Zone system.

[Beefcake]

I remember CavemanJ's Mission where we took out the city, radar factory, and HQ leaving the Bish with no dar for 3 hours.


Man those were the days.

[batch]

Fighter Factories:  One per country.  Main Strat.  Responsible for fighter availability (As their %destroyed goes up, low ENY fighters (0-10?) become unavailable.)
Bomber Factories:  One per country.  Main Strat.  Responsible for bomber availability (As their %destroyed goes up, low ENY bombers (0-10?) become unavailable.)
Vehicle Factories:  One per country.  Main Strat.  Responsible for vehicle availability (As their %destroyed goes up, low ENY vehicles (0-10?) become unavailable.)

ANY strat system that effects anything based on ENY will completely negate the ENY purpose

Considering the country with High ENY will be the country doing the steamrolling and destroying the strats...... if they have the ability to knock out your 0-10 ENY planes then what they have the ability to do is give the lowest numbered country an ENY of 10.1 for hours regardless of numbers

[K-KEN]

ANY strat system that effects anything based on ENY will completely negate the ENY purpose

Considering the country with High ENY will be the country doing the steamrolling and destroying the strats...... if they have the ability to knock out your 0-10 ENY planes then what they have the ability to do is give the lowest numbered country an ENY of 10.1 for hours regardless of numbers

Sorry that I do not remember completely, but I do not think we had "ENY" back then. Limited fuel and supplies were adequate restrictions. Spit factories or some other restrictions were imposed...or maybe that was AW. <shrug>

[Serenity]

Definitely +1! Anything we can do in this game to make factories a more valuable target...

[Swatch]

ANY strat system that effects anything based on ENY will completely negate the ENY purpose

Considering the country with High ENY will be the country doing the steamrolling and destroying the strats...... if they have the ability to knock out your 0-10 ENY planes then what they have the ability to do is give the lowest numbered country an ENY of 10.1 for hours regardless of numbers

Sorry shoulda been more clear on this... it was late.

I don't actually mean to involve the ENY system with the Strat system, but the ENY system is the only guage of 'fighter quality' that I could come up with that everyone would understand.

Addendum to Earlier Suggestion: Strat Defense

As I alluded to, these strat targets should be extremely difficult to do actual catastrophic damage to, and even more difficult to keep down permanently.  I was envisioning factories that were a little more hardened (and possibly larger) than the collection of ammo bunkers and townbuildings we have now.  I would also say these factories should have a good umbrella of CV-like puffy ack.  The goal is to capture the essence of the strategic bombing campaigns of WWII, but not force that aspect of the game down the throats of those do not enjoy it.  While the effects of a successful attack on these targets should be noticeable, they should by no means completely shut down a country, much as taking out fuel at an airfield currently only limits the planes there to 75% vs making them completely useless.

[K-KEN]

Sorry shoulda been more clear on this... it was late.

I don't actually mean to involve the ENY system with the Strat system, but the ENY system is the only guage of 'fighter quality' that I could come up with that everyone would understand.

Addendum to Earlier Suggestion: Strat Defense

As I alluded to, these strat targets should be extremely difficult to do actual catastrophic damage to, and even more difficult to keep down permanently.  I was envisioning factories that were a little more hardened (and possibly larger) than the collection of ammo bunkers and townbuildings we have now.  I would also say these factories should have a good umbrella of CV-like puffy ack.  The goal is to capture the essence of the strategic bombing campaigns of WWII, but not force that aspect of the game down the throats of those do not enjoy it.  While the effects of a successful attack on these targets should be noticeable, they should by no means completely shut down a country, much as taking out fuel at an airfield currently only limits the planes there to 75% vs making them completely useless.

I am quite certain that we had times when fuel was limited to 25% max. That was with all the strats down and the base fuel up or maybe even down. You can still defend but it makes you work harder at getting supplied and putting more effort into team/country play. Spit V and NIKIs can last a while on 25% as can bombers and C47's or some GVs. The country is not defenseless but it's movement is drastically restricted. Now THAT builds team play and relationships!!  While it's basic in nature, that was the way we played-back in the day.

[batch]

Agreed that was the way we played back in the day............ and there was good reason for the changes......

as I said in my first post, it doesnt really matter to me either way, I spend most of my time on the ground and strats have no effect there......

Im just simply pointing out some of the downside to a country system...... the biggest of which being that the team who is lowest on numbers and getting steamrolled already will now be steamrolled even worse..... while giving bombers more incentive to bomb strats (as if they dont already with every given opportunity) and giving defenders more incentive to defend (which there is currently none) we would also be penalizing a country for simply having fewer numbers

the problem as I see it is that you would be giving the low number country a choice.......spread yourselves very thin to defend the few remaining bases you have (current system) or spread yourself even thinner to defend your few remaining bases and now your strats (country system)..... all the while doing it with ever decreasing fuel/ords/radar/etc

as for me...... I dont see a situation where they would eggtard the ground game any more than they already do...... so its really status quo either way

[Baumer]

Thanks K-KEN for the background, I figured there had to be a reason for the change to the zone system in the first place. After reading your post, and talking with a few squaddie's who've been around since dirt, it gave me a better perspective.

Thanks swatch for the feedback as well, I just wanted to clarify, the actions per strat would be limited to that zone only. So on a large map, one zone may have reduced radar but not the others.

Also, I think an additional "hook" for the cities could be, if the city is 90% destroyed then field supplies are disabled at all fields within that zone.

