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

[BBBB]

LOL

[LYNX]

quick recap of this whole thread.

Hey man the strat system is hardly worth hitting.  Any chance of a change ?

you might want change but we don't

Aww  come on man it'll add to the other dimension of the game.  Give you another reason to come and kill me.

no it won't.  It'll stop me from killing you

Dude! by your own reasoning why wouldn't you kill me before I tuck your toys of you.  I mean if my actions were about to restrict your teams ability to do certain things wouldn't you wanna stop me before I accomplished my goal.  Namely come up and kill me or do unto me as I would do unto you but do it first

na man,  That's not what the games about.  The games about aerial combat.  It's about killing not restricting play.

but! but isn't coming up and killing my bombers combat?

didn't say i wouldn't kill your bombers.  I was saying you would restrict my ability to kill your bombers.

yer but that would only happen if you didn't protect your strat system in the first place.

Enough... strat system is ok.  Nothing wrong with it and it's not invasive to game play.  You sure your not the problem.  Perhaps you're needing another challenge having been around along time.  

yer i understand what your saying but



There ain't no "but".  It's like this....come up with something everyone likes and doesn't scare new players off

was just thinking it would add rather than detract.  Hows this gonna scare players off I mean......oh forget it.  Back to the drawing board.

[ridley1]

Just thoughts...using strats as an example....

what if taking out strats doesn't deny they country of what it produces...but reduces the quality?  Ords, for example....instead of having ord down and out of action for increasing lengths of time as there is more damage...the size of bombs that are produced become smaller as strat damage is increased. (we can't make 500 pounder...but we can still make 250's)  The ammo factory's been hit...can't put the big gun package on in the hangar..   Training's been hit...you need more troops for capture......

Supply is in this game, isn't it? we have road convoys, barges, trains......seems the only time I interact with a road convoy is when I get my panzer flipped by one.

[blkmgc]

I'm thinking that a much longer rebuild time for the strategic targets along with harsher defenses around them would make a pretty decent difference for the strategic groups, and still not impact the furball group that much. You don't often see many groups attacking the strats, yet there is little reward (other than the sheer fun and immersion of it all) for those that do.

I don't know that there is a way to attach a damage threshold to this all, whereas it would take a certain amount of damage, say 50% or more, at once to enable the longer rebuild time. This would encourage and support larger groups of bombers at alt , as well as interceptors which could be awarded a larger point count for destroying bombers.

Just thinking out loud. There must be a way to adjust the settings to enhance both experiences without detracting from valuable development time with code reworking for this. Its all good, we'll still be doing strat runs here just the same.

[The Fugitive]

Strat targets will never be defended. Defenders fly fighters, and fighters like to FIGHT, not climb for 20 minutes, and circle a strat target untill buffs come into sight, or they run low on fuel. Thats why you have the big debate between the "strat" guys and the "fighter" guys.

So Lynx you may think that providing targets going to a strat is going to be nice to fighter jocks, but it is never going to work. Yes the fighter jocks look at as you are taking away from their game play in stead of suppling game play. Fighter jocks can up and kill/die bunches of time to your one lone trip.

I don't have a problem with the strat bombing, not that I'm going to take the time to defend (I don't have that kind of time to "play" a game), but I think resupply should be made more appealing. If resuppling was more appealing, through points/perks/rank more people would be willing to spend the time to do it. I suppose a "strat" guy would complain about that seeing as if enough people got together to resupply  the target could be back up before they could RTB, but what were you thinking would happen? You would hit strat enough that you could neuter the entire country for a long enough time that you could roll a few bases?

[hubsonfire]

Originally posted by The Fugitive
but what were you thinking would happen? You would hit strat enough that you could neuter the entire country for a long enough time that you could roll a few bases?

That's exactly what some folks are thinking. It would alter the game to give one group a disproportionately greater effect on gameplay for the others.  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. Either way, it's not about making more customers happy- it's not about improving gameplay at all.

[Masherbrum]

Originally posted by hubsonfire
That's exactly what some folks are thinking. It would alter the game to give one group a disproportionately greater effect on gameplay for the others.  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. Either way, it's not about making more customers happy- it's not about improving gameplay at all.

Beat me to it hub.   Good posts Fugi and you.   Echoes my sentiments as well.

[LYNX]

The Fugitive

The treads about chucking ideas in to enhance the worth of actually bombing the strat. Which in my "opinion" some of it is worth bombing and some of it ain't.  I would and do bomb cities, ack and ammo  factories.  Where as I wouldn't dream of bombing HQ.  Absolute waist of time other than the "fun" factor for obvious reasons.  Wouldn't go out me way to bomb the fuel or training factories other than to use the few bombs left on board.  Wouldn't specifically make a mission priority of those 3 strats.


what were you thinking would happen? You would hit strat enough that you could neuter the entire country for a long enough time that you could roll a few bases?

