seperate arenas for just gv action

[TDeacon]

This is a good and reasonable idea, which has been suggested before in various forms, but not acted on by HTC yet.  

Here's why it is a reasonable idea.  With GVs you have the "furballers" and the "win-the-war" types, just as with AC.  GV "furball" mode involves maneuvering against and shooting at opposing GVs, analogously to AC furballing, and including a large "stealth" element as well.  The main difference from AC furballs is that GVs are an order of magnitude slower, so the furball takes a lot longer to play out.  AC being faster and more powerful short-circuit this process, especially if there is an airbase too near the GV battle.  Even if a relatively/completely AC-free GV area is supported by HTC, people will continue to use GVs to support the "win-the-war", base-capture behavior on the remainder of the map.  Thus AC will still have plenty of opportunities to attack GVs on the remainder of the map.  Thus the Forum posters who so strongly oppose this type of suggestion have nothing to worry about.  

(In a related comment, the center island in Ozkansas has been entirely Rook for a couple of weeks now, thus precluding its use as the game's premier GV area.  The island will likely remain out of service until HTC resets the map (if that ever occurs).  This was a good GV "furball" area, possibly as the air bases were relatively distant from the action, and possibly also for other reasons.  The 3 air bases on the Ozkansas center island should be set to uncapturable, and that would fix the problem).  

[grizz441]

It is clear that you consider anyone that does not have the same philosophy about the game as you do hypocritical. I realize that you would prefer that everyone up in planes instead of GV's so that you and your Ilk can pick them off one by one to pad the scores.

I think you are mistaken when you said that I like to have my cake and eat it to. Never have I said that it is wrong to bomb GV's. I only said that I consider it bad game play to do it to GV's that are clearly not advancing on bases such as a tank town type setting..

Every player has an opinion. Is it hypocritical because it is not the same opinion as you hold on the subject?  

Lol, I've been going completely against the grain of this BBS defending your style of play that I rarely even partake in and you are telling me I only care about what I do?    

So you consider it bad game play to bomb GV's yet you do not consider your squadron's 'whack a mole' base taking strategy as bad gameplay?  Wow!  

It's okay though, I'll still defend your right to play the game you wish to play, but it's a fascinating rose colored glasses stance you have taken on this particular issue.

[Lusche]

I still wonder...

TT area on Ndisles is being used by a few tankers despite being surrounded by airfields in very close proximity and thus being bombed regularly.
Tankers complain and ask for a seperate arena.

TT area on Ozkansas us being used by a few tankers despite being surrounded by airfields in very close proximity and thus being bombed regularly.
Tankers complain and ask for a seperate arena.

TT area on Trinity is far away from airfields and protected by Himalaya-like walls and thus almost never being bombed.
Nobody there.

To me that reads like tankers are glutton for punishment. They are not really interested in having a "safe place". Else they wouldn't they use it?


(Btw.. the best GV fight you can usually find on Ozkansas is V135-V136)

[sky25]

So you consider it bad game play to bomb GV's yet you do not consider your squadron's 'whack a mole' base taking strategy as bad gameplay?  Wow!  

With all due respect Grizz, where did you ever read that I said it was bad game play to bomb GV's? I said that I considered it bad game play to bomb GV's in a tank town type setting where clearly no base advance is taking place.. I said that GV's advancing on bases or camping should be fair game and bombed as much as the pilot likes.. Is this not what the original OP was talking about?

As for the "Wack a Mole base taking strategy, I really think that was the style last weekend when the Knits and Rooks hammered the Bish into submission with that very same "Wack a Mole" style of game play that many complain about on the Uterus map... And I say more power to them I enjoyed defending against it. Even though it was a lost cause..

I continue to have much respect for you and your group and the contribution you have made to the enjoyable game.. We will have to agree to disagree on this subject however..

[sky25]

This is a good and reasonable idea, which has been suggested before in various forms, but not acted on by HTC yet.  

Here's why it is a reasonable idea.  With GVs you have the "furballers" and the "win-the-war" types, just as with AC.  GV "furball" mode involves maneuvering against and shooting at opposing GVs, analogously to AC furballing, and including a large "stealth" element as well.  The main difference from AC furballs is that GVs are an order of magnitude slower, so the furball takes a lot longer to play out.  AC being faster and more powerful short-circuit this process, especially if there is an airbase too near the GV battle.  Even if a relatively/completely AC-free GV area is supported by HTC, people will continue to use GVs to support the "win-the-war", base-capture behavior on the remainder of the map.  Thus AC will still have plenty of opportunities to attack GVs on the remainder of the map.  Thus the Forum posters who so strongly oppose this type of suggestion have nothing to worry about.  

