Author Topic: strategic targets  (Read 1464 times)

Offline ScottyK

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 463
strategic targets
« on: January 30, 2009, 01:25:39 AM »
   I've been playing for about a month (started as ReaperSK changed to ScottyK)  now, i understand im  a new player, but im curious as to why cities, ammo factories, AAA factories etc...are not considered "worthy" targets.

  In the little time that i've been playing (which i love WW2 aircraft sims) it seems to me that hitting these targets with 3-5 buffs with a small escort of 3 fighters would slow the opposing resupply rate making it a bit easier to 'take a base'.

  Thanks....and please do not rip my head off.....unlike i've heard someone complaining about someone who posted a mission without a vox.  ( i post missions and i don't have a vox, with one taker lol me)
Childhood is over the moment you know your gonna die.  Fight not to Fail, or end up like the others.   In my crate, im the commander.


IGN: Scotty57

Offline SpazMan

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 384
Re: strategic targets
« Reply #1 on: January 30, 2009, 07:37:56 AM »
It does hamper the oppositions ability to resupply their bases. Most people consider base taking and porking nearby bases more worthy because taking bases is how you win the war. Hope this helps.... :salute
« Last Edit: January 30, 2009, 07:39:53 AM by SpazMan »

Offline Getback

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6364
Re: strategic targets
« Reply #2 on: January 30, 2009, 10:09:00 AM »
Bomb them if you like. Pesonally I don't see them as the nearest threat.

  Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Free Calorie Counter

Offline Shuffler

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26908
Re: strategic targets
« Reply #3 on: January 30, 2009, 10:15:19 AM »
When I'm bored I use those as bait.
80th FS "Headhunters"

S.A.P.P.- Secret Association Of P-38 Pilots (Lightning In A Bottle)

Offline BaldEagl

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10791
Re: strategic targets
« Reply #4 on: January 30, 2009, 10:24:32 AM »
The reason is that for bombing a strat to be effective you have to also bomb the respective objects on an airfield or v-base.  If you do that then the re-supply to those base objects is slowed down.

If you take down a base and capture it quickly then there's no need to slow down supply to it.
I edit a lot of my posts.  Get used to it.

Offline Knite

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 805
Re: strategic targets
« Reply #5 on: January 30, 2009, 11:24:58 AM »
Bald Eagle has the key.

Bombing the strat targets isn't as effecive as just bombing the bejeebus out of the airfield itself, and taking it over.

Now if... say... strat targets affected the airfield more dramatically, such as altering the aircraft allowed, or fuel, or whatever, then you'd see the strat targets hit more often.
Knite

39th FS "Cobra In The Clouds"

I'm basically here to lower the 39th's score :P

Offline Nilsen

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18108
Re: strategic targets
« Reply #6 on: January 30, 2009, 11:32:20 AM »
Two times the past week i have landed my 109 at strat target that has been behind enemy lines. Ive sat there waiting with a cup of coffe and rolled when the milkers come in to score.

I wish i could see the faces of the milkers comming in to do their part for "the war effort" :D


Offline Sloehand

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 874
Re: strategic targets
« Reply #7 on: January 30, 2009, 11:34:20 AM »
All of the previous being true, I think a main reason is that there is no immediate appearance of effect when you bomb factories, other than the destruction of the factory itself.

In other words, people don't see some type of dramatic effect as a result of destroying a factory even though it actually has one.

If the factory is easily reached and there is nothing better to do, people will hit it.  But otherwise, it's rare that factories are part of an overall strategy for a land campaign.
Jagdgeschwader 77

"You sleep safe in your beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do you harm."  - George Orwell
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin

Offline SEraider

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1755
Re: strategic targets
« Reply #8 on: January 30, 2009, 11:39:01 AM »
The other thing is that it helps your personal score.  That is, if score is important to you which to most of us it's not.
* I am the embodiment of Rule #14
* History is only recent.
* Stick and Stones won't break my bones, but names could "hurt" me.

CO Screaming Eagles

Offline FireDrgn

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1115
Re: strategic targets
« Reply #9 on: January 30, 2009, 11:45:51 AM »
This might be the wrong thread but what about in stead of huge maps with lots of bases that NEVER get captured......Remove some of the bases and make the strats  a lot freaking bigger like massive.

This would create more game play...


<S>
"When the student is ready the teacher will appear."   I am not a teacher.

Offline Nilsen

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18108
Re: strategic targets
« Reply #10 on: January 30, 2009, 11:55:27 AM »
I have been pro removing the strat targets in the past, but I really feel that giving them more importance would be better. My dream is that they would be so important that we would see huge fights over them with escorted buffs and defenders lurking to protect them.

Unlike field captures where it often turns into a vulch fest or sneak attack with massive numbers, you would always see someone patroling important strats. You just wont see it beeing possible to have a cap over all the bases we have to look after now.

