Author Topic: New toys!!! But......  (Read 9654 times)

Offline Flayed1

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1090
New toys!!! But......
« Reply #45 on: February 21, 2008, 06:27:40 PM »
Agin you shooting me is your virsion of combat... What I'm trying to get at is combat has many different faces your just looking at the most blatent one.

  Hmm how can I put this..  More of a meantal combat?  Statagy, long ranging goals against others with similar goals...   Your virsion of combat is meant to interfear with my virsion and vice versa....   While I do participate in the most visible form of combat I'm constantly thinking of what my next move will be in the not so visible form...   I just get to play the shoot each other down virsion while working on the other :)    

  So while more toys are great for general combat som fixes for the strat combat would be nice.

   This got me thinking does anyone have a  game of  they want to sell :)  loved that game.
From the ashes of the old we rise to fly again. Behold The Phoenix Wing!

Offline Bronk

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9044
New toys!!! But......
« Reply #46 on: February 21, 2008, 07:09:05 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Flayed1
Agin you shooting me is your virsion of combat... What I'm trying to get at is combat has many different faces your just looking at the most blatent one.

  Hmm how can I put this..  More of a meantal combat?  Statagy, long ranging goals against others with similar goals...   Your virsion of combat is meant to interfear with my virsion and vice versa....   While I do participate in the most visible form of combat I'm constantly thinking of what my next move will be in the not so visible form...   I just get to play the shoot each other down virsion while working on the other :)    

  So while more toys are great for general combat som fixes for the strat combat would be nice.

   This got me thinking does anyone have a  game of  they want to sell :)  loved that game.


So your saying you'd be happy bombing off line? Because you can do that without the fear of seing combat.
See Rule #4

Offline FrodeMk3

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2481
New toys!!! But......
« Reply #47 on: February 21, 2008, 07:16:31 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by BBBB
You do??? I must be missing something big time then. Is there another secret server I do not know about? :noid

 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. :aok


The Combat-Tour Alpha test server?:cool:

I dunno, BBBB. Myself, I partly blame the players; But after enough years, they know how to game anything in AH.

You gave me an epiphany with the 12k field thing though. Maybe a total change to the Strat system isn't really feasible. Maps, however, are.

Most of our maps' our really pretty simple variations' on one theme or another. We have Historical (Think AvA and scenario) maps. We have our TA and DA maps, which are mainly simple layouts' of fields' at different alts.

And lastly, we have our MA maps. Not to defile the efforts' of our mapmakers like Fester, for instance, but it occured to me that our maps' really determine alot of our gameplay. They all have one thing in common, though. An airfield, controlled by a town with a bunker that has to have 10 troops in it. Now, if that can't be changed, Why don't we change the access to the field/town?

HTC, since you've been following this, I mean to ask; What limit's in current mapmaking would you be willing to bend/break? I once heard someone mention a max. field alt of 5 or 10k. What about one higher? Or maybe 2 or 3 for each side higher? Maybe change the radar settings. Move it down to 50 ft., instead of 500? I haven't ever cracked into the map editor, but I might have a try at making some fields' that are only accesible by, say, a bridge for GV's. Would there be a way to put Auto-ack on the bridges' that would shoot at an attacking force? Make the bridge into town something for an attacking force to have to hold and take?

What about Lines' of supply? The only problem with the current Strat system, is that one country can take any field on the map it wants, even right next to the nme HQ, and the field gets' supplied. Make it so that the fields' have to have either a continous line of friendly fields' behind it, or be steadily supplied by players' (ala the Hump, in the CBI in WWII.) Something like these might diffuse the 'horde' problem.

I'm gonna try my hand at the editor, and see if I can make an example of what I mean. I'll get back to y'all in due time.

Offline LYNX

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2263
New toys!!! But......
« Reply #48 on: February 21, 2008, 07:30:52 PM »
I've tried thinking about this from both sides of the fence.  HTC and crew are busy chaps.  Can't pander to every ones wants. Hence the Billy Connolly sketch.  If recoding is involved ........well need I say more!

