Field Fuel Strats...

[Swatch]

I remember a time when strategic targets (specifically fuel) were juicy enough targets that they were considered valid targets for missions and individuals who wished to push back an advancing force or make an advance of their own.  I also remember them probably being TOO juicy at that time, allowing single fighters to go through and clean an entire row of bases rather quickly.  But I also remember how a smaller force was able to turn the tide of a sweeping army or redirect them to other battles by performing such strategic operations.

I propose that destroying ALL fuel depots at a base limits max fuel from that base to 50%.

Argument #1:  We already reduce it to 75%, what's the big deal about 50%?
Rebuttal:  At 75%, most planes are capable of launching from a field, flying a sector, fighting a bit, and returning home, albeit with less loiter time.  Reducing 50% greatly limits the aircraft that are capable of such flights, but the defensive capability of the aircraft is virtually unaffected.  Almost all aircraft can launch and defend themselves from a field under fire with only 50% fuel, in fact many choose to fly 50% anyway in such a situation because of the lighter weight and increased maneuverability.

Argument #2:  Lone fighters/bombers will just go around stratting and ruining the game for everybody else!
Rebuttal:   Stratting fuel takes takes two passes at least, and often three in a bomber or fighter.  That takes time and allows a defending force time to up from the field under fire OR take off from a nearby field to short circuit the attack before affecting further fields.

Argument #3:  Mobs will just sweep through fields and kill strats.
Rebuttal:   First off, mob mentality rarely results in strategy.  Secondly, a mob implies teamwork and requires teamwork to oppose.  This seems like it would not be a negative to gameplay.  And if you say that "some people don't want teamwork", go to the Dual Arena... it is for that exact mindset.  Finally, a mob attracts defenders, which increases activity within an area, which provides action to pilots, which keeps people coming back for more.

Argument #4:  Nobody attacks strats, who cares?
Rebuttal:   Precisely my point... let's put the strateg(y) back in strategic!

[olds442]

I remember a time when strategic targets (specifically fuel) were juicy enough targets that they were considered valid targets for missions and individuals who wished to push back an advancing force or make an advance of their own.  I also remember them probably being TOO juicy at that time, allowing single fighters to go through and clean an entire row of bases rather quickly.  But I also remember how a smaller force was able to turn the tide of a sweeping army or redirect them to other battles by performing such strategic operations.

I propose that destroying ALL fuel depots at a base limits max fuel from that base to 50%.

Argument #1:  We already reduce it to 75%, what's the big deal about 50%?
Rebuttal:  At 75%, most planes are capable of launching from a field, flying a sector, fighting a bit, and returning home, albeit with less loiter time.  Reducing 50% greatly limits the aircraft that are capable of such flights, but the defensive capability of the aircraft is virtually unaffected.  Almost all aircraft can launch and defend themselves from a field under fire with only 50% fuel, in fact many choose to fly 50% anyway in such a situation because of the lighter weight and increased maneuverability.

Argument #2:  Lone fighters/bombers will just go around stratting and ruining the game for everybody else!
Rebuttal:   Stratting fuel takes takes two passes at least, and often three in a bomber or fighter.  That takes time and allows a defending force time to up from the field under fire OR take off from a nearby field to short circuit the attack before affecting further fields.

Argument #3:  Mobs will just sweep through fields and kill strats.
Rebuttal:   First off, mob mentality rarely results in strategy.  Secondly, a mob implies teamwork and requires teamwork to oppose.  This seems like it would not be a negative to gameplay.  And if you say that "some people don't want teamwork", go to the Dual Arena... it is for that exact mindset.  Finally, a mob attracts defenders, which increases activity within an area, which provides action to pilots, which keeps people coming back for more.

Argument #4:  Nobody attacks strats, who cares?
Rebuttal:   Precisely my point... let's put the strateg(y) back in strategic!

HUGE!!!!! +1

[gyrene81]

i see a "bring back the toolshedders" wish...

kinda on the fence for this one... 

