New Gameplay Mechanic Needed? My Feedback

[Chilli]

I must be insane, I agree with everything said here, seems to me not to be any contradiction to be for changes in gameplay or simply waiting for the next patch or group of players to decide "What we gonna do now, Willy?"

Anyhow Letalis and others are right to kick out suggestions that might offer solutions to AH cabin fever.  So, here are some of my under developed thoughts:

Option to allow AI to control gunner positions in bombers...

results in more bomber activity and maybe slightly better bombing

Add more than one task group for each port...

results in more purely sea battles, blockades, perimeter defenses, etc

Artillery lines behind spawn points...

results in advanced scouting capabilities and spawn camp busting

Not all above ideas are original, credit to those who thought of it first, but I would hope that presenting options with a greater chance of survival, are always attractive.  This is why we have squads, hordes, and side balancing measures.

[JHerne]

Well, regardless of your position on this, there's same damned well-thought ideas here.

People by nature tend to resist change - it takes them outside of their comfort zone - more so if they've established themselves within the upper half of the population with regards to the behavior within their environment (yea, I was a psych major once, too).

I'm all for new ideas or concepts to make the overall game more diverse. New planes, vehicles, etc., are nice, but they don't do much to address the out boundaries of the game (and game play). I think implementing new concepts, while not an easy task, is the easiest way to keep the game interesting.

Case in point - artillery. It adds an element to the game that we don't currently have. Some will argue there's a need for it - others say we can achieve the same results with our existing GVs. However, it adds a new element to the game, that requires new strategy, countermeasures, and planning and implementation into the way we currently do things. Finding things like that - I'm all for it.

J

[Chilli]

I should be working on ideas for AvA terrain, but I got bogged down with limitations of my old POS system.  In it I had hoped to include the new AT guns hidden on hilltops to simulate an Iwo Jima island type scenario.  If anyone, would like to offer any assistance in that area let me know.  USRanger and MrMidi have been more than generous with their time and help.  With my system limits I am pretty much stuck with coming up with ideas and only being able to implement them on very small scale maps.

Concept:

(Hill:  AT gun )      (Hill: AT gun )     (Hill: AT gun )

(Spawn point here: X  )


(Invasion spawns here:  X )

(Beach Landing / Vehicle Base with AT gun positions)

[JHerne]

I'm kinda in the same boat with regards to AvA setups. I have all the data and historical stuff, just haven't learned how to implement it all yet.

We should talk offline about some AvA ideas I have. Combined with your terrain ideas we might have something.

J

[SmokinLoon]

At the end of the day, the number of towns leveled, bases taken, CV's sunk, or strats bombed is irreverent to the combat experience of the players involved.  Sure, everyone likes to "win", but what is the point of the fun meter is minimal.  I think most people would rather have success in a mini-mission and be involved in that success or near success vs having no effect while in a 20 vs 1 vulch-furball fest while taking a base.  That is no different than standing on the sidelines and watching your team score all the points and then getting a pat on the back for doing a good job. 

For every action (offense) in AH there is a viable re-action (defense).  If team A swarms base X like fleas then team A can get leg humped by team B who launched from base Y and comes in from an advantageous position.  There are so many mini-missions that can be had other than taking/defending a base.  I take great pride in taking out barracks (no troops/supps) at a nearby enemy base knowing that their offensive just got delayed a bit while they wait an hour for barracks to repair or a 15 min or so to be re-supped.  What is even more fun is to go on up the line and take out the barracks of the base they are using to re-supply the base you just disabled troops at.  It is amazing what a single Mossi, or better yet a pair of Mossis can do to an enemy's supply line.

My point is simple: stop focusing on taking a base and learn to broaden your scope of what fun can be had in AH.  Not all the missions in WWII were to capture territory.          

[Ghosth]

Smoking nailed it. With a big hammer!

Lots to do, you just need to look around a bit, get a bit creative.

[Letalis]

At the end of the day, the number of towns leveled, bases taken, CV's sunk, or strats bombed is irreverent to the combat experience of the players involved.  Sure, everyone likes to "win", but what is the point of the fun meter is minimal.  I think most people would rather have success in a mini-mission and be involved in that success or near success vs having no effect while in a 20 vs 1 vulch-furball fest while taking a base.  That is no different than standing on the sidelines and watching your team score all the points and then getting a pat on the back for doing a good job. 

For every action (offense) in AH there is a viable re-action (defense).  If team A swarms base X like fleas then team A can get leg humped by team B who launched from base Y and comes in from an advantageous position.  There are so many mini-missions that can be had other than taking/defending a base.  I take great pride in taking out barracks (no troops/supps) at a nearby enemy base knowing that their offensive just got delayed a bit while they wait an hour for barracks to repair or a 15 min or so to be re-supped.  What is even more fun is to go on up the line and take out the barracks of the base they are using to re-supply the base you just disabled troops at.  It is amazing what a single Mossi, or better yet a pair of Mossis can do to an enemy's supply line.

