Establishing bases

[TheRhino]

Here's something... what if online (and offline without the use of perk points) you could establish forward OPs, weapons development facilities, artillery and the like? We could drive to/land at a certain point, claim it as a base, and use perk points to buy objects/buildings to place there. This would also introduce the need for observation/reconnaissance/liason aircraft. These facilities could increase radar range, weapon and ammunition suplies, fuel supplies and possibly even to create experimental fighter aircraft? To me, it opens up a whole new world of opportunity, but I know heaps of people will disagree on the grounds of it being 'too hard' or 'too unrealistic'. Before making these claims about it being unrealistic, please realise THIS IS WHAT PEOPLE DID NOT ONLY IN WW2, BUT ALSO CURRENTLY. ALWAYS HAVE AND ALWAYS WILL. I EVEN THOUGHT IT IMPORTANT ENOUGH TO GET MY CAPS-LOCK OUT. I do understand this would take quite a while to incorporate into Aces High, but I think it would be every bit worth the wait.

 

 

[TheRhino]

Here's something... what if online (and offline without the use of perk points) you could establish forward OPs, weapons development facilities, artillery and the like that DO NOT appear on the map? We could drive to/land at a certain point, claim it as a base, and use perk points to buy objects/buildings to place there. This would also introduce the need for observation/reconnaissance/liason aircraft. These facilities could increase radar range, weapon and ammunition suplies, fuel supplies and possibly even to create experimental fighter aircraft? To me, it opens up a whole new world of opportunity, but I know heaps of people will disagree on the grounds of it being 'too hard' or 'too unrealistic'. Before making these claims about it being unrealistic, please realise THIS IS WHAT PEOPLE DID NOT ONLY IN WW2, BUT ALSO CURRENTLY. ALWAYS HAVE AND ALWAYS WILL. I EVEN THOUGHT IT IMPORTANT ENOUGH TO GET MY CAPS-LOCK OUT. I do understand this would take quite a while to incorporate into Aces High, but I think it would be every bit worth the wait.

 

 

:edit

[guncrasher]

can you post an example of experimental fighter aircraft that was sent to forward out posts?  one thing is to suggest bringing a bunch of c47's and open a vh base somewhere, but experimental aircraft was not sent to the front much less to lightly guarded out posts. as if it was to crash or be captured it would be a nice giveaway of top secret info to the enemy.

and the observation/recon aircraft has been discussed to death.

semp

[MAINER]

+1 for the bases -1 for the experimental aircraft total=0

[Tank-Ace]

-1. would be abused to no end.

[321BAR]

-1. would be abused to no end.

limit the amount of foward bases allowed per side and it wont be. also allow a command structure per base to allow it to be disassembled and moved elsewhere on the map

[guncrasher]

it would be a good change to have these c-47 made gv bases with perhaps 1 hangar to spawn gv's and attack a nearby base.  and when the vh get's destroyed then you gotta start all over.  but I hardly think people will bring several c47's to within range of an enemy base when they can just bring bombers and blow it all to hell.


semp

[Tank-Ace]

Well I think the issue is that HTC wants everything to be available to everyone. Even the CV controll thing can be circumvented unless the guy controlling the CV is the guy with the best rank in the arena.

I think thats probably also the reason that HTC doesn't limit the number of planes per base, or types of plane per base; everything should be available at an equal opportunity to everyone.



And semp, what I see is more of one NOE C-47 (relativly hard to spot, and you can't tell if hes already placed his GV base without hours of searching) going to a behind the lines base, or to the strats or something, and then suddenly you have a horde of GV's swarming over the strats, or strategic base.

[guncrasher]

problem is it shouldnt take only one goon to open up a base.  about 4 or 5 should be more like it.


semp

[Tank-Ace]

I think HTC doesn't like things that require multiple people to use. Infact its one of the main arguments against LST's, gliders, and the like.


Personally, I think starting up a base thats fully capable of independent action should require 10 at the very least, if that base is just a single hanger and no AA guns. Other than that, I would agree.

[alpini13]

   to stop abuse of this option,just make it a moveable base like a CV for land,and when its parent base is captured and the land based moveable base(cv like) is destroyed...well then the opposing force gets the movable base....just limit what is available at the cv like moveable base.

[FBCrabby]

Well... I can see it now.

NOE mission all the way into enemy territory an set up a field right next to their HQ... Yeah... -1

[TheRhino]

You do realise this would add so much more required strategy into the game? Fair enough for not agreeing over the X-planes bit, even I didn't think that was the best idea ever. But all the towns, air bases, cities, etc. are all consistent in their layout. These fields would be the one thing that isn't, and would supply strategic value if you use them correctly. They could also be used to spawn supply routes, so these 'invisible fields' would essentially kill three birds with one stone. It would require more supply routes for those who enjoy destroying trains, barges and convoys, it would give those who enjoy reconnaissance missions a go at actually trying to find something, and those who want extra fuel and ammo will have it at their fingertips.

[Tank-Ace]

So? It would still be abused. It would need a high perk cost, like if you take a KT's worth of perks out of all categories (you're able to create an autonomous, self contained base wherever you like) and at least 10 C-47's to setup.

If there weren't those restrictions, there would be no end to their abuse.

[TheRhino]

So? It would still be abused. It would need a high perk cost, like if you take a KT's worth of perks out of all categories (you're able to create an autonomous, self contained base wherever you like) and at least 10 C-47's to setup.

If there weren't those restrictions, there would be no end to their abuse.

Simple fix. Make the restrictions. I doubt it would make any difference, seeing that you have to get to the place you want to set up first, and you could run into all sorts of trouble on the way anyway.