Combine best of old capture war and strategic war

[Shifty]

Hello all, <S>

I've been thinking for some time in what tweaks could be done to improve even more this format so well devised by AvA Staff. I must say that I firmly believe that this new direction in AvA is the right one and the only that may attract more new players. So, good or bad suggestions they might be, the actual setup works and, if it ain't broken, why change it? Only to make it even better, IMHO. So, I'll just throw a couple of ideas for your analisis.

First, the money management issue...The idea of a starting budget is great but a couple of factors could be brought in to perfect it even further: one, strats and objects should have value, too. That should be considered, for both sides. "Countries" produce money, as long as they have their strats and cities working and in the direct measure of their abilities to function. That should enter the equation too. Also, there could be some reward, financially speaking, for the damage inflicted on the other side strats. Finally, there should be made a balance, for both sides, between number of sorties made - by plane model - and sorties landed. This ratio could then be applyed as a correction factor, rewarding the best management of aircraft and penalizing the side with worse aircraft management, as an asset.

Secondly, the issue of ground war and field capture. There is no war without ground grabbing - I know, there are, just not ww2 - and without ground vehicles...I feel a bit unfair that ground vehicle fans are almost excluded from the current setup. Also, not gaining terrain and push the frontline one side or the other, is a bit weird...Maybe we could have a new approach here: dramatically increase the number of troops needed for capture - to a number between 60 and 100 - of targets, specify different numbers needed for different targets - 60 for a VB, 100 for an airfield, maybe more for a city - and allow the capture of strats and cities, once again, for resource capture purposes.

Thirdly, the assymetric victory conditions and the historical matchups. This could be thought to allow for more historically accurate matchups during the duration of the war, avoiding the appearance of odd-birds in the setups. Also, assymetric victory conditions could lead to different and more historically correct tactics.

Just ideas.

<Salute>

Agreed, there still needs to be some tweaking to find the best formula. The all Strat system seems to have bogged down to something similar to trench warfare. All in all it's been a great idea to try the different systems, to see if a good matchg can be found.

[Damionte]

Another compromise in system.

The current money based system does have it's features that are good. I don't like that most bases on the map are utterly useless, and the long distances involved does sometimes knock out casual play.

My suggestion is to keep the money system in place, up the total money a bit but make certain planes available at all fields on their perspective sides.

The less effective planes for each side. Like the P40, P39, F4F on the allies side, and maybe the A6m and M202 on the axis. Either for free or, for a different price. For instance. P51's are 50 K. So say the allies spend 40 k to put P40's at 3 bases. Essentially drop the price of the early war or pre war rides down to the bottom. Like 10-20k depending on capability. or even free as I said earlier.

Or something like a separate support budget. Give each side another 100K each round that can only be spent on ground vehicles, support aircraft these older obsolete fighters, and maybe radar. Then fix in the particular aircraft available for purchase with these funds. That 100k is a fixed amount and doesn't change based on the results of the war. so both sides can at the very least be able to resupply and put up a basic fight each round.

These older planes would undoubtedly be placed at forward bases on both sides.

While the current point system can be spent by both sides, on the bigger bombers and the popular LW rides, which are usually placed a little further back in the lines the way they are now.

The reason I like the separate funds for these support type air frames, is because if you just give both sides more cash to work with, they'll simply buy more LW rides. This way yes both sides do get a little more funds to work with on LW rides, about 1 base worth of them. You also create a front line war for the EW rides. The LW fans can still fly their LW choices, just have to travel a little bit farther to do so. While at times like tonight where the allies have knocked out most of the allies usable late war bases, the axis could still up in something. Even if it's just zeroes, and m202's.

[Damionte]

As for the base capture, yes that needs to come back. Should be able to capture a bases including the aircraft types that base provides.

Leave the numbers higher though. I agree with the 60-100 thing. Casual players working late night at off hours shouldn't be able to easily take a base with just 1-4 people.

[Stampf]

" While at times like tonight where the allies have knocked out most of the axis usable late war bases, the axis could still up in something. Even if it's just zeroes, and m202's."

