Object "Respawn"

[Pand]

From a 'simulation' perspective, I would like to see this area of the game improved---

For example:  We destroy a vehicle hangar... and the bits and bytes are hard at work repairing it in 15 minutes exactly.  The hangar goes from a "totally down" to "totally up" status immediately-- slightly unrealistic when comparing to the rest of the game.  Would it be possible to be able to re-destroy/damage an already downed hangar?   It is a little hokey that we have to sit floating above the field, 'waiting' for the hangar to go from 0% to 100% in a split second, before we can drop and disable vehicles again.   We then have to clean up the 10 vehicles that poured out of the hangar for the 5 seconds it was available.

Yes, I am aware this is a game.  Yes I am aware this game is not 100% realistic.  Yes I am aware people will post responses with no actual content relative to this topic. 

I think the end goal is to make this simulation as realistic as possible, and this is an area that I feel could use some improvement.  Thanks HTC!

[Mar]

Are you also aware that you would be zeroing the fun factor for a lot of people by making it impossible for them to come up and fight you?

The balance between realism and fun is a fine line indeed, which is why I prefer that it not be messed with. HTC has done an amazing job tuning it the way it is.

$0.02

[Chilli]

I think it would improve the immersion if something was done graphically to represent rebuilding.  Already we know that a hangar that stops smoking signals the last interval of time 5 mins?? before it pops.  Maybe a number of fire trucks spawn over time.

The problem, with your idea is that if items don't completely repair, the attackers have no idea of what is a "live" target.  For instance, the old town buildings were more completely destroyed and were more obvious than the current more realistic looking damaged buildings.

[Rob52240]

-1  Let's give people a chance to get back up and fight between base closures.  A continuously closed base would be absolutely no fun to be near.

[Pand]

Are you also aware that you would be zeroing the fun factor for a lot of people by making it impossible for them to come up and fight you?

The balance between realism and fun is a fine line indeed, which is why I prefer that it not be messed with. HTC has done an amazing job tuning it the way it is.

$0.02

The smart play would be to up from a nearby friendly base, and defend appropriately.  Just so I can put this into perspective, what is your callsign in game?

[Pand]

-1  Let's give people a chance to get back up and fight between base closures.  A continuously closed base would be absolutely no fun to be near.

There wouldn't be a continuously closed base, it would be captured.

[caldera]

 

I think the end goal is to make this simulation as realistic as possible, and this is an area that I feel could use some improvement.

-1

If you want to make it realistic, it wouldn't be rebuilt at all.  How are repair crews supposed to work while the vulchers are circling?
Maybe you could try taking a base without flattening everything in sight.  If you want to be "realistic" about things, a flattened base would take days or weeks to get up to speed.  You wouldn't have the ack immediately pop back up as well as hangars fully stocked with planes, fuel and ammo.

The way the hangars work now gives you 15 minutes (after steamrolling), to capture the base.  If the hangars are down and you still can't get it in that time frame, then you need a new plan.

 

[guncrasher]

The smart play would be to up from a nearby friendly base, and defend appropriately.  Just so I can put this into perspective, what is your callsign in game?

sometimes you dont have time to come from another base battle would be over by then.


semp

[FBCrabby]

so - when the hanger stops smoking isn't good enough for you? when the hanger stops smoking that's pretty good warning...

[flatiron1]

So Pand is your goal to capture the base?

[EVZ]

I think the end goal is to make this simulation as realistic as possible, and this is an area that I feel could use some improvement.  Thanks HTC!

I agree, BUT, I do think realism has to be compatible with playability. It's not very realistic to have the base available for offensive operations right after it was destroyed and captured either ... But it keeps the game's momentum up and avoids dead time. Likewise, if there is no Window for defenders to get BACK into the fight and no possibility of saving the base, momentum and continuity will be lost ... Base taking is to mechanical as is IMHO.
 

[Soulyss]

I think the end goal is to make this simulation as realistic as possible, and this is an area that I feel could use some improvement.  Thanks HTC!

I think this is an incorrect statement, I would venture a guess that the end goal is to make GAME that is enjoyable for as many of the potential subscribers as possible.



As for the actual wish I don't think realism has anything to do with it, it's also highly "unrealistic" to be able to shut down the ground defense at a field by destroying one building.  My apologies if the following is inaccurate but what this wish really reads as is a wish to make it easier to capture fields rather than a wish for more "realism".

[Pand]

So Pand is your goal to capture the base?

1.  During a base capture, a coordinated attack on a field is completely spoiled because a friendly, NOT part of the group, destroys a hangar 5 minutes before the main raid shows up.   Any yay-hoo greenie that overhears an attack can jump in and mess things up (could apply to a hangar, town, or even an ack gun).

so - when the hanger stops smoking isn't good enough for you? when the hanger stops smoking that's pretty good warning...

2.  Most people on this thread think I am speaking directly about hangars.  I'm also irritated around ack guns 'popping' with no warning.  A base is flat, but the ack guns were destroyed out of sync and now 2 or more aircraft are shot down by a non-human combatant.  While the 'smoking hangar' and 'non-smoking hangar' is a rough estimate on that side, what do we have for ack--- nothing.

I think it would improve the immersion if something was done graphically to represent rebuilding.  Already we know that a hangar that stops smoking signals the last interval of time 5 mins?? before it pops.  Maybe a number of fire trucks spawn over time.

The problem, with your idea is that if items don't completely repair, the attackers have no idea of what is a "live" target.  For instance, the old town buildings were more completely destroyed and were more obvious than the current more realistic looking damaged buildings.

The only person on this entire thread so far that provided a positive response is chilli.  He took the time to actually 'discuss' the topic and describe something that may improve the game relative to the original idea, instead of just trolling.

Jerry Springer's Final Thought:
It is wonderful to know that the game is perfect as is, and the hangar representation of smoke/no-smoke does not require any improvement.  It has been this way as long as I can remember, and apparently should stay this way indefinitely.  My post was merely a suggestion, but many have taken this as a direct attack on their mother.

Hope everyone had a great holiday and I look forward to some good fights in 2012! <S>

[bustr]

When you are smart enough to know the answer's to your own questions while knowing what the audience's responces will be. And ending your opening monologue and ending signoff with the same contempt for your audience's intellegence. That makes you a troll baiter.

Any other possibility would insult both of our intellegence since you have an obvious command of syntactical construction coupled with a polished indifference to all but your own desires.

Don't toss coins into a wishing well if your intent was a bribe. You will never be happy with the results. And the well is famous for it's silence.

[Rob52240]

I'd like more variety of airfields, and more hangers.