« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Map room placement change  (Read 1346 times)

Offline Yossarian

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2516
Re: Map room placement change
« Reply #15 on: October 27, 2009, 11:27:29 AM »
From a realistic perspective, why would the ownership of a small room in a town a few miles from the base have any effect on the base itself anyway?  :headscratch:
Logged
Afk for a year or so.  The name of a gun turret in game.  Falanx, huh? :banana:
Apparently I'm in the 20th FG 'Loco Busters', or so the legend goes.
O o
/Ż________________________
| IMMA FIRIN' MAH 75MM!!!
\_ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ

Offline WMLute

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4512
Re: Map room placement change
« Reply #16 on: October 27, 2009, 11:56:18 AM »
Quote from: nimble on October 26, 2009, 08:57:25 PM
just thinkin of ways to up the complexity a little

I still think they need to change the size of the towns according to the size of the field.

Small field = what we have now
Med. field = 10-15 more buildings and another ack or 2.
Large field = 20-30 more buildings and 3-4 more ack.

You could STILL take a large field with 3 tanks/whirbles/ostis and an m3 so the milk runners can't whine too much.

It would please the 'bomber' types as well 'cause now they have 3 diff. town setups to egg and more targets to lob bombs at. 

The 'strategy' types would like it because they would have to plan differently according to the field size.

It would appease the 'anti-hoard' types as it will slow down the swarm of nme from just jumping from base to base.  (would also make NOE missions easier to defend against because it takes longer, and requires a bit more effort, to get that med/large field)

I think that is the best and most viable idea I have seen in a long time re: field captures.  It makes the medium/large airfields more valuable as they would require more effort and diff. tactics to capture them.
« Last Edit: October 27, 2009, 11:58:51 AM by WMLute »
Logged
"Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to do and they will surprise you with their ingenuity."
— George Patton

Absurdum est ut alios regat, qui seipsum regere nescit

Offline Yossarian

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2516
Re: Map room placement change
« Reply #17 on: October 27, 2009, 12:39:19 PM »
Quote from: WMLute on October 27, 2009, 11:56:18 AM
I still think they need to change the size of the towns according to the size of the field.

Small field = what we have now
Med. field = 10-15 more buildings and another ack or 2.
Large field = 20-30 more buildings and 3-4 more ack.

You could STILL take a large field with 3 tanks/whirbles/ostis and an m3 so the milk runners can't whine too much.

It would please the 'bomber' types as well 'cause now they have 3 diff. town setups to egg and more targets to lob bombs at. 

The 'strategy' types would like it because they would have to plan differently according to the field size.

It would appease the 'anti-hoard' types as it will slow down the swarm of nme from just jumping from base to base.  (would also make NOE missions easier to defend against because it takes longer, and requires a bit more effort, to get that med/large field)

I think that is the best and most viable idea I have seen in a long time re: field captures.  It makes the medium/large airfields more valuable as they would require more effort and diff. tactics to capture them.

+1  :aok
Logged
Afk for a year or so.  The name of a gun turret in game.  Falanx, huh? :banana:
Apparently I'm in the 20th FG 'Loco Busters', or so the legend goes.
O o
/Ż________________________
| IMMA FIRIN' MAH 75MM!!!
\_ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ

Offline AKKuya

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2641
Re: Map room placement change
« Reply #18 on: October 27, 2009, 03:17:26 PM »
HiTech is planning on changing the strat system.  What the changes are?  How will they affect the strategy and tactics?  Only he knows and not telling.

Maybe the capture element will be chaged to coincide with the new strat system. 
Logged
This chapter has ended?

Offline Killer91

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 801
Re: Map room placement change
« Reply #19 on: October 27, 2009, 03:44:29 PM »
Quote from: CountD90 on October 26, 2009, 08:42:08 PM
and no more laughing at the noobs who drop troops over the field hahaha :aok :rofl

No but then we could all laugh at the noobs dropping them over the town!!   :banana:
Logged
Quote from: Tyrannis on March 21, 2011, 08:26:29 AM
someone named pervert is thanking someone named badboy for a enjoyable night?

Offline nimble

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 333
Re: Map room placement change
« Reply #20 on: October 27, 2009, 04:24:30 PM »
Quote from: WMLute on October 27, 2009, 11:56:18 AM
I still think they need to change the size of the towns according to the size of the field.

Small field = what we have now
Med. field = 10-15 more buildings and another ack or 2.
Large field = 20-30 more buildings and 3-4 more ack.

You could STILL take a large field with 3 tanks/whirbles/ostis and an m3 so the milk runners can't whine too much.

It would please the 'bomber' types as well 'cause now they have 3 diff. town setups to egg and more targets to lob bombs at. 

The 'strategy' types would like it because they would have to plan differently according to the field size.

It would appease the 'anti-hoard' types as it will slow down the swarm of nme from just jumping from base to base.  (would also make NOE missions easier to defend against because it takes longer, and requires a bit more effort, to get that med/large field)

I think that is the best and most viable idea I have seen in a long time re: field captures.  It makes the medium/large airfields more valuable as they would require more effort and diff. tactics to capture them.

yea, this is an excellent post. If only I wasn't so lazy typing on my iPhone. Thanks for filling in what I left out of my wish!
Logged
Even if it seems certain that you will lose, retaliate. Neither wisdom nor technique has a place in this. A real man does not think of victory or defeat. He plunges recklessly towards an irrational death. By doing this, you will awaken from your dreams.