[SmokinLoon]

I agree.  Make it worth while to bomb the strategic targets AND to defend them.  Giving people reasons to up those 109's (for the fast climb!) instead of the fluffer planes always gets a    from me.
  

[Swatch]

i see a "bring back the toolshedders" wish...

kinda on the fence for this one... 

I'd like to point out that the only way this has any real effect on current gameplay is if somebody completely takes down the fuel strats at a target.  As it stands, hardly anyone hits the fuel strats at all, at which point I'm left wondering why we even have them...

I'm just looking for a more balanced use of all the cool features that HiTech has included in the game, while increasing the intelligence and teamwork that goes into Main Arena battles.

[gyrene81]

while increasing the intelligence

  that's a long haul, hasn't happened since online multiplayer gaming started...

but i understand your motivation...as it is we have dweebs whose sole purpose is to run around killing dar and ammo...fuel just gives them one more thing to toolshed...didn't killing the fuel on a base bring it down to only 25% max loadout at one time?

[Swatch]

  that's a long haul, hasn't happened since online multiplayer gaming started...

but i understand your motivation...as it is we have dweebs whose sole purpose is to run around killing dar and ammo...fuel just gives them one more thing to toolshed...didn't killing the fuel on a base bring it down to only 25% max loadout at one time?

That's correct, and I agree... that's too far.

My question is why do you call those people dweebs?

[gyrene81]

My question is why do you call those people dweebs?

because they have no intention of taking the base...just porking stuff...

[Swatch]

Fair 'nuff.

But it does allow others to come in behind and take bases while preventing an offensive along that front.    Just saying...

[The Fugitive]

I'd like to point out that the only way this has any real effect on current gameplay is if somebody completely takes down the fuel strats at a target.  As it stands, hardly anyone hits the fuel strats at all, at which point I'm left wondering why we even have them...

I'm just looking for a more balanced use of all the cool features that HiTech has included in the game, while increasing the intelligence and teamwork that goes into Main Arena battles.

But it would effect game play, or why do it?

Fuel use to be porkable to 25% and that was the max you could take off with. Back then I think the fuel multiplier was 1 and even then there was a big out cry. Now with a 2 for multiplier your basically putting it back to the way it didn't work before. In your first post you mentioned "At 75%, most planes are capable of launching from a field, flying a sector, fighting a bit, and returning home, albeit with less loiter time." When defending a base from attack that is pretty much what you have to do. Launch from the attacked base equals "vulch" launch from an adjacent base (map rules state you must have the bases spaced a sector apart) and at 50% and a 2 fuel burn multiplier your giving away proxies as you crash at the battle out of fuel.

Strats are a balancing act that HTC has to walk. make them to devastating to the enemy and you take away his ability to play...which is the reason he has a subscription, to play. Make them too weak and nobody bothers hitting them because what the point.

 

[AWwrgwy]

So the wish is:

I want someone to be able to kill the fuel strats so I can no longer fly from a base?

Just kill the hangers.


wrongway

[BigKev03]

I would like to see it again.  It would make good targets for the B-29 and it would put defense of strats back in the mix.

BigKev

[Swatch]

So the wish is:

I want someone to be able to kill the fuel strats so I can no longer fly from a base?

Just kill the hangers.


wrongway

Not true... I was thinking of two cases, neither of which prevented somebody from flying from a base.

The first is the case that a battle is trying to capture an adjacent base.  The attacking force could hit the surrounding fields fuel, helping to limit reinforcements and helping to take that field.  But at the same time, it will slow down the attacking force if they take one of those fields.

The second is when a large force is attacking a smaller force.  The smaller force can hit the surrounding fields' fuel, reducing the larger force's ability to attack.

Now, neither of those two things could be done without a coordinated attack because of the # of fuels and their arrangement on the base, so a single player is unable to swing the game one way or the other.   Also, I know that when I was thinking about, it was 25% AND a 2x fuel multiplier.

The wish is, I want attacking the fuel depots to be as viable a strategic option as attacking the ord bunkers or troop barracks.  My observation is that I feel this isn't the case right now and that the fuel depots are fairly insignificant.