A different idea for strats

[FiLtH]

   Since it seems that destroying strats either handicap the enemy too much, or as now, really dont seem to do much at all, how about this.

STRAT HARDNESS set per ENY. The more you out number folks, the weaker your strats, the weaker your side, the stronger your strats.

RADAR STRAT: For every 10% of the enemy radar factory destroyed, rather than making it so the enemy loses dar, how about the radar ring for the side who destroyed it increases by 10% in size.

AMMO STRAT: Ammo at all bases are hardened, the more factory destroyed, the harder your ammos.

TROOP STRAT: If the troop factory is destroyed, all your bases have their barracks at each base set to        enabled.

REFINERY STRAT: If destroyed, all your bases fuel are set to full.

   This affect would last a say 1 hour. That would make planning and execution of the missions worthwhile.

   It might get alot of the fight out of the mud and up in the air taking some of the base grab out of it.

   This could be nice if a side if being slammed and many of their bases are porked. A couple good buff runs could even the playing field. This would give strats a real purpose, without shutting down a side. Could set up some nice bomber/intercept stuff.

[Ghosth]

Interesting concept.

[thndregg]

   This could be nice if a side if being slammed and many of their bases are porked. A couple good buff runs could even the playing field. This would give strats a real purpose, without shutting down a side. Could set up some nice bomber/intercept stuff.

I can supply the bombers.

[Hap]

I'm for anything reasonable that would make things "worthwhile" as opposed to putting a nickel and wind up the machine and spray away at the bad guys.

We're still left with being unable to answer the question "why" when it comes to your strat suggestion.  Without a winnable war, the strat system can be fun, sort of, to increase scoring.  But not much else.

A scoring system has superseded the strat system which used to underpin a war effort on either side.

I don't see how to reconcile the two.  And as it is now, things are as they are.  As long as any arrangement makes for successful business that will be what we have.

Either someone will come along with more war and less score, or, what I would much prefer, HTC will come up with something.

[Tilt]

make strats useful and make em capturable.

Having said that our AHII strat model basically dates back to 1998 AW2  (by AW3 strats could be set as capturable) eventually HTC will have to look at it a new.

[SD67]

The whole point of having strats is to make it difficult for the other side(s) to sustain a war effort.
Currently the only tangible effect our bombers have is if they shut down airfields by dropping hangars.
I'd dearly love to see a strat system that shows an immediate detrimental effect to the side that should be protecting them.
For example, if a zones radar factory is destroyed, repairs to damaged radars that are destroyed in that sector should be affected accordingly, if it is levelled to zero no rebuilding should take place until the factory begins to function again. Things can be helped along by flying/driving supplies in to the affected strat.
As it is presently the strats are a practically worthless target, if they had a significant meaning people would be encouraged to defend them. This will be good for the furballers because those buffs are now going to NEED escorts and that means fights.
It will also give the guys who fly buffs a meaningful target that is more than just dropping hangars. It will mean trips into enemy territory to level an entire city or factory and it will mean teamwork will be needed to pull it off on both the aggressors and the defenders sides.
It takes the game away from aerial quake and back into the combat simulation.

[Bruv119]

interesting idea Filth,

They need a bit of fleshing out though.  More structures, objects , buildings, basically increase the size of them.

On a sidenote though just imagine a bigger strat on the ground in a tank or jeep.   Ultimately you could use this as a way of adding infantry to the game.  I'm not for or against the FPS side of things but this is me thinking out aloud.  

You would have to capture the base closest to the strat and then setup a Forward spawn base near the Strat and then Battlefield style get into the strat and hold onto 3 out of 3 map rooms within the large strat.  If the defenders manage to get out and wipe out the forward base then its saved for a set amount of time.  You could then add a few extra vehicles, Artillery and such like.  It would be like a Tank Town waiting to happen and would be pretty epic.  

A game within a game.

[SD67]

I like that too. Just because it's called Aces High does not mean the ground war part should fall by the wayside.

[lasersailor184]

The whole point of having strats is to make it difficult for the other side(s) to sustain a war effort.
Currently the only tangible effect our bombers have is if they shut down airfields by dropping hangars.
I'd dearly love to see a strat system that shows an immediate detrimental effect to the side that should be protecting them.
For example, if a zones radar factory is destroyed, repairs to damaged radars that are destroyed in that sector should be affected accordingly, if it is levelled to zero no rebuilding should take place until the factory begins to function again. Things can be helped along by flying/driving supplies in to the affected strat.
As it is presently the strats are a practically worthless target, if they had a significant meaning people would be encouraged to defend them. This will be good for the furballers because those buffs are now going to NEED escorts and that means fights.
It will also give the guys who fly buffs a meaningful target that is more than just dropping hangars. It will mean trips into enemy territory to level an entire city or factory and it will mean teamwork will be needed to pull it off on both the aggressors and the defenders sides.
It takes the game away from aerial quake and back into the combat simulation.

The problem is that HT won't do anything that can change the pristine blue sky 24/7 furball.  If he's not going to give us weather or night back, why would he do anything that would affect non-dogfighting part of the game?

[Serenity]

   Since it seems that destroying strats either handicap the enemy too much, or as now, really dont seem to do much at all, how about this.

STRAT HARDNESS set per ENY. The more you out number folks, the weaker your strats, the weaker your side, the stronger your strats.

RADAR STRAT: For every 10% of the enemy radar factory destroyed, rather than making it so the enemy loses dar, how about the radar ring for the side who destroyed it increases by 10% in size.

AMMO STRAT: Ammo at all bases are hardened, the more factory destroyed, the harder your ammos.

TROOP STRAT: If the troop factory is destroyed, all your bases have their barracks at each base set to        enabled.

REFINERY STRAT: If destroyed, all your bases fuel are set to full.

   This affect would last a say 1 hour. That would make planning and execution of the missions worthwhile.

   It might get alot of the fight out of the mud and up in the air taking some of the base grab out of it.

   This could be nice if a side if being slammed and many of their bases are porked. A couple good buff runs could even the playing field. This would give strats a real purpose, without shutting down a side. Could set up some nice bomber/intercept stuff.

Is it just me? Or is that completely backwards.

Sorry, but I disagree. For the time it takes me to get a strong enough attack on a strat, if you cannot intercept you deserve to suffer.

[FiLtH]

   Yes Serenity it is backwards, but by denying the enemy it just weakens gameplay, people complain. So rather than destroying the enemy strats to hurt him, you do so to help you. Sense of purpose without crippling a side. Or...having no effect whatsoever.

[JHerne]

This is an idea I support 110%...Bravo Zulu Filth! 

Historically, the Allied bomber campaign of WW2 (both USAAF and RAF) were strategically oriented, taking out factories and infastructure targets like oil refinerys and cities. In AH2, we use heavy bombers to take down bases and towns for base captures, or we dive-bomb carriers with them (another pet peeve of mine).

By increasing the strategic importance of strat targets, it not only pulls players away from offensive base-rolling, it puts a serious check on their ability to wage war if they don't defend those targets. This can be an effective counter to the ENY issue if implemented and used properly.

JH

[Serenity]

   Yes Serenity it is backwards, but by denying the enemy it just weakens gameplay, people complain. So rather than destroying the enemy strats to hurt him, you do so to help you. Sense of purpose without crippling a side. Or...having no effect whatsoever.

Eh, maybe Im just vindictive, but I would rather see the red guys suffer than the green guys gain something.

[JHerne]

That's an intelligent response.

[Serenity]

That's an intelligent response.

Yes it is. That is my oppinion. There is nothing wrong with having a preference.