Game Play question.

[The Fugitive]

Not sure this would do anything cause I think it is the "MASS" of the horde that creates its own gravity that draws more like minded peeps to it. I think the draw to the many revolves around a general sense of being part of something that you yourself don't have to create, the common feeling of safety in the "many" just like herds of herbivores in the wild gravitate to each other for the protective quality of large groups.

There has to be some sort of change that brings these qualities to the defence, or some incentive that rewards defence or punishes a country for not defending. I believe the FIX is in the understanding of simple human urges and tendencies. Just like in the wild most animals travel in #s, so too most people travel and feel safer in herds. Human or animal there are in comparison very few lions! Just like with humans when a mob attacks the few, the few have little chance, with animals the same occurs when a lion gets trapped in the middle of a herd of wildebeests, the lion has little chance. Find a way to make "DEFENCE" like a herd and you will have more folks defending! Otherwise the "lions" will always be stampeded into the mud, the only upside for the lion is, he most likely dies with a full stomach  




JUGgler

I think making the horde hit both bases adjacent to the targeted base would split the horde up. Make the battle spread out along a 50+ mile front for one base. You have more chances of smaller groups fighting it out instead of a single concentration of attackers.

One thing that the 113th Lucky Strikes does when we are able to capture a field is to hold in place , defend until the town starts to rebuild or in the case of airfields and Vehicle bases, re-supply.  At times this may mean sending out strikers to take out a VH that spawns into the base or making strikes against Ords at nearby airfields, to prevent them from coming in heavy.

My feeling is that the strategy part  of the game play could be improved.  I’ve love to see more towns connected a road system that actually had an impact on game play, with open areas in which Knight, Bishop or Rook engineer teams could build Vehicle Bases or Airfields, rivers with bridges that could be destroyed and rebuilt, 

Change Airfields so that there are limits to the number of aircraft that can be launched.  There were few airfields in WWII that supported both bombers and fighters.    There was a limit on number and type of fighters that were based at an airfield,   

Any aircraft could refuel but only a limited number were actually based their.  Perhaps if the rearm pad would allow a more flexible choice in rearm.  You could chose a new load out both fuel and ord.  If you had to fly from a base in the rear . You could go with no ord and re-arm at a forward base with ords. 

Perhaps we need to put troops in both places towns and airfields  and when a base is captured it needs to be re-supplied or it stays down.    You need to put troops in the town and engineers on the Airfield to get the base functional again.. You need move troops and supplies to get AAA and Anti aircraft functional.  Or it’s down for the hour.

A town could have a nearby airfield and a nearby Vehicle base and perhaps a nearby artillery base.  One that can put up Anti Aircraft cover over both the town and airfield.   You would need to capture all three to secure a sector.

Some sectors would have all three bases others two and some just one.  Make deploying engineers to build remote airfields or  bases that would need to be supplied with logistics.  Move things to fight over and about.

Adding things to make players even MORE timid isn't going to help. While your squad does defend, most do not. The horde captains are much more interested in rolling base after base. You see it when one of these "captains" log on. Everyone starts clambering for a mission to grab a base. We need the same kind of excitement for building a defensive mission as well.

[Delirium]

This is a great discussion with a lot of great ideas.

I particularly like the delay in auto ack coming back after capture.

[hitech]

This is a great discussion with a lot of great ideas.

I particularly like the delay in auto ack coming back after capture.

It used to be that way and was changed.

Think how easy it is for the original country jut to have troops waiting to capture it back instantly.

[Melvin]

Think how easy it is for the original country jut to have troops waiting to capture it back instantly.

This is what everyone is asking for.

If folks wish to horde a base, that is fine. All the defenders want is a reason to keep said hordlings around for a while so that they can engage them.

Imagine this if you will: The troops have landed and have taken the map room.

Grunt: "We've captured the map room, but the situation is still tentative. We're working hard to get the AA           operational again, but spotters have located enemy troop movement to the north and a Tiger in the bomber hangar."

Pilot: "Uhhhh copy that crazylegs. Be advised, uhhhhh we're strafing the troops to the north, uhhhhh and we'll see what we can do about that uhhhhh tank in the fighter hangar."

Grunt: "BOMBER HANGAR! The Tiger is in the bomber hangar!

Pilot: "Uhhhh yeah, the tank is in the bomber hangar. He just uhhhhh vulched five of our guys on the runway. Uhhhh wait one."

<28 seconds of silence>

Pilot: "Uhhhh yeah crazylegs it's gonna be at least 8 more minutes before we can get a plane with a bomb up here. Uhhhhh erm you see, we expended all ords on the ords bunkers. So ummm wait one."

