Use for bomber perks, build a base.

[rabbidrabbit]

Obviously this would require some changes but....  What if I upped a c47 and dropped some base supplies causing a town to start building... if I drop 5 supplies then its a VH, 15 sups more and its a small airfield etc...  the supplies being perked.  Destroying structures takes away from the base with the factories providing some inherent rebuild rate. Hence, factories have some value to anyone caring about a base and thus more likely to be attacked and defended.


Obviously the perk system does not have a lot of value now...heck.. I have well over 5500 fighter perks...  stupid amounts of bomber perks...  The game is just that... a game...  combined with fleet building on the other thread folks would have a more vested interested in earning and spending perks.  The maps become more dynamic so its not the same old same old forever and squads have more meaning.

[Spikes]

If anything it would NOT be a small airfield.

Something with 1 FH, 1 BH, a dirt runway, AND you would have to land in the same area of your first drop.

Maybe only 20 planes could take off out of the base, and it only showed up as a blue "B" on the map. It was not detectable by nme dar.

[rabbidrabbit]

The point being the more effort to build it up the more it would be.  I'm framing the idea within the VH>SA>MA>LA concept in play.  Basically we could keep some "permanent" bases like we have now and others be player generated and destroyed within some basic rules.. IE ..  no closer than 15miles from any other base etc..  It simply increases player stakes in the game thus more fun and dynamic.

[outbreak]

Originally posted by SpikesX
If anything it would NOT be a small airfield.

Something with 1 FH, 1 BH, a dirt runway, AND you would have to land in the same area of your first drop.

Maybe only 20 planes could take off out of the base, and it only showed up as a blue "B" on the map. It was not detectable by nme dar.

This idea sounds a tid bit more real, it would have been easier to setup a Temporary Dirt airfield instead of trying to completely construct a Small Airfield in WW2, Concrete wasnt always available on the front lines

[John Hynds]

Combat engineers. 1 drop of supplies. 1 of engineers. Base starts building.

[BaDkaRmA158Th]

Hmph, im all for it.

But i think it should be limited to a airstrip a few aaa guns, refueling/rearming pad. A small fire base would be cool, the smaller & simple it is, the better also.

I imagine something so simple as a dirt runway, with two .50's at each end of the runway.(soft guns)No tower.


That way if you realy want to help your team, you could make that little plane resupply. Heck even a place for players to be able to land there kills after a engine gets blown out.



only real problem would be tree's ground objects and flat level ground.

[rogerdee]

you could add another factor

recon would be more useful,if the dirt strip was spotted it would be reported but only show up on the main map if a recon aircraft flys over and takes photographs.
Once the plane returnes home safely after a given time the tempory base would show up on the country map for a limited time.

to keep it showing more recon flights would be needed.

[Spikes]

another thing,

I doubt it would be a full base with a town...HTC could setup something that once the hangers are down and the enemy has control, the airfield is non-usable, to any country, and soon it 'disappears'.

[mipoikel]

Finally an interesting idea.

[StuB]

This is a neat idea.

The US did something like this in asia.  The 3RD BOMBARDMENT GROUP
also known as the 3RD ATTACK GROUP  of which the 13th Bomb Squadron "The Grim Reapers" were a part of,( flying A20's and B25's ...they were involved in the development of the field mods for the strafers...I got to meet one of the gunners that flew in the 1st test of it at the 13th reunion last oct.) were involved in a plan to build a secret airfield to attack the Japanese.  The base and a second decoy base were successfully built and the attacks were successful.

I have a book about it, but I loaned it to my dad who flew in 13th in Vietnam, and he has misplaced it.

[mike254]

Personally i think its a great idea. I would love to see this happen

[stodd]

Sounds like a good idea 1 bh, 1 fh, 2 or 3 auto acks,1 manned ack, 1 rearm pad, 1 dirt airstrip. I like the idea of it not being shown on the enemies maps. Also since its so small mabey you could only take off with a maximum of 50% or 75% fuel. Mabey because of how small the runway is you couldnt take heavy (4 engined) bombers only medium and light.

[rabbidrabbit]

My proposal was to have perked "base building supplies" that would start building a base.  One drop--> 4th drop just builds some buildings so you can spot it.  The 5th drop builds a VH base.  Adding more supplies, lets say another 5 builds a small airbase etc.   Destroying stuff on the base takes it away.  If enough gets blown up then the small airfield becomes a VH and so on.  Essentially the more base building supplies dropped the bigger the base, the more its destroyed the less of a base.  It takes effort, risk and teamwork to build something of value and it can be taken away with the same.  Over time what is there gets repaired just like now via the factories etc but it does not grow on its own.

Placing of a base has restrictions just like it does now so you can't just build 40 bases side by side milk running.  If you think about those restrictions then  you could make it impossible to create a base near someone else's HQ for example.  

Dynamic base building does not "simulate SeaBees" it adds significantly to the value of teamwork, strategy and variety.  It gives significant value to bomber perks, the strat system and teamwork which all lead to better combat.  Seriously, did anyone say you get a work crew and have to build a building or cut some trees?

 

Originally posted by Krusty
Either you make it so it's an automatic self-building process, you deploy it, it builds a strip, or you make it so that individual players have to go in and create the base.


If the former, it's just a new version of the old "We want to create dirt strips in the middle of a map with dropped supplies!" request.

If it's the latter, it's taking the focus away from combat, and this game isn't supposed to be simulating what the CBs did in WW2.

Keeping the focus on combat alone, if you had a new base, where would you be allowed to put it? How many miles from an enemy base? How many miles off the corner of "no" and "where" could you place it? How many? What if some fool abuses it and places it 50 sectors inland, thus keeping folks from using it where it can be (akin to "spies" occupying CVs so their squaddies can sink 'em).

If you DO come up with rules that minimize the abuse of these "instant bases" how would they change gameplay? A massive horde of GVs (or planes, depending on which request we consider) capable of being spawned instantly anywhere near an enemy HQ or port or airfield, and what if there were 2 or 3 of them all in the same location?

I can see the appeal of including something "cool" but in this case I don't think it adds anything positive to the gameplay mechanics. It might add to the "that's cool to see!" part of the game, but how the strat/capture works now, this would be a negative thing IMO.