Totally disagree.  You will never get guys to fly extra far, in extra crappy rides...

What were you guys thinking today?  The Axis litterally can't even up in there now.  I think we need a balance between winning the war and keeping it "playable" guys. 

What would the Allies do if the Axis knocked out their hangers?  That's why they haven't.  Now the arena will be extra empty untill some hangers come up.  Good work.  Impressive.

[Shifty]

" While at times like tonight where the allies have knocked out most of the axis usable late war bases, the axis could still up in something. Even if it's just zeroes, and m202's."

Totally disagree.  You will never get guys to fly extra far, in extra crappy rides...

What were you guys thinking today?  The Axis litterally can't even up in there now.  I think we need a balance between winning the war and keeping it "playable" guys. 

What would the Allies do if the Axis knocked out their hangers?  That's why they haven't.  Now the arena will be extra empty untill some hangers come up.  Good work.  Impressive.

I have to agree with this. The arena is as good as dead now.

[Damionte]

Except that it's not dead yet.

There are even numbers fighting in there as we type. Have been most of the day. The allies didn't finish off A58. Nor whatever base is active in the A4-A22 area. It's just the northern most bases that got knocked out. Axis are still alive in the south, which is where most of their untouched strat targets are. So that's where the Allies are attacking.

Folks are in there right now fighting it out.

It has slowed down though. Since the furballers don't have any place to fight easily and don't want to chase the folks around who are trying to just win the war, there's a lot of grumbling.

That said though I think my compromise above would help with that. Just finding the rightbase to knock out is harder when planes are upping from many different basses. In this last round for instance it took us a while to figure out just where the axis were coming from in the north. We had a good idea about 25 and 28, but spent a lot of time also hitting 70 and some other bases because in the end, we really couldn't tell exactly where you guys were upping from. And that's in the north where it seems in hind sight to fairly obvious.

As long as aircraft able to carry any ord at all can up from a base, that base is a threat. So you have to patrol the sky in that sector and can't ignore it.

With the current set up and the funds available at this stage we're able to just shut a sector down for 12 hours or more. Then pretty much ignore it. Counting on people's short attention spans to be the biggest defense for an area. Then we can concentrate all of our pilots some place else.

[flatiron1]

yes there are 29 pilots 13/16 right now all having a great time I think. so not dead.

[Shifty]

yes there are 29 pilots 13/16 right now all having a great time I think. so not dead.

My bad the Axis are still able to put aircraft up.

Everytime I've been in today the Axis were down 3to1 or there were Allies and no Axis.
Tonight was pretty even, and worth staying on for.

[Shooter503]

Been off and on through out the day. Seen some good battles and also cut circles in the sky and flew really long distances to get to a fight.
I must saying that eliminating your opponents abilty to fight is the single best way to win. But it has cut into game play.
 It strikes me that the CO of a side whose base was compromised would move aircraft. Being that there are a number of bases that are not in use, maybe if the leaders could activate a base from an inactive base in another location after say 2 or 3 bases are destroyed. Or alow fighter aircraft to up from the nearest V base to the one with downed hangers two or three hours later, as the aircraft have been moved by ground?
Just some thoughts.
 
The Luftwaffe operated from roadways to hide their aircraft.

[OldBull]

I have also been in and out of the arena all day (Sunday) and at all times there have been  good and balanced numbers. The Allies changed their strategy (our previous one has certainly been lacking) and began to target airfields and it has paid off. By pushing back the Axis lines we were able to penetrate the fighter ring and close the % gap somewhat and stay in the war while working within the frame work of the game. I see no reason to call foul here.
 Maj OldBull
XO Avengers

[Shifty]

I have also been in and out of the arena all day (Sunday) and at all times there have been good and balanced numbers. The Allies changed their strategy (our previous one has certainly been lacking) and began to target airfields and it has paid off. By pushing back the Axis lines we were able to penetrate the fighter ring and close the % gap somewhat and stay in the war while working within the frame work of the game. I see no reason to call foul here.
 Maj OldBull
XO Avengers

Never saw anything close to balanced until Sunday evening. Came in three times during the day Sunday and three to one odds in favor of the Allies were the best I saw until the evening. I'm not knocking anybody, I'm just saying  no opposition just isn't my cup of tea. So I'm not going to jump in and help subdue an enemy who isn't home. I'm glad you guys have finally scratched out a lead.