As a player like you the strat system is still the same as it's always been.  However in my AH history certain targets have become virtually worthless hitting.  The system as it was still is but the game play, it is not.  HQ, fuel and to a large degree the troop training have very little effect in today's Strat bombing campaign (game play).  Almost 1/3 of the strat targets are negated because it's deemed as pointless.  I refer to both parties here.  Those that the strat belongs to and those that would destroy it.

With the advent of more acks, more barracks, changes in the minimum fuel load outs, hardening of HQ plus it's ease of resupply we also witness a by product.  The neutering of the strat system.  The tackle still works but some aspects of it are firing blanks.  Granted we no longer see just 1 or 2 guys porking all the fuel or troops and or ordnance along an entire front.  Neither do we see enemies overly concerned if your bombing the fuel factory into the stone age.  That's to say if anyone wanted to waist 40 plus minutes of their life bombing for no reward.... cause and effect.

The only thing I can think of is a compromise if your to get HTC into your camp.  After all the way the strat system works, it works fine.  If I'm correct I believe certain hardness's can be set and certain down times can be altered.  I confess I don't know if one setting sets all or if each and every base has to be set but how about making factory buildings twice as hard IE 500lb as apposed to 250lb and make field strat down times 2 or 3 times as long.  Perhaps alter the resupply amount by double......something along these lines.

Would the idea enhance game play with regard to strats?  Would it bring back the high alt fighter patrols or near panic scramble when a factory flashes? Or would it just promote an abundance of quake type noe suiciding lancasters?

Good luck.

Offline ghi

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2669
New toys!!! But......
« Reply #49 on: February 21, 2008, 08:14:11 PM »
imop, the game needs few changes to push players in  more organized massive raids/fights , more realistic at high alt :ecouraje players to attack and defend the most valuable strategic target: the HQ:

--bring back the 4 steps progressive damage model for HQ, like in AH1, even if is not total destroyed, the bomber pilot gets something, not only 30mm shells, for the long flight and bombing skills, maybe more perks also

---HQ downtime, at least 30 min without resup option, now the HQ is resuped before the bombers get back to base

-- i would go to a formula , shortcut to Victory,where even the war is lost and map reset if the HQ and City is destroyed, like in chess, atack the king,you can have all the toys on the table but still get checkmate: If Hitler would have been killed , i'm sure WW2 would have finished early: This 40% of the both enemy bases win/reset model, makes the game inactive and boring with same map for weeks.

Offline Flayed1

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1090
New toys!!! But......
« Reply #50 on: February 22, 2008, 03:11:07 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Bronk
So your saying you'd be happy bombing off line? Because you can do that without the fear of seing combat.



 Not at all, and again your only seeing the most visible and brutish  form of combat....  

  But if I must make it simple for you....   If you want my bombers to fly to an objective so that you may undertake the most basic of combat then the strat system needs to be fixed to make my bomber flight mean something...  Other wise my strategic and more complex version of combat is meaningless and you get left with the general meaningless furball at base AXX and nothing beyond that..

  For you the basic combat of the furball may be enough but for me I like to think about the strategic combat effect I have on the war rather than, I shot down so and so... That is just a bonus to the overall strategic combat of the game.

  I'm just trying to get you to understand that there are different levels of combat, some are working well in the current game setup and others need fixed.  If you can't understand this then welll.....
From the ashes of the old we rise to fly again. Behold The Phoenix Wing!

Offline Bronk

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9044
New toys!!! But......
« Reply #51 on: February 22, 2008, 04:54:28 AM »
:rolleyes:

com·bat

–verb (used with object)
1.   to fight or contend against; oppose vigorously: to combat crime.
–verb (used without object)
2.   to battle; contend: to combat with disease.
–noun
3.   Military. active, armed fighting with enemy forces.
4.   a fight, struggle, or controversy, as between two persons, teams, or ideas.
See Rule #4

Offline BaDkaRmA158Th

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2542
New toys!!! But......
« Reply #52 on: February 22, 2008, 05:09:24 AM »
New toys!!! But......

no buts!

only an'deeeeeeeeeens
































an'den!
~383Rd RTC/CH BW/AG~
BaDfaRmA

My signature says "Our commitment to diplomacy will never inhibit our willingness to kick a$s."