I have no view yet of how they could be made that important or where they should be placed on a map, but im sure the community could come up with ideas  :)

Offline Anaxogoras

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7072
Re: strategic targets
« Reply #11 on: January 30, 2009, 12:18:55 PM »
   I've been playing for about a month (started as ReaperSK changed to ScottyK)  now, i understand im  a new player, but im curious as to why cities, ammo factories, AAA factories etc...are not considered "worthy" targets.

  In the little time that i've been playing (which i love WW2 aircraft sims) it seems to me that hitting these targets with 3-5 buffs with a small escort of 3 fighters would slow the opposing resupply rate making it a bit easier to 'take a base'.

  Thanks....and please do not rip my head off.....unlike i've heard someone complaining about someone who posted a mission without a vox.  ( i post missions and i don't have a vox, with one taker lol me)

If you're new, it's better to concentrate on improving your air-to-air combat ability, not on how to take bases.  "Winning the war" is meaningless and not what this game is about. My $.02.
gavagai
334th FS


RPS for Aces High!

Offline Patches1

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 668
Re: strategic targets
« Reply #12 on: January 30, 2009, 12:34:07 PM »
ScottyK,

Strats are good targets and they play a good role in the game, but most Folks don't understand the dynamics behind the Strat Targets and thus, are unlikey to hit them.

The key to Strat Targets is a percentage...and that percentage is 50% destroyed...BEFORE the effect of the Strat Target hit is felt upon the corresponding individual airfield target. If you take all Strat Targets corresponding to their airfield targets down below 50%...you impact the ability of the airbases to recover. But! If you further reduce the City Strats below 50%, you also further delay the ability of all other Strats to resupply because all Strats must funnel through the City Strats.

Hope this helps.



"We're surrounded. That simplifies the problem."- Lewis B. "Chesty" Puller, General, USMC

Offline Wingnutt

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1665
Re: strategic targets
« Reply #13 on: January 30, 2009, 12:38:54 PM »
make it impossible to take base of the city (city for that zone if its a big map) is more than 50% up..I dont know what would be bigger, the raging air war over the city(s) or the raging screaming and crying on here :aok

Offline Knite

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 805
Re: strategic targets
« Reply #14 on: January 30, 2009, 12:46:23 PM »
I have no view yet of how they could be made that important or where they should be placed on a map, but im sure the community could come up with ideas  :)

I've always thought it would be a cool idea to have Strats directly impact an associated field's available aircraft and vehicles... but my thoughts really would require a ton of work, as it's tied into a new way to setup maps... but basically...

Right now, to take a base, typical strategy is to bomb the VH, sometimes bomb the FH, take out the town and land troops.

The timings obviously can be changed for balance sake, but my thoughts were :

A) Put Strat targets with a VH spawn inside them... Call it the vehicle factories, with the ability to spawn at the strat, or between an associated airfield and town (Also allow the airfield to VH spawn closer to the strat factories as well as inside the airfield VH). This eliminates the easy "bomb VH to eliminate ground support" at the airfield, as ground support would ALSO be able to come from elsewhere.

B) Create a "standing army" at the town. This standing army is supplied by both the barracks at the airfield (let's say every 10 minutes) and barracks at the Strat barracks (every 20 minutes). The standing army idea can be very simple, and can really be thought of as hitpoints. Towns default at 20 "troops", and troops are killed on a 1 to 1 basis, meaning at minimum it requires 3 goons or M3s to capture a downed town (20 troops to take the town guard down, 1 to take the town), but if you fail, the town guard gets reinforced unless you bomb both the airfield barracks and strat barracks.

C) At the strat have "Aircraft Factories". The Aircraft Factory respawns 1 airfield hangar every 10 minutes, starting with fighter hangars then bomber hangars.

D) Move the radar to the Strat targets, and make them more than just 1 tower. Increase "dot" range over what it is today by 25%. Every picture I've seen of WWII Radar shows multiple towers, so we should have multiple towers as well. If we use 4 towers, make each one bombed reduce the radar range by 25% instead of just all or nothing.

E) Once all airfields the Strat is associated with is captured, the Strat then changes hands. Yes, this does mean that after a base is captured, it's very hard to hold as the Strat target base is supplying your enemies but not you. However, since bases still regenerate on thier own (just much MUCH faster with the strats intact), that forward base is still worth defending as you'll get it's full usage eventually.

I think this would help move a lot of fights away from the airfields and towards the strat targets. This (I think) would help reduce vulches as the fights would be centered around strat targets to take over airfields as opposed to over the runway of the airfield and it's close town. Since one strat target could be fueling 2 (or more) airfields, it's importance is greatly increased as weakening the strats would help against other airfields as well, yet the airfields still need attention because of the air hangars and town needed to capture.  This also helps reduce milkrunning as it's a much bigger co-ordination needed to quickly take a base (but still not so much that it can't be done).


Again, these are all just ideas. No offense meant to the current setup at all. Mine thoughts are just different. =)
« Last Edit: January 30, 2009, 12:49:10 PM by Knite »
Knite

39th FS "Cobra In The Clouds"

I'm basically here to lower the 39th's score :P