(In a related comment, the center island in Ozkansas has been entirely Rook for a couple of weeks now, thus precluding its use as the game's premier GV area.  The island will likely remain out of service until HTC resets the map (if that ever occurs).  This was a good GV "furball" area, possibly as the air bases were relatively distant from the action, and possibly also for other reasons.  The 3 air bases on the Ozkansas center island should be set to uncapturable, and that would fix the problem).  

I think Sir, you have explained this better than anyone thus far. Agreed +1

[TDeacon]

Lusche,

I agree that Ozkansas V135-V136 is sometimes good for GV fights; I had some good fights there last night.  

However, the point of this thread is to request support for a dedicated area designed to reduce AC participation by design, and not by chance.  The dedicated area (whether a separate arena, or areas-by-design on existing maps) is not intended to remove any style of game play, but to support "furball-mode" GV action (to use my terminology).  Doing this is in the interests of HTC, who recognizes that it does have a significant interest in GVs in its player base (hence the new Panther).  

Despite the sophistries in your previous post, it is unfortunately a fact that, lately, about half the time I want to use GVs I can't find a fight which isn't dominated by AC.  So either I take up an AC, or don't play.  For some reason, I find GVs to be low-tension these days.  :-)

Also, please note my post (3 up), about the 2 play modes.  I'm sure you realize that all that not all GV players are clones.  

[Lusche]

That still doesn't answer the question.. Why is an area not used at all that is giving the "furball" tankers exactly what they want?

For about 1 1/2 years we had this area back, and it was always empty. One quarter of each tour it was up, and completely devoid of any action.

[Dadsguns]

That still doesn't answer the question.. Why is an area not used at all that is giving the "furball" tankers exactly what they want?

For about 1 1/2 years we had this area back, and it was always empty. One quarter of each tour it was up, and completely devoid of any action.

Because its the complaint or "flavor of the week",  If its not one thing its going to be another...... 

[phatzo]

Q. Why hasn't anyone taken TT back from the Rooks?

 

[TDeacon]

Lusche:

Why is an area not used at all that is giving the "furball" tankers exactly what they want?

 
Because this "area" you refer to does not always exist.  Why do you pretend it does; haven't you read the previous posts?  

Phatzo:  

Why hasn't anyone taken TT back from the Rooks?

It was tried successfully by Knights once, I recall, about 2.5 weeks ago.  However, Rooks captured it all back again after people left (late at night?).  Knights tried again about a week ago, but failed.  I guess after that the mass of people necessary to capture back Ozkansas TT island (and a considerable number are needed, especially if there is significant opposition) apparently felt they had better things to do.   I tried recently to capture back a TT vehicle base by myself, but that doesn't work well if there is even one defender, and someone noticed the blinking bases.  So, as I said, it looks like it will remain Rook for a long time.  

Dadsguns:  

Because its the complaint or "flavor of the week"

 
This is an inane comment, for obvious reasons.  If you can't make constructive comments, don't post.

[Lusche]

Lusche:  
Because this "area" you refer to does not always exist.  Why do you pretend it does; haven't you read the previous posts?

Sorry, but the reading comprehension fail is all on your side: 

Quite often. Until recently, it was up 1 week every month.

And completely empty, despite being mostly free from bombing planes (and being in the middle of MA, having scores)

That still doesn't answer the question.. Why is an area not used at all that is giving the "furball" tankers exactly what they want?

For about 1 1/2 years we had this area back, and it was always empty. One quarter of each tour it was up, and completely devoid of any action.

So where do I "pretend" (lol) it always exists?

My question still stands...

[fwdscout]

thanks all for the well informed comments .i've only been playing about a year .just recently have noticed more
(bombing of gv's)the more run corse of action for faster kill scores add up because of ease of kills.this is the only reason why my question first came up.as i stated earlyer i personaly am not that good in ac.i choose to run gv more often.with spawns so far from bases and planes ability to rearm and return is why some people are tierd of getting bombed constantly. good hunting and see you on the field!!!

[Shuffler]

Sorry, but the reading comprehension fail is all on your side: 

So where do I "pretend" (lol) it always exists?

My question still stands...

Please don't muddle the discussion with facts.

[Yenny]

I shall name that arena World of Tank xD 

[Shuffler]

I shall name that arena World of Tank xD  

 


XDm