Wish for the week - Old strat system

[BuckP]

I also see more benefits that just to milk runners.  Fighters would up to kill the score hor, which in turn might start a larger fight.  Maybe each strat should have more defense and/or each one have a VH attached (or a friendly VH spawn into each strat).  Spreading it out can work on many levels...and yes the milkers surely will get to score, but that's ok too.  Part of their fun is to make those runs, and we have all done it at some point whether anyone will admit it or not. 

Greebo is right about there being zero incentive to bomb/attack the mega strats now as it is.  Unless you catch it early and know how to fly at high altitudes with the right planes then it isn't even really worth defending.  A few squaddies and I love to catch the high alt bombers making those runs now, but it's fairly rare to see more than a couple per night.  Conversely, it is rare that we make a high alt bombing run to the other countries strats because of several things including the time involved for the run and it will have no impact on the country.  So fingers crossed for a change soon!     

[macdp51]

+1
 
HP

[Karnak]

Here was my proposal for a change to make strategic targets more valuable:

Proposal for the implementation of meaningful strategic bombing in Aces High

As far as the commonly suggested plane factories, the problem with that is the fact that it works directly against ENY if there is a factory for the P-51D, Spitfire Mk XVI and La-7 because the side with larger numbers will have an easier time denying those airplanes to the side with lower numbers.

The possible alternative I have mentioned is to have the factories be not for the top end rides, but rather for the useful rides that are used once ENY denies access to the top end rides.  That way you might be able to deny the side with numbers their F6F-5s and Mosquito Mk VIs.  Being denied those aircraft wouldn't hurt the side with low numbers very much because they would still have their P-51Ds and P-38Ls, but for the side with high numbers failure to defend those factories could push them into even poorer aircraft.  It would also be more of a challenge for the outnumbered side to pull off a successful raid on the factories than it would be for the larger side.

[Skyguns MKII]

Old is good, but i don't think we need the old, i think we need it revised.

[Lusche]

Here was my proposal for a change to make strategic targets more valuable:

Proposal for the implementation of meaningful strategic bombing in Aces High

As far as the commonly suggested plane factories, the problem with that is the fact that it works directly against ENY if there is a factory for the P-51D, Spitfire Mk XVI and La-7 because the side with larger numbers will have an easier time denying those airplanes to the side with lower numbers.

The possible alternative I have mentioned is to have the factories be not for the top end rides, but rather for the useful rides that are used once ENY denies access to the top end rides.  That way you might be able to deny the side with numbers their F6F-5s and Mosquito Mk VIs.  Being denied those aircraft wouldn't hurt the side with low numbers very much because they would still have their P-51Ds and P-38Ls, but for the side with high numbers failure to defend those factories could push them into even poorer aircraft.  It would also be more of a challenge for the outnumbered side to pull off a successful raid on the factories than it would be for the larger side.

Interesting idea, but a side fighting desperately their fields against a superior number of enemies will have a hard time to muster enough pilots and get to the strats which are at that point usually very far away (Even with relatively high ENY limits there are still many very capable interceptors available) . This may be a interesting challenge, but for this very reasons it would probably rarely happen at all. Taking away 30 pilots from a total force of 80 for 2h might mean many additional bases lost if you are already getting pounded.

I would like to see a reason for the dominating side to divert a part of their force to attack the strats instead of just smash&grab base after base.  Either by a simple additional requirement to win the war "40% of enemy bases + city down to X%". Or by a point system like I once proposed (captured bases as well as destroyed strats are worth a certain amount of points, reach X points in any way and you win). Or another mechanism, as long as the side with the initiative  has a major motivation to fly large strategical missions, while not crippling the outnumbered side's ability to defend.

[Karnak]

A refinement of my previously stated idea.  Make the factories produce "ENY" and damaging or destroying them would raise the ENY limit for that side.  The production modifier would be cumulative with the balancing modifier.  For example, a side that is heavily outnumbered might have all of its ENY factories destroyed giving it a +15 ENY modifier, but getting -20 ENY due to being outnumbered and thus not being affected while at the same time the largest side is sitting at 20 ENY due to a +15 ENY balance modifier.  A successful raid then damages the larger side's ENY factories giving them an additional +6 ENY and they are now limited to ENY 26 and higher units.


I will say that I don't actually like this idea as it would limit plane choices and I don't like that as a rule.  It would be entirely possible in this system for three sides to be pretty much even and all have damaged ENY factories thus blocking P-51D fans from being able to fly the P-51D no matter which side they were on.

[Lusche]

Still, the numerical superior side, which has enough numbers to being able to "afford" to divert a sizeable portion of their players to a strat raid would much less interest to do so, while the underdogs can't pull it off due to the horrid tactical situation without hurting their own defense.
(Just like real life... thing of the desperate & puny tries of the Luftwaffe to mount offensive bombing missions as late as 1944 instead of fully concentrating  on the defense)

It would be entirely possible in this system for three sides to be pretty much even and all have damaged ENY factories thus blocking P-51D fans from being able to fly the P-51D no matter which side they were on.

