Game Play question.

[Shuffler]

Me too shuff, but there is much complaining about hordes from those who do little about against hordes!  Just trying to help 



JUGgler

 

[Kingpin]

Well cause if it is not defended then the counter attackers will have an easy recapture, I don't think the original attackers will like that very much, hence creating some "OFFENSE, attack" and "DEFENSE, defend" for both sides in the fight for the same base!

Actually, this idea of keeping a recently captured base "in play" longer sounds like a potentially strong improvement to game play.

The simplest way to do this, in my opinion, is not have the ack reset as soon as a base is captured.  I've always thought this is a ridiculously gamey aspect of AH, where all the ack instantly comes up and starts shooting at the defenders.  Maybe even have all ack destroyed upon capture for 5 or 10 minutes.  Or at least leave whatever ack is destroyed down for at least 10 minutes.  The attackers will then have to "clear the base" themselves instead of relying on the ack instantly popping and doing it for them.

Also, by keeping the ack down, the side that lost the base now has a better opportunity to recapture.  This should create more interesting fights in the process.  As it is now, most of the attackers quickly land (especially if they have gotten some vulch kills in).  Meanwhile the the defender's reinforcements arrive from the adjacent base, only to find little or no fight over the newly captured field.  By leaving the ack down, the attackers would actually have to think about defending their new base from an easy recapture.

This also makes the tactic of completely flattening a field, dropping all hangers and ack, more risky for the attackers.  They may need those hangers to defend the base right away, since the defenders may have a recapturing goon standing by.  If the hangers are all down, the attackers would have to stay up or rearm to defend, or risk the newly taken base being recaptured.  (Anyone else picturing 10 vGuys on a rearm pad with no CAP up...?  )

The bottom line is this may lead to more fighting for a base and creative game play with regard to field capturing/defense -- a positive change from the "horde smash and quick land" (with as little "fighting" as possible) that happens over and over ad nauseum now.

My vote: Keep ack down to keep captured bases in play.

<S>

[wil3ur]

Or how about making a base unviable for 45 minutes after capture unless resupplied?

[Kingpin]

Or how about making a base unviable for 45 minutes after capture unless resupplied?

Not sure exactly what you mean by "unviable", but that sounds like more of a "limiting" approach.  My thinking WRT keeping ack down is it makes the attackers make strategic choices about how they take (and have to think about defending) the base.

Keeping the fight on longer is the key to the process being more fun IMO.

[wil3ur]

Meaning Troops, Ord, Fuel, Dar and Ack would all be down as if the base was just dropped, requiring a resupply... or waiting 45 minutes for the base timer to come up.  Why would a defender leave a completely viable base if they're evacuating it and giving it over to the enemy?  They'd take what they could, and blow up the rest, lest it fall into enemy hands.

[grizz441]

Actually, this idea of keeping a recently captured base "in play" longer sounds like a potentially strong improvement to game play.

The simplest way to do this, in my opinion, is not have the ack reset as soon as a base is captured.  I've always thought this is a ridiculously gamey aspect of AH, where all the ack instantly comes up and starts shooting at the defenders.  Maybe even have all ack destroyed upon capture for 5 or 10 minutes.  Or at least leave whatever ack is destroyed down for at least 10 minutes.  The attackers will then have to "clear the base" themselves instead of relying on the ack instantly popping and doing it for them.

Also, by keeping the ack down, the side that lost the base now has a better opportunity to recapture.  This should create more interesting fights in the process.  As it is now, most of the attackers quickly land (especially if they have gotten some vulch kills in).  Meanwhile the the defender's reinforcements arrive from the adjacent base, only to find little or no fight over the newly captured field.  By leaving the ack down, the attackers would actually have to think about defending their new base from an easy recapture.

This also makes the tactic of completely flattening a field, dropping all hangers and ack, more risky for the attackers.  They may need those hangers to defend the base right away, since the defenders may have a recapturing goon standing by.  If the hangers are all down, the attackers would have to stay up or rearm to defend, or risk the newly taken base being recaptured.  (Anyone else picturing 10 vGuys on a rearm pad with no CAP up...?  )

The bottom line is this may lead to more fighting for a base and creative game play with regard to field capturing/defense -- a positive change from the "horde smash and quick land" (with as little "fighting" as possible) that happens over and over ad nauseum now.

My vote: Keep ack down to keep captured bases in play.

<S>

I agree, keeping ack down would be a good improvement.  It would make base capturing a little more difficult, so if HTC thinks they have the balance right, they might have to reduce town % by 5-10% to offset this improvement.

[Kingpin]

Meaning Troops, Ord, Fuel, Dar and Ack would all be down as if the base was just dropped, requiring a resupply... or waiting 45 minutes for the base timer to come up.  Why would a defender leave a completely viable base if they're evacuating it and giving it over to the enemy?  They'd take what they could, and blow up the rest, lest it fall into enemy hands.

This is not a bad idea either, as it does require more defense of the new base.  I certainly think the "insta changeover" of all the assets at a base is rather gamey.  However, keeping a base flat until it's resupplied does not give the attacker an incentive not to completely flatten and deack a base (since everything will be closed anyway).