Hitech, I appreciate your desire for a "simple" solution. However, given all the great tools you (and the rest of HTC) have given us to play this game, there are to many combination's of game play to satisfy all of them with one simple design change. As K-KEN points out (and I suspect this to be true) there was a fundamental issue with country resources, that would allow for the "steamroller". Now it may be possible that with eny now, that would be discouraged but, even when a side has high eny, there are still plenty of bomb haulers available to keep the low side's strats down.

Thanks to everyone for the chance to have a good discussion about improving game play.

<S> Baumer 

[hammer]

Let me add that I don't think the zone system is too complicated. I think it's just not worth it to hit strats, vs. taking out capability locally, so people ignore the strat targets except for milk-running. As currently set up, it requires true strategic thinking and, even more difficult, coordinated effort throughout a country, to realize any benefit from hitting strat targets. It just doesn't happen in the MA very often.

Regards,

Hammer

[moot]

Yep, the required scale/quality of organization to benefit from what the current strat targets allow, strat/tactically, is just too high, for too little return. 

I can't see how it could work to have only one set of strats way back near HQ:  that would mean very long flight times at initial map positions, but also that the country that's pushed back to its HQ (steamrolled) is more vulnerable while the other country(ies) have that much more territorial buffer between their set of strats and the front line.  It's a positive feedback like HT says they want to avoid.

[sparow]

<Salute> all,

Excellent debate. The actual zone system has impact but it is not rewarding enough for attack/defend. I wish there was a way of mixing both systems. Something along the lines Swatch, Baumer, Hammer and others suggested.

A strat system based in primary and secondary strats, these linked to bases, via cities or not. A distribution network that ensures capilarity, by road, rail or sea. With weak points possible to create choke-points, like bridges, the road itself, the rails themselves, the docks.

I fully understand the need to keep gameplay above cardboard strategy. But once a change is required, having things evolved so much in these last years, this would be a golden opportunity to get the best of both systems.

Last year, in AvA, a "war" was run where strats had a serious impact on the resources for next round. If you had your country and strats destroyed you would not receive one - or more - new aircraft or vehicle. Well, that surely produced many heavy bomber raids, fighter interceptions, escorts et all... And people still had time to grab land and dogfight.

If it is a simple system change, from zone to country, that will be allright. People will adjust and things will be more or less the same. But if the system is changed for a better one, that would be improvement.

Cheers all,

P.S.: I remember bridges defended by a couple of AAA guns. Can't say if it was AH1 or WB. Memory fails me...

[Tilt]

IMO having strat deep inside enemy territory (due to loss of territory thru capture) looks wierd and gamey.

Having forward strat capturable can be configured to avoid steam roller IMO (its just a matter of maths)

Actually in WWII strat was to the rear but cities were everywhere and they played a role re general logistic delivery.

How about making cities capturable but reversing their role........... instead of strat being resupplied by cities make it so cities distribute  strat  (manaufactured at rear strat facilities) to their localities (big depots  remember those) ie if you want strat supplied to your fields then you capture the local city.

This way the city becomes its own zone master supplying fields in its zone. Atritting the city depletes the local rebuild rate. Capturing the city denies supplies to local enemy fields.

Cities will become little Leningrads/Stalingrads/Caens/Arnhems dotted over the map. Focal points of battle.

[moot]

Maybe rebuild times could be inversly proportional to the size of a country's territory?  This would make a steam rolling country more vulnerable, and wouldn't necessarily require more than one set of strats, as HT seems to prefer.

e.g.  Bishes are neither advancing nor retreating on either front, while the Rooks have the Knights nearly pushed back to their HQ.  Knights have (arbitrarily) shorter rebuild times (realistic since their single City is having to provide for smaller number of fields) which means that there's no positive feedback loop on the steam rolling, and that Knights could concievably run a small intruder mission NOE all the way to the Rook strats near Rook HQ, and really make a difference.  This while the Rook are easily within reach of the Knight HQ and other strat.

This can fit with other suggestions for the rest of the strat system in this thread, e.g. Hammer's 1000 lbs bombs restriction when Ammo Factory is destroyed, in whatever arrangement.  E.G. no 1000lbs for fighters anytime Ammo Fac is down, or only in some specific circumstances, arbitrarily chosen to keep the overall strat system well balanced and as near foolproof as possible.

[batch]

again that handicaps the heavily outnumbered team a bit..... in your example:

rooks have advanced all across knit front......... knits in typical fashion have all gone to blue arena now......if rebuild times are increased for base strats for countries with low base count........you suggest if ammo factory is destoyed then limiting types of bombs ie: take away 1000lbs.....

so now knits who are outnumbererd 3:1 can have their bombs faster but can only have the small ones

you can have your weapons as fast as you want......... but your only allowed to have sticks while you fight the 3 of us who have swords

[moot]

Decreased.  Rebuild times are proportional, not inversly proportional, to a country's territory.   That's what I meant.
So when the Rooks are at the Knight's HQ's gates, their fields are vulnerable via the slow rebuild time.   In another scenario, where the Bishes are somehow (freak stuff like this happens every now and then) eating into the Rooks and Knights at the same time, but not really putting up a fight either (e.g. the Rooks are ignoring them back there), while the Rooks would have normal rebuild times, it would still be balanced because the Rooks are risking to lose their strat back at HQ.

The possible flaw here is a country exploiting this by letting the third country (not the one they've pushed back to HQ) eat their territory so that they aren't suffering the slow rebuild time while steamrolling.  The question is whether this is really a problem outside of theory.