My point is simple: stop focusing on taking a base and learn to broaden your scope of what fun can be had in AH.  Not all the missions in WWII were to capture territory.          

Gave this some thought...right now at the end of the day, you could make a case that towns leveled etc is irrelevent to the combat experience of the players involved.  Make a case, but probably not win.  The game's mechanics drive gameplay dynamics and hence the experience.  This thread would not have started were it not for the three independent hordes usually seen in MA.  "Combat"  (players fighting players) has seen a decline and the game is not as fun as a result. I'd say that qualifies as affecting "the combat experience" of players involved.

Right now the "war" is an abstract backdrop to the fighting with no real purpose for existence.  Your example of killing barracks (while interesting) is ultimately equally irrelevant to vulching the lone spixteen with 30 of your closest friends. The gameplay mechanics should promote players fighting other players.  How often do you see people ask "where's the fight?" and get frustrated.  A massive vulch-fest does not qualify as a fight.  The war should provide context for the action and give it meaning; for that to have any chance of happening there should be a winner.

If you disagree with all the above, I still say it is a rather backwards proposition having to find creative ways to enjoy a game that costs $180/yr to play.   

[Yossarian]

The one thing that's become apparent to me in this thread is that if you want strategy, you need smaller maps.  I personally think more strategy in AH can't be a bad thing, and I think smaller maps are more fun anyway.

That said, however, the #1 goal of any game is to have fun.  I personally have fun by lobbing 75mm shells at tanks from 1K out, and watching the turret fly off (1000lb bombs will also do nicely, if said tank happens to be a T-34).  Other people will have fun by attempting to prevent me from doing the above.  Overall, if you don't have fun, then don't play.  But never forget that overall purpose of any game: to have fun.

[Chilli]

Letalis has a point.  Gaming is for FUN!  Yet, "Furballers" are frequently called out for ignoring base capture attempts/ defense on MA country channel.  What is that furballers do?    Have fun with ACM  and the flight models  developed by HTC.   

The DA, I suppose could possibly be a snack for the furballers appetite, but the full blown Squad versus multiple enemy combatants meal ticket is not complete.  There are no scores or stats or crowning of monthly DA heroes. 

Okay, KOTH then  .  Twice a week  Though, a totally awesome experience, it is a tournament, that hosts many of the MAs top furballers, and forbids any wingman tactics at all.

Axis versus Allies, the meat AND potatoes for me....... buuuuuuuuuu...... tttttttttt      You freaks  won't fly in there (self involved moment).   

Somehow, I still manage to slip into a furball or two or three (who's counting  ), bang on a few hangars  , wing up with my squadees  , get pwnd in a KOTH joust tourney  , and find a few other than myself to enjoy historically matched air battles in the AvA  .

Is it too late to demand a refund for my $15? (sarcasm)   But the MOST despicable gameplay, and least fun exists in the mechanics of how fields are captured. 

[EskimoJoe]

<snip>
-If you’re online and your country loses a base, so sorry, -5 perks for ya. This will keep people from sitting in tower accumulating perks for doing nothing other than throwing off ENY.  Hopefully it will also cause more flyers to consider mounting a coordinated defense as well…
<snip>

Sorry, but I don't want to lose perks for every time my retarded country-mates can't defend a base or my retarded enemies sneak a base while others are having a nice fight elsewhere.

Just my two cents.

[Chilli]

I don't remember if it was here or somewhere else, that someone suggested tying the factories to certain aircraft.  I don't think that HTC would ever consider that, but that is a more realistic simulation of effects from strategic attacks on country resources.

[FLOTSOM]

I don't remember if it was here or somewhere else, that someone suggested tying the factories to certain aircraft.  I don't think that HTC would ever consider that, but that is a more realistic simulation of effects from strategic attacks on country resources.

as an offshoot to your offshoot someone once mentioned in another thread somewhere that they should tie factories to current country eny. obviously the uber rides will be the first effected by the strat bombing. which in reality serves the purpose of weakening your opponents ability to mount offensives against you using the top of the line gear. this creates a slightly more significant air of reality of cause and effect. it gives motivation to both attack and defend the strat targets.

before the argument of greater number sides will attack strats to balance the eny........ummmmm well yes they will use their greater numbers and worse rides to attack fewer numbers in better rides....see the balance potential? additionally when being attacked by these greater numbers worse eny countries then by porking thier factories you will increase an already elevated eny causing the horde to use worse and worse rides thus giving the lower numbered country a better fighting chance.