The title of this thread hits the nail on the head. Somehow combining the two types of wars would be the best bet. IMO. I think and even better idea in the future is find a way to incorporate THE WAR into traditional AVA style setups, like North Africa, Finn/Russ, Okinawa,The Slot, or BOB. If we can get to where we can put playable victory conditions concentrating on historic battles instead of a larger abstract war... That would be very cool. In fact maybe run a war based on the outcome of a predetermined number of weekly battles over different maps and theaters.
Just a thought.
<S>

[a4944]

This is a "combat flight simulator".  It's not a strategic war game.  I don't see how the current setup (placement of aircraft, not strategic war) can attract the number of new players that we would like to see.  Call it advertising, but we need a way the new players can get a quick taste of the style of play and the Axis vs Allies matchups.  We don't really have enough players to effectively play this type of setup.

Everybody was happy with the first week.  Numbers were 50+ and expanding.  What's different this last week? The largest difference is the lack of aircraft at forward fields.  The allies don't have any, the axis have early war rides.  Lets work our way back to the first week which appeared to be fun for all. 

This happened in the base capture war also.  Everyone was very happy with the beginning where there was good balance.  The BoB started out as a blast.  Then the startegic war took over and ruined it for the combat flight simulator players and it became a ghost town.  Note how the strategic war setups have been getting in the way of good game play rather than supporting it.

As a temporary step, can we give allies a Spit V at a forward field to match up with the 109F?  People will still up to intercept big raids but we need something to do when there are no big organized raids.

As a long term, can we support all styles and keep it balanced?  I noticed BlueTop does not fly anymore because he liked base capture.  Besides the HO shots, he was a fun guy and we lost him.

Goal is to promote multiple styles of gameplay within an Axis vs Allies matchup.

Furballers: Need roughly equivalent fighter aircraft at bases that are close.  Easy enough, populate the forward fields.

Base Capture:  Make the frontline bases capturable but not the rear bases.  Is this possible?  It would be kind of fun and it would be limited so one side could not destroy a map by rolling over all of the bases.  Keep hanger down times low so that the furballers can maintain close bases.

Strategic: Keep the strategic war objectives that we have today.  The war is won through the strategic effort.  Base capture can help support that or be a fun diversion.


The focus needs to be on gameplay to grow the community.  The above is an attempt to support all styles and to be inclusive.  It would also provide good variety. 

Venom

[Shifty]

This is a "combat flight simulator".  It's not a strategic war game.  I don't see how the current setup (placement of aircraft, not strategic war) can attract the number of new players that we would like to see.  Call it advertising, but we need a way the new players can get a quick taste of the style of play and the Axis vs Allies matchups.  We don't really have enough players to effectively play this type of setup.

Everybody was happy with the first week.  Numbers were 50+ and expanding.  What's different this last week? The largest difference is the lack of aircraft at forward fields.  The allies don't have any, the axis have early war rides.  Lets work our way back to the first week which appeared to be fun for all. 

This happened in the base capture war also.  Everyone was very happy with the beginning where there was good balance.  The BoB started out as a blast.  Then the strategic war took over and ruined it for the combat flight simulator players and it became a ghost town.  Note how the strategic war setups have been getting in the way of good game play rather than supporting it.

As a temporary step, can we give allies a Spit V at a forward field to match up with the 109F?  People will still up to intercept big raids but we need something to do when there are no big organized raids.

As a long term, can we support all styles and keep it balanced?  I noticed BlueTop does not fly anymore because he liked base capture.  Besides the HO shots, he was a fun guy and we lost him.

Goal is to promote multiple styles of gameplay within an Axis vs Allies match up.

