Yet another one...

[Pepe]

SW,

Why would you mention this if for no other reason than to throw in your opinion of "vulching", then not want anyone to comment on it or question it.

Because we were talking what would be the effect of certain measures on aifield damage. I welcome your coments with regards to this, but I thing you question my motivations for/against vulching. Your question is unrelated to the thread, that is about airfield damage model. That's the only reason why I ask you to start another thread. I appreciate your oppinions, but I'd like to keep each matter on each thread, if possible.    

--------------------------------------------

After-all, as HTC is making AH, this game is not supposed to recreate or simulate any form of experience of being there except for in scenarios. The MA is supposed to be a "mindless" place to just throw down and have fun without worrying about "will I be able to take off or have too many people already taken off from this field?"

AH claims to have (and as long you are here from beta, I think you will concur with me) the closest to the real thing FM in the whole industry. So it certainly does try to simulate the real experience in this aspect. It has gameplay concessions, but the baseline is simulation and fidelity. As long as further elements are introduced, I think the baseline is not changed, thus I try to think of a better simulation of base damage here.


--------------------------------------------


If you don't want someone remarking on one of your points, then why would you use that as a "pro" for your idea?

Selective use of the pros and cons, so long as they work for you and not against you?

Dang, how I hate negative questions. Hard to understand properly when not in your mother language      . I think it's better to remark than not. But the reason beyond my answer was that, IMO, your question was off-track. Still I don't refuse to answer. Just asked you to start another thread titled "Why are you agaist vulching?".

I try to see the points for and against. I try to discuss the flaws when I feel there is some solid ground to do.


--------------------------------------------


Did this thread somehow become uncivilized since I commented on your comment about vulching?

I don't see how.

I did not say so. I think is still very civilized, and enlightening too      


-------------------------------------------

And this is just pure speculation based on trying to get your idea across as a good one. Newbies aren't the only ones taking off from fields under attack. Many "vets" do it to keep their field from being captured.

Do you classify BigMax of the Assassins a newbie? Please, do not bring newbies into this as a pro for your argument to limit spawning from damaged fields because it isn't just newbies taking off from fields under attack.

Let me repeat what I posted. I think I stated it quite clearly. If you don't see it, please tell me.      

It is my own speculation, and I try to let it clearly stated: "I know this is a quite risky assumption, but I honestly think this is the general case."

Newbies are not the only ones: "I well maybe wrong, but, as I said previously, you will hardly find a veteran taking off from a capped field if it's not an ongoing capture attack. So the so-called "mindless" vulchers are people who will abuse from newbies who do not know where to take off and usually do it from a capped"

Cheers,

Pepe

[ 07-11-2001: Message edited by: Pepe ]

[AKSWulfe]

I just wanted to find out why you brought up vulching as a proponent for your argument to make damage to fields more effective (I guess) in terms of what gets damaged versus what can be launched.

I admit, I think the idea has merit. Unfortunately, we are all paying the same amount of money.

I would not like to be paying 30$/month to be able to fly from a field 30 minutes away from the action. That would bore me to tears.

The question is: Would you be willing to sacrifice more people than you would bring in if your idea was implemented?

Think of this scenario:

Someone who just enjoys porking fields for no other reason than to keep people from taking off from front line fields decides to take all the hangars at front line fields down to x%. This limits people to either planes at a certain ENY value or how many people can take off per minute.

You can no longer fly what you want from that field, or you can no longer fly from that field and must choose another one, further back behind the lines.

This just invites people to play the role of, please excuse my language, amazinhunk of the skies.

This is why I oppose anything that would further make it easier to limit what can be launched from a field.
-SW

[Pepe]

SW,

The question is: Would you be willing to sacrifice more people than you would bring in if your idea was implemented?

No, definitely not. I think this is Htc.'s job. Taken to the limit, I would retire myself before. I'm not that kind of people  


With regards to the scenario you propose, you will never find that particular area of the sky unpopulated  . Whatever Htc. could possibly think /wanted to trow into the game, some people just feel an irresistible attraction and will find ways to get there.   Plane type / Plane number limitation would not, in my opinion, promote that behaviour more than current fuel/ammo/drunk destruction.

Cheers,

Pepe