That's the problem with ENY: It's floating quickly. It may take 1 hour, often even more if you take everything into account, until a big raid will finally bomb the strats. Meanwhile the overall numbers can be very much different and the effect is either zero, or may have a contrary effect on balancing. And any effect resulting from bombing the strats should last for a long time no matter what, and not just the ~45 minutes it has now, or again player will find it worthless to attack targets that are back up before they have even returned to base.

[Karnak]

Lusche,

Did you read the thread I linked to about my earlier idea for a strategic system?  I definitely agree that the effect of bombing strats needs to last longer.  I would say that it should not be possible to resupply the strats using cargo carriers.  Rather stats should be automatically supplied from other resources on the map by trains.  For example, towns for the barracks strat, oil fields for the fuel strats, mines for the hangars and ordnance strats.

[Lusche]

Lusche,

Did you read the thread I linked to about my earlier idea for a strategic system?

Yes, I have now. I think that's going in the right direction... but in my opinion the way it is proposed there it might be unbalancing, as the side having lost a big portion of their territory can hardly reach the enemy strats and now would have huge problems ever getting some bases back. Not entirely unrealistic, and could maybe speed up map changes... but perhaps quite frustrating for players as there is less hope for a comeback? 

There more I think about it I come to think that a strat system indeed should attract the attention of the superior side and a impact on war & scores, but no crippling effect on a side's ability to fight (after all that's also why the max fuel porkage level was changed long time ago)

[Karnak]

Scores are easy.  The hard part is finding a way to meaningfully impact the war while not crippling the low numbers or losing side.

[WWhiskey]

Interesting idea, but a side fighting desperately their fields against a superior number of enemies will have a hard time to muster enough pilots and get to the strats which are at that point usually very far away (Even with relatively high ENY limits there are still many very capable interceptors available) . This may be a interesting challenge, but for this very reasons it would probably rarely happen at all. Taking away 30 pilots from a total force of 80 for 2h might mean many additional bases lost if you are already getting pounded.

I would like to see a reason for the dominating side to divert a part of their force to attack the strats instead of just smash&grab base after base.  Either by a simple additional requirement to win the war "40% of enemy bases + city down to X%". Or by a point system like I once proposed (captured bases as well as destroyed strats are worth a certain amount of points, reach X points in any way and you win). Or another mechanism, as long as the side with the initiative  has a major motivation to fly large strategical missions, while not crippling the outnumbered side's ability to defend.

 current perks are 25 across the board for a map win,,, increase that score with a percentage of factories/city destroyed at the time of map win,, if all factories and cities are down to 0, then pay 50 perks maybe?   it would give the bombers better motivation to go hit strats, taking away from the base rolling machine  for a period of time is an up side  and I see no downside other than losing some defenders to kill strat bombers!

[EagleDNY]

I don't know what the solution is - the call for a real strat system has been going out for years now.  We have strategic bombers, but nothing strategic to do with them - so we spend our time flattening bases with them.

Give us something better to bomb!  Give us a reason to get 30 people together in huge buff missions that will give you some incredible aerial footage for your next commercial.

[thndregg]

I don't know what the solution is - the call for a real strat system has been going out for years now.  We have strategic bombers, but nothing strategic to do with them - so we spend our time flattening bases with them.

Give us something better to bomb!  Give us a reason to get 30 people together in huge buff missions that will give you some incredible aerial footage for your next commercial.

[BuckP]

There isn't any one answer to all of our wants with the strats, I am sure that Hitech has gone over and over this through the years as well.  However, it can definitely be changed from its current state to allow us more use of them as well as our planes/gv's. 

My point in starting this thread was to bring the subject back into light because the game suffers with this current strat situation.  I am not bashing anything here, we have tried this strat setup and it doesn't work, so lets move on to the next ideas.  With the 410 coming into the game I thought this would be a great time to spark up the ideas with the intention of an eventual change soon.

Good ideas bouncing around, lets keep the topic going so a change is made.

[Lusche]

I'm toying around with a simple point system again right now...

What about if AH would make the state of the strats as the major component of the war winning requirements (similar to what Chris3 had proposed a few times)? Capturing individual bases would then truly be a tactical objective as means to get better access to the enemy strats.

This could also result in more concentrated battles / frontlines, as there would be a natural inclination of exploiting already established footholds and continuing thrusts into enemy territoy instead of grabbing just more bases here and there to increase base count?
(This is what the old field capture order failed at because it was too ridid). Long range high altitude bombing missions would have much more of a point without degrading tactical combat and real strategy would play a much larger part.

Maybe I will put up a new proposal/discussion thread later...