thinking strat

[Zazen13]

I would accept that as an explanation if it weren't for the fact that I did occasionally still get as excited as when I first started. This was on one of the rare instances that I found an exciting furball or battle. I really feel that they are much harder to find now that everyone is spread so thin over these expansive fronts.

Yup, set and setting is 95% of it. It's damn near impossible to get as jacked about a game when the thing you used to love to do a lot you almost never get to do anymore, whatever that may be. Back in the day before HUGE maps and milk-hording, it was a drag when some high alt buffs decided to kill a furball by dropping fighter hangers. But it wasn't the end of the world because there was probably another furball you could jump into or help foment. But, now when the same thing happens you may not see another really good fight for the rest of the day/night on a HUGE map, so it's really kind of depressing.

[Chalenge]

Someone said something about dessert? We have a lot of dessert camo skins and no dessert!

[Iron_Cross]

I've been on and off again since 2001, and was an AW geek before 1998.  I have to agree that the large maps have forced players to be rewarded for the hoard mentality.  If your playing wack-a-mole trying to defend the huge number of bases on your front then your side can't form a hoard of its own, and therefore have lost the initiative and can not win.  The conditions for victory, are such, that the path of least resistance leads to the most territory conquered in the least amount of unit time.  We have authored our own decent into mediocrity by asking, and begging, for new larger maps.  We must suffer the consequences of our own wishes being granted.

Strat players are rare as hens teeth now because of the density of fields on the large maps.  Why shut down a particular field, when there are five others within a sectors flying distance that are fully up, and why go after the Strat targets to keep them down when there are numerous fields fully up, close to the one you want to shut down?  Conversely why resupply a field when there are others nearby fully functional?

The players have found the most efficient system for resetting maps.  Just because we find the tactics used and style of play abhorrent, does not invalidate it. The conditions for victory are such, that the path of least resistance leads to the most territory conquered in the least amount of time.  That is the plane and simple truth of why the hoard, and its tactics exists on any map, especially the large ones.

[Zazen13]

I've been on and off again since 2001, and was an AW geek before 1998.  I have to agree that the large maps have forced players to be rewarded for the hoard mentality.  If your playing wack-a-mole trying to defend the huge number of bases on your front then your side can't form a hoard of its own, and therefore have lost the initiative and can not win.  The conditions for victory, are such, that the path of least resistance leads to the most territory conquered in the least amount of unit time.  We have authored our own decent into mediocrity by asking, and begging, for new larger maps.  We must suffer the consequences of our own wishes being granted.

Strat players are rare as hens teeth now because of the density of fields on the large maps.  Why shut down a particular field, when there are five others within a sectors flying distance that are fully up, and why go after the Strat targets to keep them down when there are numerous fields fully up, close to the one you want to shut down?  Conversely why resupply a field when there are others nearby fully functional?

The players have found the most efficient system for resetting maps.  Just because we find the tactics used and style of play abhorrent, does not invalidate it. The conditions for victory are such, that the path of least resistance leads to the most territory conquered in the least amount of time.  That is the plane and simple truth of why the hoard, and its tactics exists on any map, especially the large ones.

Precisely...individual fields are all but meaningless on a HUGE map. If the "win the war" types want to have a strategic impact on the map within the 3-5 hour period of a typical play session they must milk-horde for the greatest number of captures per unit time as possible. Any kind of fighting beyond some periodic gang-vulching is catastrophic to this overall goal.

[Lusche]

I would accept that as an explanation if it weren't for the fact that I did occasionally still get as excited as when I first started. This was on one of the rare instances that I found an exciting furball or battle. I really feel that they are much harder to find now that everyone is spread so thin over these expansive fronts.

Oh, one still can get excited.. it's just way more difficult to get into that state. Also what one might have called a "good fight" when he was new, would now be hardly noticed at all

[crockett]

Oh, one still can get excited.. it's just way more difficult to get into that state. Also what one might have called a "good fight" when he was new, would now be hardly noticed at all

Granted you can still get excited if you challenge your self in various aircraft. The problem still remains the same, that there is far too few good fights these days and if you do find one it wont last long before it turns to a vulch or a land grab.