Offline ridley1

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 677
New toys!!! But......
« Reply #53 on: February 22, 2008, 07:39:29 AM »
well Bronk...
you say that us bombing your stuff is enough of an enticement for combat.

So, you'll defend everything? At all times? Or will you allocate your resources to where they're most effective? We have bases...we have strats....strats do nothing...therefore you defend bases.

Combat- Noun...to combat crime

The police say there is a burglar in the area. So you defend yourself against him.
You have a two story house. You can't afford to put bars on the windows on all stories to protect yourself.  But the burglar can't get up to the second floor. So, It's a no brainer. You bar up the first floor.

But...Home depot has a sale on ladders. Now the burglar CAN reach the second floor. Now, you have to think about allocation of resources.

Same game, Strategy has changed. One little thing makes a big difference.

Offline LYNX

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2263
New toys!!! But......
« Reply #54 on: February 22, 2008, 07:59:52 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Flayed1

                  SNIP
 SOLUTION: Stat objects need to be made more meaningfull to the country they belong to. Make them matter enough that there is actually some fear if they get bombed, just as there is some fear when people see several flights of bombers going over a base and knowing that your FH's and VH are going to die and make it that much harder to defend your base. Of course this might be more of an Aww crap type feeling than actuall fear but you get the idea :)

   One way I see to acomplish this is Factories and HQ need to be non resupliable by players. If your country doesn't defend them you lose them for the set time that the game will take to fix the damage. Just like hangers..
  Same with HQ, bring back the multipul levels of dar damage and make the damage last how ever long the trains take to fix the damage.  

  Bases should remain as they are other than if it were me fuel should be porkable to 50% to make the fuel factory actually have some type of effect, as it stands now that particular factory is nothing more than a place for people to work on score...

 Only other issue is porking fields... To make the factory damage mean someting the fields must be porked but this is a player side issue and nothing that HTC should really have to worry about other than making sure that the strat rules are up to date and available to players so they know what to hit to accomplish what ever the goal may be.





Firstly ignore Bronx's troll like babble or lack of forethought to see beyond the gunsite.  

I believe there is a problem with HQ multi level damage system and that's one reason they are not using it.  If you partly hit HQ enough to disable dar bars it can't be fixed with resupply.  It's either broken or not coded one of the two.  Where as if you destroyed HQ it can be resupplied.  The other reason it's not used and was hardened was because Knights were without Radar for 3 days straight.  No sooner was their HQ up but within 30 min or so it was bombed again.  This went on for 3 whole days.  Not being a knight I don't know if they even bothered to up for the HQ raiders.  Nore do I know if they actually ran any supply...... Hence the change to HQ.

In ye olde days of AH there would be a cry "HQ raiders" followed swiftly by a general scramble to protect HQ.  Now-er days we look at the size of the dar bar and if it's small we carry on with what we were doing.  A "so what" shrug of the shoulders.  After all 1 set of bombers can't hurt HQ.  This sentiment also applies to many of the factories.

Was it realistic that just 1 set of bombers could effect a whole sides radar....No .... but it did promote "combat":rolleyes:   If anything went near HQ folk would up likes flies around the proverbial.  So... with regard to HQ I would say leave the damage to full or nothing until a "fix" for multi level damage is found.  Make HQ weaker so's 1 set of Lancs 14k's worth can knock it out.  Leave the resupply effect as is IE 8 boxes.  

