New way to capture bases, and a thought on ack

[Clone155]

I have 2 wishes!

First wish, I wish that instead of taking down the whole town and bringing in one goon to capture it, you can bring in five goons with town still up, but ack is down, and capture it that way. (that's 50 troops)

Second wish, I wish that the ack we have right now would not aim at you like the way it does now. I wish the ack would have fixed positions and when an enemy is near the guns all fire at the fixed positions, and maybe make the ack 37mms. This is how they did it in the war right? I know this is how the fleets worked anyways. And if the town had this, maybe you wouldn't need to kill ack for the first wish. Perhaps make some 37mms have fixed positions, lets say about 10, and the ack that does aim at you are 50 cals.

Thoughts?

[phatzo]

none

[CraneMan]

Sounds to me like the bases would be too easy to capture.
-1

[Denholm]

Agreed. This would make a seemingly simple process too simple. If you can't work as a team to take a base, you shouldn't be taking bases.

-2

[AWwrgwy]

RE: Ack

So the small caliber guns do not follow the low flying aircraft but spray and hope a plane flies through?  

I think you are thinking of large caliber guns, 75mm and up, that fired a massed barrage in front of a formation of aircraft based on predicted altitude and direction.  You need to take into account that the barrage was meant to explode within the formation using shells that exploded based on time or altitude.  No proximity fuses.

Small caliber guns on fields are meant to track and shoot at cons.  The only real historical example of massed fixed fire I can think of is massed infantry barrage firing their rifles in the air at the sound of passing aircraft.

The hard guns on fields are 20mm but the manned guns are 37mm.


wrongway

[Sakai]

II wish that the ack we have right now would not aim at you like the way it does now. I wish the ack would have fixed positions and when an enemy is near the guns all fire at the fixed positions, and maybe make the ack 37mms. This is how they did it in the war right?

Flak, the large black bursts that go off around planes in movies, newsreels, and the game at high altitudes, was timesd and fired to location.

Ack that is use dfor lower flying ac, like those strafing a field, was very much target specific in terms of where it was aimed.  Guns up to large caliber naval rifles were aimed at individual targets.  So, certainly everything 40mm and under near a base should go for the specific pane.  The mannable acks at bases are what, 37mm?

[Clone155]

Well I guess the ack thing would never happen, but all you need is one guy to shoot down one C-47 to stop the capture, and they would need five.

The point of this wish though is to try and get goons to fly together more often. I was using the thought of carrying spec ops to take bases for a while, but its getting boring. And no one wants to fly a goon mission

P.S. That is five kills if you ever intercept this 

[Guppy35]

How bout instead we do:

-Flak towers that take more then one pass to take down.
-camouflaged flak positions so it's not so easy to find and kill them
-dispersed and camouflaged vehicle hangers so the mobile ack can't be taken out so quickly
-satellite fighter fields close to main fields so fighters can up and defend instead of having to try and up in the vulch pattern.

All this would make it an actual challenge to take a base instead of the way it's done now. 

[Ack-Ack]

How bout instead we do:

-Flak towers that take more then one pass to take down.
-camouflaged flak positions so it's not so easy to find and kill them
-dispersed and camouflaged vehicle hangers so the mobile ack can't be taken out so quickly
-satellite fighter fields close to main fields so fighters can up and defend instead of having to try and up in the vulch pattern.

All this would make it an actual challenge to take a base instead of the way it's done now. 

I like it.


ack-ack

[Wizer]

How bout instead we do:

-Flak towers that take more then one pass to take down.
-camouflaged flak positions so it's not so easy to find and kill them
-dispersed and camouflaged vehicle hangers so the mobile ack can't be taken out so quickly
-satellite fighter fields close to main fields so fighters can up and defend instead of having to try and up in the vulch pattern.

All this would make it an actual challenge to take a base instead of the way it's done now. 

Excellent idea.  Maybe HiTech could post a survey to get feedback from the community.

[AWwrgwy]

How bout instead we do:

-Flak towers that take more then one pass to take down.
-camouflaged flak positions so it's not so easy to find and kill them
-dispersed and camouflaged vehicle hangers so the mobile ack can't be taken out so quickly
-satellite fighter fields close to main fields so fighters can up and defend instead of having to try and up in the vulch pattern.

All this would make it an actual challenge to take a base instead of the way it's done now. 

Sounds good in theory but.....

-Flak towers that take more then one pass to take down.

Good idea.  Is it just a raised AAA gun?

-camouflaged flak positions so it's not so easy to find and kill them

Once you know where they are, it doesn't matter what they look like.  Random "spawning" hard ack?

-dispersed and camouflaged vehicle hangers so the mobile ack can't be taken out so quickly

more than one VH?  Cammo is the same problem as the flak above.  Once you know where they are....

-satellite fighter fields close to main fields so fighters can up and defend instead of having to try and up in the vulch pattern.

Separate, captureable fields?  Or you capture the main field you get them all?


Just food for thought.


wrongway

[Nemisis]

Sounds to me like the bases would be too easy to capture.
-1

 


I agree. You could just get a huge fleet of C47's and capture like 5 bases without slowing down.

[AKP]

How bout instead we do:

-Flak towers that take more then one pass to take down.
-camouflaged flak positions so it's not so easy to find and kill them
-dispersed and camouflaged vehicle hangers so the mobile ack can't be taken out so quickly
-satellite fighter fields close to main fields so fighters can up and defend instead of having to try and up in the vulch pattern.

All this would make it an actual challenge to take a base instead of the way it's done now. 

Why not just make bases "non-standard".  So instead of one type of small airfield, or vehicle base, there are say... 5 or 6 different types of each.  So you dont know what the layout is until you get there.  This would make actual recon missions needed, and it would be harder to take out the base in general... since you never know what type you are going up against.  Keep the number of buildings the same, but completely change the way they are arranged.

And no one wants to fly a goon mission

I guess people dont realize your score gets better and you get perks for taking a base.  If you ever need a goon or an M3 driver... just come get me... I'll do it!

[5PointOh]

How bout instead we do:

-Flak towers that take more then one pass to take down.
-camouflaged flak positions so it's not so easy to find and kill them
-dispersed and camouflaged vehicle hangers so the mobile ack can't be taken out so quickly
-satellite fighter fields close to main fields so fighters can up and defend instead of having to try and up in the vulch pattern.

All this would make it an actual challenge to take a base instead of the way it's done now. 

+1

Always thought remote feilds with no rearm or limited fuel/ord load outs would add to the difficulty for base takes.