Offline DCCBOSS

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 509
Re: Map room placement change
« Reply #21 on: October 27, 2009, 04:34:41 PM »
Quote from: WMLute on October 27, 2009, 11:56:18 AM
I still think they need to change the size of the towns according to the size of the field.

Small field = what we have now
Med. field = 10-15 more buildings and another ack or 2.
Large field = 20-30 more buildings and 3-4 more ack.

You could STILL take a large field with 3 tanks/whirbles/ostis and an m3 so the milk runners can't whine too much.

It would please the 'bomber' types as well 'cause now they have 3 diff. town setups to egg and more targets to lob bombs at. 

The 'strategy' types would like it because they would have to plan differently according to the field size.

It would appease the 'anti-hoard' types as it will slow down the swarm of nme from just jumping from base to base.  (would also make NOE missions easier to defend against because it takes longer, and requires a bit more effort, to get that med/large field)

I think that is the best and most viable idea I have seen in a long time re: field captures.  It makes the medium/large airfields more valuable as they would require more effort and diff. tactics to capture them.



+1

As far as the orignal post I don't think so, why not just hide it so nobody can take the base  :headscratch:  :D
Logged
"Where ever you go, there you are".
C.O. of Rolling Thunder

Offline nimble

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 333
Re: Map room placement change
« Reply #22 on: October 27, 2009, 04:51:38 PM »
Quote from: DCCBOSS on October 27, 2009, 04:34:41 PM


+1

As far as the orignal post I don't think so, why not just hide it so nobody can take the base  :headscratch:  :D


It wasn't about hiding it so bases can't be taken. It was more about having to deal with the actual base to take rather than town.
Logged
Even if it seems certain that you will lose, retaliate. Neither wisdom nor technique has a place in this. A real man does not think of victory or defeat. He plunges recklessly towards an irrational death. By doing this, you will awaken from your dreams.

Offline DCCBOSS

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 509
Re: Map room placement change
« Reply #23 on: October 27, 2009, 05:01:09 PM »
Check this post out has a different slant on it.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,275967.0.html
Logged
"Where ever you go, there you are".
C.O. of Rolling Thunder

Offline nimble

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 333
Re: Map room placement change
« Reply #24 on: October 27, 2009, 05:07:28 PM »
Logged
Even if it seems certain that you will lose, retaliate. Neither wisdom nor technique has a place in this. A real man does not think of victory or defeat. He plunges recklessly towards an irrational death. By doing this, you will awaken from your dreams.

Offline Dantoo

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
      • http://www.9giap.com
Re: Map room placement change
« Reply #25 on: October 27, 2009, 06:44:12 PM »
Bases need to be made easier to capture not harder.

Lute's idea is interesting, well thought through and worth more than just a second look.
Logged
I get really really tired of selective realism disguised as a desire to make bombers easier to kill.

HiTech

Matthew 24:28 For wherever the carcass is, there is where the vultures gather together.

Offline SmokinLoon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6168
Re: Map room placement change
« Reply #26 on: October 31, 2009, 09:30:03 PM »
I'm all for making it more difficult for a few sneaky fellas to take a base.  I like the idea of the "map room" being within the confines of the base.  I never did understand why it is in the middle of a residential area.  A strategically important place like the HQ bunker would/should be within the defensive compound such as a military base.

Taking a base should very much be a team effort. 
Logged
Proud grandson of the late Lt. Col. Darrell M. "Bud" Gray, USAF (ret.), B24D pilot, 5th BG/72nd BS. 28 combat missions within the "slot", PTO.

Offline 100goon

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 253
Re: Map room placement change
« Reply #27 on: October 31, 2009, 09:54:25 PM »
Logged
Claim Jumpers

Offline WMLute

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4512
Re: Map room placement change
« Reply #28 on: November 01, 2009, 12:14:51 AM »
Quote from: DCCBOSS on October 27, 2009, 05:01:09 PM
Check this post out has a different slant on it.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,275967.0.html

The exact thread where that idea was created.  (and I am not the originator of it)

As I said I think that is one of the best ideas I have seen in a long time and I hope HTC considers it.

My fear, after seeing that development thread, is that HTC will go a tad "overboard" with town size.
Logged
"Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to do and they will surprise you with their ingenuity."
— George Patton

Absurdum est ut alios regat, qui seipsum regere nescit

Offline trigger2

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1342
Re: Map room placement change
« Reply #29 on: November 01, 2009, 02:58:58 PM »
Quote from: Yossarian on October 27, 2009, 11:27:29 AM
From a realistic perspective, why would the ownership of a small room in a town a few miles from the base have any effect on the base itself anyway?  :headscratch:

From a realistic perspective, why would one want to own a completly destroyed, bombed out airfield that it would cost more to repair than good it would do? :headscratch:
Logged
Sometimes, we just need to remember what the rules of life really are: You only
need two tools: WD-40 and Duct Tape. If it doesn't move and should, use the
WD-40. If it shouldn't move and does, use the duct tape.
*TAs Aerofighters Inc.*
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
« previous next »