As for the rest of the strat system I feel the same as most strat players in that parts of it ain't worth hitting or defending.  If I'm near a city and it's being bombed I'll go kill the attacker.  If fuel factory is being hit I won't bother upping to defend it.  Whats the point ?  The bomber isn't going to effect my teams ability to push forward.  Even a Lgay can run on 75% fuel to an enemy base 1 sector away and home again.

Perhaps hardness's, cause and effect could be looked at with a view to putting some "combat" back into the strat system.

Prolonging the down time of damaged Strat at fields.  Radar, ammo, auto ack, barracks and lastly fuel.  Fuel to say 50% max if all fuel cells are destroyed.   Or perhaps double the amount of supplies needed to bring stuff up.  Make factories buildings a little harder for the sake of "fairness".  Say 500Lbs per building.

As an attacker I would view taking 40 plus minutes in bombers meaningful if I could stop or prolong the enemies ability to use certain planes, restricted by fuel, to anything other than base defence. "now try an fly ya lgay, spit16, pork auguring P47's for 2 sectors after I bomb all ya front line small fields fuel" ....< demonic grin rubbing hands like studmuffingin>

As a defender I would get ticked off a tad if it looked like I couldn't go much beyond a sector in my Spit16.  Ide be up to kill the fuel factory attacker because you know that once he gets that factory below the 50% threshold that we hold so dear.  He'll be over your front line fields pork bombing every fuel cell he could get his grubby little cross hair on.....the tosser!

Would Imposing variations of this theme on other strats promote combat or would folk just shrug shoulders and adjust to the given situation.  Ammo down for 2 hrs,  "so what" type of thing.  Or having to run 16 boxes of sups to rebuild?  

As much as we try to enhance our strat game play we are always going to be undermined by other players......namely the Nintendo suicider gamers.

Good luck getting things reviewed.

Offline Eagler

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17660
New toys!!! But......
« Reply #55 on: February 22, 2008, 08:04:24 AM »
HT
You guys are my best time wasting distraction I have these days :)
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27


Intel Core i7-13700KF | GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS Elite AX | 64GB G.Skill DDR5 | EVGA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti FTW3 | Vive Pro | Warthog stick | TM1600 throttle | VKB Mk.V Rudder Pedals

Offline Eagler

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17660
New toys!!! But......
« Reply #56 on: February 22, 2008, 08:05:28 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Flayed1
  This got me thinking does anyone have a  game of  they want to sell :)  loved that game.


Ebay
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27


Intel Core i7-13700KF | GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS Elite AX | 64GB G.Skill DDR5 | EVGA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti FTW3 | Vive Pro | Warthog stick | TM1600 throttle | VKB Mk.V Rudder Pedals

Offline hubsonfire

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8658
New toys!!! But......
« Reply #57 on: February 22, 2008, 09:58:09 AM »
I'm glad a few of you don't work for HTC. This game would really suck if you did.
mook
++Blue Knights++

Proper punctuation and capitalization go a long way towards people paying attention to your posts.  -Stoney
I was wondering why I get ignored so often.  -Hitech

Offline ridley1

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 677
New toys!!! But......
« Reply #58 on: February 22, 2008, 10:20:36 AM »
could you expand on that statement hubs?

Offline hubsonfire

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8658
New toys!!! But......
« Reply #59 on: February 22, 2008, 12:18:42 PM »
There's not much more to it than that. People are campaigning to have the gameplay fundamentally altered simply because they think it should be. They don't care about how successful the game is, or what has or hasn't worked in the past. They aren't concerned with it from the perspective of a business owner and service provider, and they cite reasons for past changes which are completely false. You wouldn't actually improve the game, you would just change the game because you're bored with it.

Ergo, it would really suck to have some of you making HT's decisions. You would take the unstructured MA environment, and turn it into "defend the factories or lose radar/fuel/ord/planetypeX/troops". You would make the game unbearably dull and repetitive.
mook
++Blue Knights++

Proper punctuation and capitalization go a long way towards people paying attention to your posts.  -Stoney
I was wondering why I get ignored so often.  -Hitech