Author Topic: Field Capture (Read 164 times)

J_A_B · « **on:** January 24, 2001, 02:30:00 PM »

One thing I have noticed in AH is that fields can apparently be captured without having to actually destroy the place (correct me if I'm wrong). This leads to people having to ability to endlessly respawn to defend the field.

I think one feature from AW might apply well to AH. In AW to capture a field, you must first destroy a certain percentage of the hangars, fuel cells, and other buildings. Once you destroy that certain percent of each type of structure, the field is "destroyed" and un-usuable to the country who owns it until it is rebuilt (generally about 30 minutes). This INCLUDES the country which captures the field--once you capture the field, you cannot use it until it is rebuilt and must defend it.

Greanted you can already destroy the buildings in AH; however, due to the amount of complaining I see on these boards I am guessing this is rarely the case. Requiring these structures to be destroyed would solve the problem of limitless respawners. It would also make it MUCH more difficult for one or two people to capture a fair-size base.

It makes bombers more important, too

J_A_B

SOB · « **Reply #1 on:** January 24, 2001, 03:02:00 PM »

Not a bad idea, IMO, but I don't think it's necessary.

Who gets hurt by the endless re-spawning? The people trying to take the field. So, they've got a choice, take out all the hangers or deal with re-spawners.

You've got a choice, to whine about something you could have prevented is just stupid.

SOB

Westy · « **Reply #2 on:** January 24, 2001, 03:20:00 PM »

You can already do about the same with bases here as they do in AW. Hit the hangars and the fighters or bombers cannot launch. Same with vehicle hangars. Hit the ammo bunkers and ordinance is either limited or not available. Hit the fuel and the available fuel for aircraft starts dropping til there is a max of 25%.
The problem with AW's is the percentages are not how muich ammo or fuel you can take off with but the % is how effective a full load of ammo or fuel is. In other words you may have 100% fuel on board but if the base is damage the fuel might reflect 60% and you only get 60% of your fighters performance. Same with ammo.it If the ammo is at 80% on a damaged base it doesn't mean you can only have 80% of your max load of ammo, it means your ammo is only 80% as effective. Also, AW also allows you to bomb the maintenance" on a field to lower the damage that any aircraft taking off from there can take. IMO this is one of the most unrealistic things about AW.

-Westy

J_A_B · « **Reply #3 on:** January 24, 2001, 07:31:00 PM »

I only posted that as a suggestion, as I have seen quite a few comments about annoying things happening during base capture. I have no idea how bad the problem really is (or isn't).

J_A_B

PS--AW doesn't do that stupid thing with fuel/ammo anymore, they finally did away with that.

SOB · « **Reply #4 on:** January 24, 2001, 07:57:00 PM »

J_A_B...just so ya know, that last sentence wasn't directed at you

Jimdandy · « **Reply #5 on:** January 24, 2001, 09:01:00 PM »

ooops

[This message has been edited by Jimdandy (edited 01-24-2001).]

Westy · « **Reply #6 on:** January 25, 2001, 08:48:00 AM »

Rgr that J_A_B. I haven't "flown" AW for over a year now and priro to that it had always been like that (the way I described).

And on of the most discusse dissues is when you see someone(s) spawn repeatedly in hopes of nailing the M3 or C47 is a pita for sure. But it means that the attackers failed in one of thier core objectives and that is to shut down the hangars at the field.

-Westy

Weave · « **Reply #7 on:** January 25, 2001, 12:01:00 PM »

What close the hangers, and take the base? How the hell is anyone gonna get those quick vulch kills? Perish the thought!

What would AH be without 25 fighters over an enemy base, with not a bomber or goon in sight.

Seriously, to take a undefended base, all that is required is to silence the AI acks, and put 10 troops into the map room.

Weave

Tac · « **Reply #8 on:** January 25, 2001, 01:22:00 PM »

The only problem comes from the large fields. You would need to have a LOT lancasters over a large field in order to bring down all FH's and BH's. Add another light buff like a TBM or Ju88 to de-ack.

Now comes the problem of those bombers actually surviving long enough to drop all their bombs and blow the FH's and BH's. Then comes the problem of the short rebuild time of FH's and BH's. Then comes the problem of keeping the field clear of enemy cons while the goon comes in.

In almost all occasions, the bombers either die before they kill their targets and cons up constantly from the endless amount of FH's and BH's in the large field OR come from the nearby friendly field.

I have never seen a large base be brought down completely and then taken. Every time its done the large field still has a lot of FH's up and the goon (the 8th or so goon to try) manages to land and drop.

I believe that FH's and BH's should be down for the same amount of time as acks or more. That a whole hangar is rebuilt in half the time (or less) of a single ack gun is quite disturbing.