Furballers: Need roughly equivalent fighter aircraft at bases that are close.  Easy enough, populate the forward fields.

Base Capture:  Make the frontline bases capturable but not the rear bases.  Is this possible?  It would be kind of fun and it would be limited so one side could not destroy a map by rolling over all of the bases.  Keep hanger down times low so that the furballers can maintain close bases.

Strategic: Keep the strategic war objectives that we have today.  The war is won through the strategic effort.  Base capture can help support that or be a fun diversion.

The focus needs to be on gameplay to grow the community.  The above is an attempt to support all styles and to be inclusive.  It would also provide good variety. 

Venom

Venom,

Very good post, I like your ideas about the AVA growing the community and offering  Allied vs Axis matchups that appeal to as many as possible.

I think we should look into these types of ideas aggressively in the AVA. The only place I differ with you is the current war. It's not exactly the way I'd like things to be at the moment, however it's been planned and executed by players on both sides. No telling how many hours Oak, Flat, Luttrel, and Oldbull have put into this. That's just on the Allied side, you start adding in RMRider, JG11 and the 78th on the Axis side there's been so much time and effort put into this we should allow the current war to run it's course as scheduled. Also it's a great tool for learning what's working and what isn't.

I do hope ideas like yours are pursued in the very near future.
<S>

[Trukk]

Also it's a great tool for learning what's working and what isn't.

That's the key, IMO there currently are some basic design issues that are working against adoption of the AvA by a wider audience instead of promoting adoption by a wider audience.

[oceans11]

Halo make a lot of good points in his posts and I am inclined to agree with most of his suggestions. Having said that, let me also say that what we are doing with this arena is  constantally evolving and for the most part evolving for the good, none of us are ever going to be completely satisfied with what we have and that is just human nature but I applaud the staff for their tireless efforts and the players for their civil and constructive comments.
 Now, if I may, let me offer this comment from a bombers preprespective, for us long flights are the norm, 30 minutes to get to the target are about average, I am the pilot, the bombardier and when necessary the gunner. A good calibration takes nearly a grid to set up. If I have to go the the gunners position I will lose my line and usually my calibration, if I don't go to the gun I am cannon fodder. While I understand the desire to "find a quick fight" your quick fight usually comes at my expense, now don't get me wrong I am not advocating a free ride to the target but for the opposition the be able to located me from the time I up puts us at a distinct disadvantage, now having said this I don't necessarily know what would be an equitable solution but is it possible that the darbar could be modified to pick me up at the time I cross into enemy territory? I am open to suggestions.
Maj OldBull
XO Avengers

Venom,

Very good post, I like your ideas about the AVA growing the community and offering  Allied vs Axis matchups that appeal to as many as possible.

I think we should look into these types of ideas aggressively in the AVA. The only place I differ with you is the current war. It's not exactly the way I'd like things to be at the moment, however it's been planned and executed by players on both sides. No telling how many hours Oak, Flat, Luttrel, and Oldbull have put into this. That's just on the Allied side, you start adding in RMRider, JG11 and the 78th on the Axis side there's been so much time and effort put into this we should allow the current war to run it's course as scheduled. Also it's a great tool for learning what's working and what isn't.

I do hope ideas like yours are pursued in the very near future.
<S>

These highlighted statements IMO need to be addressed.
If we are going to have a war based strictly on TARGET hit percentage ratios then there should be a way to adjust DARBAR to allow at least a half way fair run at the target.

There is nothing like flying for 45 min all the way across map territory to get to your target only to have 20 fighters come at you at one time because they have been watching you for those same  past 45 min you have been in the air.

Now like OldBull said we are the pilot,gunner,Bomber and navigator. That being understood perhaps there should be more than one person allowed to join a Bomber formation .
Perhaps
1 pilot
   Gunner
     Bomber .


Also one more thing is BUGS in the B17 .
I will post that ASAP on the bug forum area

Regards

We all have put time into this and feel that it is definitley inproving,However it definitley needs its tweaks