Take late last night for example in Orange.. There was a great furball going with Bish and Nits. Bish had a CV off the coast of a Nit base and it was a great little furball of mostly low alt fighting (under 10k). Bish were not trying to capture the base and the CV was in a patrol pattern keeping it far from shore.

I guess the land grabbers couldn't stand the sight of a furball, because a bunch of tards came in with P47's and sunk the CV then about 5 mins later some NOE goons captures the corresponding port. I said something about it on 200 and they tried to use the excuse that Bish were hiding in ack and that's why they killed the CV, which was total BS. If it was just about ack they wouldn't have also captured the port.

The land grabbers appartlly couldn't leave a good furball alone, they just had to go kill the CV and steal a undefended port. Shortly before that the land grabbers had come in and killed all the FH's at the closest Abase for the Bish. I mean they have a map with 200 bases on it and they have to be killjoys and kill a great furball, just to capture a base that means nothing.

Right after this, there was a Nit Cv off of Bish 209.. there were about 4 guys trying to sneak it, by shelling the town with the CV then hoping to sneak in a LVT. I up with a fighter and kill a few of them then a few more bish up and start killing them. So what did the attacking Nits do? They stopped upping, likely hoping we would just go away.

Soon as there was any form of resistance they went into hiding, until later I saw there was a big full dar bar that upped at the same time long after the defenders had landed. I dunno if they managed to capture it because that's about the time I logged off. Just seems this kind of thing is becoming far to common these days.

Granted it's not a Nit, Bish or Rook thing that's just an example I used from last night. It's a MA thing that I hope changes..

[yanksfan]

Interesting perspective. You brought up some good reasons why players bent on "winning the war" must resort to overwhelming application of force exclusively upon undefended fields to maximize their captures per unit time. If they attempted to "win the war" while actually fighting for bases that already had an established Alt/E laden defense, we'd all be worm dirt before they got halfway there on a HUGE map with 200+ fields.

B4 the arena split and for a time after a group of us got into the habit of defending, jumping from one attack to the other, it was alot of fun at the time, we were most always outnumberd. some you win some you don't. if we happened on an LTAR attack you could settle in for a long time, they just never stop coming always a great fight and alot of fun.

I don't defend to much at all anymore, seems if you offer any real defence the fight dies off quickly and moves to the other end of the map. Base taking has become just that, it's not about stirring up a fight, it's just about a capture.

[Zazen13]

I don't defend to much at all anymore, seems if you offer any real defence the fight dies off quickly and moves to the other end of the map. Base taking has become just that, it's not about stirring up a fight, it's just about a capture.

Exactly...playing wack-a-mole with paper heroes that evaporate at the first inkling of a smackdown just to appear 15 sectors away at another vacant base is about as much fun as skinny dipping down a razor blade into a swimming pool full of Iodine.

[Iron_Cross]

B4 the arena split and for a time after a group of us got into the habit of defending, jumping from one attack to the other, it was alot of fun at the time, we were most always outnumberd. some you win some you don't. if we happened on an LTAR attack you could settle in for a long time, they just never stop coming always a great fight and alot of fun.

(snip)

I have a love/hate relationship with the LTARs.  I love them because they are pretty much the only squad that will put up a decent fight for a base, despite the odds.  I hate them because, they are so damn good in their GVs.  It's like they are from Fort Knox, or something.  Seriously they are damn fine GV'ers, like they live online in them or something.

[Zazen13]

I have a love/hate relationship with the LTARs.  I love them because they are pretty much the only squad that will put up a decent fight for a base, despite the odds.  I hate them because, they are so damn good in their GVs.  It's like they are from Fort Knox, or something.  Seriously they are damn fine GV'ers, like they live online in them or something.

LTAR's are one of those living phenomena born out of necessity. Back in AHI field ack was far less substantial than what we have now. It was great to have the LTAR's there to make people think twice about low alt pendulum vulch passes on the takeoff spots. Even if they happened to not be at a particular base, people always had it in the back of their mind that any and every Ostwind they saw may be the LTAR's so curbed their tight CAP vulching. This had the net effect of enhancing and extenuating fights a lot.

