that its Ok as it is then why fix it?

Tilt · « **Reply #40 on:** February 21, 2008, 05:25:56 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by ridley1
Frode:

Capture is the basis of the game, I can't in any way see that changing; just adding dimensions as to how one team achieves it.

Accepting that territorial gain acts as a method of focussing combat , there are still a myriad of gaming mechanisms that could be used instead of or as well as the capture of airfields thru landing troops into a map room

Flayed1 · « **Reply #41 on:** February 21, 2008, 05:47:21 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Bronk
No it's not. Combat is the basis of the game, capture just promotes combat.

The problem I see here Bronk is your seeing it as... COMBAT: Only air to air, air to ground or ground to gound, Planes GV's or what have you killing each other... That is what you see as combat being the goal of the game and primary..

I think COMBAT: Take your land or harm your land using the tools provided while you try to stop me using same said tools and my virsion of combat is more of a stratiegic one rather than the blatent Air to air stuff, though it is fun...

Really though no matter how you think of it the two types of thinking need each other or those that like the style your thinking about whould just need 3 bases or less shut in a room and have at it, and the rest of us would just go find another game...

The problem is that the strat system needs some tweeks to make it more usable to those of us on the other side of the coin from you. While HTC may be getting more new customers those of us that really want to hang onto the game need a lil love too.

And no HiTech I don't think this because I've been playing several years, I started thinking this back after I started really trying to play the strat side of things in AH1 and found it lacking and made worse when the overly drastic HQ and fuel changes were made..

Bronk · « **Reply #42 on:** February 21, 2008, 05:52:42 PM »

Flayed you bombing my stuff is to entice me to up and shoot you down.

So it still goes back to combat.

ridley1 · « **Reply #43 on:** February 21, 2008, 06:15:58 PM »

I can understand the concept of "if it ani't broke, don't fix it", Tilt. Sure the player base is growing, and that's good for HTC, and good for the game.

But I've noticed through this thread, and even in your post, that you'd like to see changes, or maybe I should say other options available within the concept of this game.

Sure, the demographics are looking good, but then again, most of the responses to this thread are coming from longer term players. And there's a theme (even from yourself, Tilt) of "mmm, there's something missing" But, more importantly, how can it be improved
Sure, it's the older players speaking up right now, but it really wasn't that long ago that we were the new guys. (Please, let me fantasize that it wasn't that long ago)

BBBB · « **Reply #44 on:** February 21, 2008, 06:22:42 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hitech
And we now cross 1000 players online at the same time on busy nights.

HiTech

You do??? I must be missing something big time then. Is there another secret server I do not know about?

Bravo on the football analogy. I expected nothing less. People are here expressing a displeasure with a game that at one time was great and you spin that into a football analogy that totally contradicts what you have done at HTC with the game play.

The point is you have made so many changes to the game play it is boring and repetitive to some. In short you DID make the fields 12,000 feet, you just made the field shorter and narrower too.