This statement is backwards thinking .  The point of a strat system or bombing an enemies strat system is to hinder the enemies ability to "roll a few" of my bases and making it harder to defend their bases.  No one is talking, implying or even suggesting "stopping the enemies ability outright.  To disable the enemies resources FULL STOP".  It's about  HINDERING as opposed to stopping.  It's all very well me getting me jollies off bombing strat but it ain't worth a "tomtit" if the specific strat on enemy fields isn't hit.  It's a 2 stage affair.  One isn't good without the other.  Even if the 2 stage affair went to plan the enemy still has an abundance of other fields that won't have been hit.

Strat targets will never be defended. Defenders fly fighters, and fighters like to FIGHT, not climb for 20 minutes, and circle a strat target until buffs come into sight, or they run low on fuel. That's why you have the big debate between the "strat" guys and the "fighter" guys.

To some extent I agree with you especially with today's strat system but isn't this what this thread is debating.  Making the strat system worth fighting over ?  I used the fuel strat as an example further back in the thread...just an idea.  Didn't say stop fuel period but hinder the ability of certain planes through fuel restriction to be able to fly to and fight over an enemies base.  I for one would be up to defend the fuel factory if I thought me Spits we're gong to be restricted to base defence.

Anyways we're just yakking for the sake of it.   Although HTC hasn't said anything outright in this thread reading through the lines he's happy as it is........nuff said.

[ridley1]

I said earlier.....Strats can be used in a defensive strategy as well....

Ever been hooked up into a mission for base capture then had it cancelled because the ords just got knocked out? At a tactical level, you've slowed them down, before you've had to play ronco vulchamatic at the base they're attacking

If a country is rolling bases,,,here's one further way to slow them down.

[moot]

My 2c.. The most efficient way to reach a solution is to use the sort of problem solving heuristics from engineering classes in early college..  This is definitely a complex problem.

A table where we list all the alternative solutions (strat types) to strat in the MA, with their flaws/problems on the other side (i.e. strat types at top, problems on the side, or vice versa).  At each box (in the table) that corresponds to a "solution" and "problem", would be listed the possible fixes.

Eventualy you'd have to see one or more patterns that'd best satisfy everyone's idea of fun strat in the MA.  It's a clear way to give everyone who looks at it a clear picture of the whole problem, rather than argue some detail or fraction of the problem for a long while, only to see that solving it was in vain because it doesn't fit with any possible/feasible arrangement of the rest of the strat system.

To really harness the whole volume of ideas floating in the players' heads though, there'd need to be some moderating of input to this problem/solution matrix.  Otherwise it'd fill up with redundant submissions, random spam, whines, etc.

[LYNX]

Originally posted by hubsonfire
That's exactly what some folks are thinking. It would alter the game to give one group a disproportionately greater effect on gameplay for the others.  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. Either way, it's not about making more customers happy- it's not about improving gameplay at all.

I could really buy into this load of if someone asked for a hanger factory to be added.  Then all u had to do was bomb it below 50% then bomb 1 fields hangers down which by default would disable all their fields in one swoop  muhahaha

[Rich46yo]

Originally posted by moot
Nah, your post was plenty condescending and mis-informed/misleading.

WrgTrn, paying 15 bucks doesn't buy you a spot on the design comitee.

Rich46yo
"Yeah I know its just a game and it aint all so important to me if the base was taken. But something is broken here. Something with the rules of the game, the importance of the targets, and the way people are given rank. I notice many of the ones who look down on missions and those that fly them participate in this baby seal clubbing. Well running missions is far more challenging then flying up and down a runway shooting poor schmucks trying to up."
That's the path of least resistence for you.  It's why the MA's gameplay has had to be foolproofed rather than merely improved.

                  Dude you aint all that easy to understand. The most I can gather from this is somehow you, who Ive never seen in the game, has somehow decided I "take the path of least resistance" by either flying missions or clubbing baby seals on runways. Which is it?

                I think Ive been insulted but your grammar and use of quotes makes it impossible to fully understand. I suggest you learn the Kings English before you insult someone. And learn to spell.

[ridley1]

Honestly Rich...

I'm not sure that your point in your original post was very clearly defined.

I mean...were you a vulcher...or vulchee?

[hubsonfire]

Create Manufacturing Plants that churn out planes that account for the top few tier # of kills each tour.

Personnally I'd like to see certin planes become unavailable, or an ENY effect applied through strat bombing.

Originally posted by LYNX
I could really buy into this load of if someone asked for a hanger factory to be added.  

It's been suggested twice already in this thread. You were saying?

[toonces3]

Rich46yo,
What Moot is saying is that the other players, not you, were taking the path of least resistance.

While one can put up missions and do things the 'hard way' the majority of players would just prefer to club baby seals and do things the 'easy way'.  Therefore, until clubbing baby seals isn't possible or profitable, there's little incentive for some folks to change this type of behavior.

I think you took this the wrong way, and this is how I perceived his response.  It wasn't an insult directed at you.

Hub, I enjoy reading your points.

Toonces, out.