[Getback]

It must be where you go looking for the fight. In all my time flying, 12 years in flight sims, the fight went from base to base. It jumped. No fights ever stayed at the same base for long. I use to think Well what base will they be hitting next, what base would I hit next? Basically I just anticipated. The other day we attacked the same base for over 2 hours before we captured it. Like Pluck a gv was asleep at the wheel and the troops slipped by. That caused some ire. You could see that by the way they were trying to get the base back.

Frankly, I'm not sure what you folks call furballing, yeah I know there's a thread on it. To me furballing is when you get right there swapping paint with the enemy. Many times I will see 2 full dar bars of enemy by a base and hardly any cons coming into the base.

Like I have said, and falcon and dredger and Rox, if you aren't protecting your base that is your fault. Why would you send just two people in to capture a base. You always want numbers ever country does not matter if it is just furballing, old fashion fighter sweeps, or taking bases.

As far as two tanks in town 2 eggs would take care of that nicely. I almost always fly with eggs. I love to shoot those rockets too. I can kill a gv 3k out with those at times, 6k if I'm in a TBM and I can see them(and if they are standing still).

I guess I just don't understand the rants about this subject. I find a way to have fun every time I play. I guess I just don't get disjointed because people won't play the way I want. Instead maybe I just adapt.

[Zazen13]

Frankly, I'm not sure what you folks call furballing, yeah I know there's a thread on it. To me furballing is when you get right there swapping paint with the enemy.

My description below is really what a "furball" or "dogfight" is in the classical sense. What you are describing is a "stall-fight" or "turn-fight". Furballs/Dogfights almost always include some "stall-fighting" and "turn-fighting", especially at the lower strata, but it is also a lot more varied and complex than just that...

You are misunderstanding the modern definition of "furball". A Furball is a large, chaotic engagement, with many planes operating in loose coordination over a relatively finite space. Furballs are three-dimensional, they tend to look like a tornado that starts out wider at the top with a skinny rope, as it matures the rope thickens and the top shrinks. There's a definite periphery on the horizontal plane at low alt. There's planes that have exhausted their E at the bottom stallfighting, there's people fighting more vertically in the middle alts and there's those in the next higher strata who have not yet spent their E and are waiting to strike. Furballs have ebbs and flows at the various strata as killing expends E. Planes once occupying the top strata halfway through a mission with 5 kills may find himself down in the weeds trying to fight his way through the periphery to return to base. A furball is a complex organism, it is not 2 or more Spits playing stall horn grab-ass on the deck...

 
 

[BaldEagl]

Personally, I still like the big maps.  I'm not a huge land-grabber (other than to get a few captures for the stat thing) and almost never fly NOE as I'm a lone wolf player.  For me the big maps simply offer a much larger variety of game play options.

The problem I saw when the arenas were split and only small maps were allowed was not only the limitations of the maps themselves relative to game play options, but the population densities.  There was nothing BUT furballs on every front.  That's great if you like to furball but not so great if you like more limited engagements.

I like to furball every once in a while but, again, as a lone wolf I like to find those areas that can offer me one-on-one to one-on-three engagements without constantly being ganged.  I also very much enjoy buff hunting milk-runners or being a lone (or one of very few) defender(s) against those NOE or GV "sneak" missions and have had a lot of success at it.  What I sacrifice in return for this is my kill per hour stats but I don't care as long as it ends up giving me quality engagements.

There are a few small maps that offer the advantages of the large ones but, again, they are largely unpopular with the "we don't like large maps" set.  SmPizza is one along with a few others I forget the names of.

I would like to see HT go to one arena with large maps, one with small maps and caps set permanently at like 450 in the large map arena and 250 in the small map arena, then, let the players choose for themselves.

[Monty405]

/signed.

I recently re-subbed but with the way the areas are split and my combined hatred for gigantic maps have caused me to consider why i subscribed again.