Grunt: "Oh for crying out loud, we'll have the ack up in 10 minutes."

Pilot: "Ummm crazylegs, you guys are gonna have to hold fast and try to uhhhh get that ack up. Some creeps just showed up and are currently whipping the uhh snot out of us."

Grunt: "WTF?"

Pilot: "What's that honey? Tacos for breakfast? Ummm I gotta bail crazy. Watch out for that tank in the VH."

Grunt: Dammit, get the ack up before those M3's get here!

[TinmanX]

It's Friday night and there have been substances.

What if the towns were sized appropriately to the field? So a Small Field has a town the size it is now, a Medium Field has a town 100% bigger and a Large Field has a town 100% bigger still.

Wow. this might not even be the right thread. Lets just send it out and see where it ends up.

[LCADolby]

You fools, making it 'easier' to defend only increases te size of the attacking horde 

[coombz]

red guys to shoot, squaddies to wing up with

that's about it

[icepac]

It used to be that way and was changed.

Think how easy it is for the original country jut to have troops waiting to capture it back instantly.

True.......there would be 350 troops running to the map room.....both red and green icons.

[Tilt]

The biggest problem I see with this is the defenders are still losing an airfield to use to defend from. As the line moves over you are forced to abandon the field. It's pretty much the same as when the horde flattens it, not much of a difference.

To spread the fight out, maybe a twist on the old "ordered capture" system. To take a field/base you have to meet the requirements we have now, but add to that they must also have 2 adjacent towns down to 25% as well. This would have the horde hitting the main objective, but then it would have to split to hit 2 other towns as well. Giving defenders more time to defend, and busting up the horde a bit.

Of course "land grab" mean that the losing side at some point loses access to its fields. The mechanism here is where this as a result of a lost battle elsewhere rather than actually over the field in question. meaning that the field is usable right up until the battle is lost rather than being closed down prior to the battle being lost.

Defining the front line could be done in a number of ways. One such would be to triangulate (or quadrulate) an air field with 3 (or 4) surrounding towns/vehicle fields. If # t's/VF's  (say 2) are lost then the field is disabled only to be re enabled when one side or another reduces the # (to say 1). 

[Zoney]

I think that if you pay attention to the dynamics of the land war, anticipate the enemies next move, and have the patience to be in a position to intercept, the rewards of defending are fun.  Unfortunately if you base your fun on "stopping" the offense instead of "engaging" the offense, you may be frustrated.  No, you won't always be right when you work your intercept and may have to adjust your strategy possibly involving a longer flight to the fight, or landing and towering out to up where they did go.

I defend 90% of the time.  I'm at altitude in position to be able to make the choices I want as the offense arrives.  I'm not alone.  There are lots of us that fly this way.  I see many of the same guys over and over.  You know we are talking and working together even though we are not always in the same squad.  There are 2 things I find in common with my fellow defenders, we are patient, and we are happy.

[The Fugitive]

It used to be that way and was changed.

Think how easy it is for the original country jut to have troops waiting to capture it back instantly.

Maybe add a 5 minute timer for the "new" defenders to get set-up and find those guy looking to hide troops. After the 5 minutes the base can be recaptured, and ack is still down for 25 minutes.

Attackers capture base and get 5 minutes to setup defense.

Old defenders have 5 minutes to set up their attack to retake the base.

25 minutes later all buildings and ack pops fresh if the base isn't re-taken.

You fools, making it 'easier' to defend only increases te size of the attacking horde 

maybe, but if it takes the horde longer to capture, more may defend making more combat.

[PFactorDave]

Maybe even simpler...

Leave ack down but just set one or two buildings in town to pop when the capture happens.  This will prevent the previous owners from simply flooding the town with troops, but will still leave the town vulnerable enough that it needs to be defended for a period of time.

[Tilt]

You fools, making it 'easier' to defend only increases te size of the attacking horde 

I think there is some truth in this. IMO Hordes by their definition are of such a size as to overwhelm their opposition completely without any regard to tactic or skill.

As stated elsewhere I see no method of limiting Horde activity out side that of a dynamic zone/field limit. Given this the only remaining course is to motivate hordes away from airfields.

Regarding  ggun delay upon capture.

The idea now that a side without local superiority in either air or ground should both take and hold a field is an anachronism. If capture has been achieved yet the attacking GV and Air forces cannot hold it for #minutes (5minutes?) without gguns then maybe they deserve to lose it.

Whats wrong with holding troops in reserve for a counter attack?

[JUGgler]

 Somehow motivate "defender hordes" and you'll have a fix!





JUGgler

[MarineUS]

I up to defend anyways, but I'd rather have more people up with me so I don't feel so alone.