My thinking with the idea of simply keeping all ack down at a newly captured field is:

1) it may be a simpler change/fix
2) some advance thought must be given to defense, instead of the "quick-land and move to next target" approach
3) base (and town) defense would need to be done by players, not "insta-popping" ack

Again, whatever keeps the fight going at the base and does away with "smash and hide" game play is a good thing, IMO.  Attackers should need to think about defense to hold their gains.

As it is now, the attackers hardly have to think about holding their gains, since the ack defends the base in the short term while the hangers usually pop before a counter attack can arrive in any force.

[grizz441]

This is not a bad idea either, as it does require more defense of the new base.  I certainly think the gamey "insta changeover" of all the assets at a base is rather gamey.  However, keeping a base flat until it's resupplied does not give the attacker an incentive not to completely flatten and deack a base (since everything will be closed anyway).

My thinking with the idea of simply keeping all ack down at a newly captured field is:

1) it may be a simpler change/fix
2) it makes defending the base (and town) something that needs to be done by players, not the "insta-popping" ack
3) the attackers may need to defend, instead of "quick-land and move to next target" as they do now

Again, whatever keeps the fight going at the base and does away with "smash and hide" game play is a good thing, IMO.  Attackers should need to think about defense to hold their gains.

As it is now, the attackers hardly have to think about holding their gains, since the ack defends the base in the short term while the hangers usually pop before a counter attack can arrive in any force.

Bingo.

[Kingpin]

Bingo.

Update:  It's been brought to my attention that it used to work that way (ack would stay down) and it turned into more of a goon rush game.

Assuming ack can be set to pop in 10 min after base take, isn't keeping a CAP over a new town for 10 minutes easy enough to prevent a goon rush re-take?  I would think goons would have to be escorted in, hence continuing the fight over the new base (the whole point) .

Personally, I'd rather have a goon rush fight over a town than the "horde and hide" system in play now.

[JUGgler]

This is not a bad idea either, as it does require more defense of the new base.  I certainly think the "insta changeover" of all the assets at a base is rather gamey.  However, keeping a base flat until it's resupplied does not give the attacker an incentive not to completely flatten and deack a base (since everything will be closed anyway).

My thinking with the idea of simply keeping all ack down at a newly captured field is:

1) it may be a simpler change/fix
2) some advance thought must be given to defense, instead of the "quick-land and move to next target" approach
3) base (and town) defense would need to be done by players, not "insta-popping" ack

Again, whatever keeps the fight going at the base and does away with "smash and hide" game play is a good thing, IMO.  Attackers should need to think about defense to hold their gains.

As it is now, the attackers hardly have to think about holding their gains, since the ack defends the base in the short term while the hangers usually pop before a counter attack can arrive in any force.

I like its simplicity. I agree as long as the ack for both the base and the town stayed down until the base was fully resupplied and functional!


nice and simple!

 



JUGgler

[The Fugitive]

Update:  It's been brought to my attention that it used to work that way (ack would stay down) and it turned into more of a goon rush game.

Assuming ack can be set to pop in 10 min after base take, isn't keeping a CAP over a new town for 10 minutes easy enough to prevent a goon rush re-take?  I would think goons would have to be escorted in, hence continuing the fight over the new base (the whole point) .

Personally, I'd rather have a goon rush fight over a town than the "horde and hide" system in play now.

I don't remember it being that way. They did have goon races to get them back tho. Acks were much fewer in the old days and it only took a pass or two to clear the ack for the goon drop. Also back then it was more important to try and recapture the base because there were much less numbers of bases and the total needed to win the war was easier to get to.

Leaving the ack down after a capture would most likely lead to goons rolling, or M3s as soon as an attack is spotted. They would run out and try to hide and be ready "just in case". Of course if they did, that would be and added on think to the list during a capture. "After we capture the base you, you, and you hunt goons/M3s"

[PFactorDave]

I think anything that forces the horde to stay airborn in one area for another 10-15 minutes would be a good thing.  It's enough time to get airborn from a nearby field and punish the horde some.  It might force them to actually fight against airborn opponents occaisionally.

Maybe a few of them will realize that they aren't getting any better at flying by running in the crowd all of the time.  They might realize that the horde masters aren't doing them any favors in the long run...

[grizz441]

Update:  It's been brought to my attention that it used to work that way (ack would stay down) and it turned into more of a goon rush game.

Assuming ack can be set to pop in 10 min after base take, isn't keeping a CAP over a new town for 10 minutes easy enough to prevent a goon rush re-take?  I would think goons would have to be escorted in, hence continuing the fight over the new base (the whole point) .

Personally, I'd rather have a goon rush fight over a town than the "horde and hide" system in play now.

[runonsentence]
A coordinated goon rush retake would not work if the side that just captured the base stuck around and defended for ten minutes instead of landing and going to the other side of the map immediately after the capture, leaving the defenders that actually put in effort to defend and take off from the adjacent base with absolutely nothing to shoot at, except for the ack that just magically popped up once the base was captured.
[/runonsentence]