How infantry might be implemented.

[Tank-Ace]

I think we're all ignoring the fact that this would require essentially an entire rework of the game. If multiple people playing as troops are required to take a base, then we'll need some more structure to the game, past the voulintary missions if we want to see map wins.

We would also need a TON of new structure modeling, such as building interiors, improved minimum foliage modeling (for cover), we would have to model a crap load of new animations and interactions with vehicles/objects (what happens if I run an infintryman over with my tank, or chop him up with my proppeler when flying super low alt?), new weapons, etc.

The bailed pilot's .45 becomes much more usefull.

The role of aircraft, vehicles, and ships would change entirely. Aircraft, and ships would then be playing support for the ground troops (it would be all about supporting the fighting actually being done in town), tanks and infintry would be playing a mutual-support game.


Overall, the work that would need to be done for a proper job is just staggering.

[bangsbox]

that game exists already, graphics suck and game play does to. blitzkreig i think its called.

[Jayhawk]

I think we're all ignoring the fact that this would require essentially an entire rework of the game. If multiple people playing as troops are required to take a base, then we'll need some more structure to the game, past the voulintary missions if we want to see map wins.

We would also need a TON of new structure modeling, such as building interiors, improved minimum foliage modeling (for cover), we would have to model a crap load of new animations and interactions with vehicles/objects (what happens if I run an infintryman over with my tank, or chop him up with my proppeler when flying super low alt?), new weapons, etc.

The bailed pilot's .45 becomes much more usefull.

The role of aircraft, vehicles, and ships would change entirely. Aircraft, and ships would then be playing support for the ground troops (it would be all about supporting the fighting actually being done in town), tanks and infintry would be playing a mutual-support game.


Overall, the work that would need to be done for a proper job is just staggering.

Probably why hitech has talked about it publicly since at least 2006 but we haven't seen anything.  It would just be a monumental undertaking could be damaging to the development of the rest of the game.  Of course, there is always the chance he's been working on it slowly for those 6 years and he'll spring it on us out of the blue (but I kind of doubt that).

[Chilli]

Well, I for one am willing to admit that I don't have the slightest clue as to what is feasible for HTC  .

It was wished for, that troops didn't look and move like Frankenstein.  Look at what we have now....   

You say, that in order for these ideas to be done properly, a whole new world needs to be created???     Oh well, I guess that you haven't noticed that your tank suddenly springs back from laying on its top and is completely fixed from clicking on a text box in the corner of your screen.    Even if like Smokin' says the troop animation attacks hard targets like field guns and other buildings rather than running to the maproom and kicking a cloud of dust as they do now, I don't believe that would break the game engine.    But who knows.....

I am just saying.......  there could be a great leap in fun and overall strategy with a different use for troops.

If HiTech doesn't want to dick around with the main arena, he could possibly give it to us as a custom arena option, or even one better, replace the duplicate game mechanics in Early and Mid War with something NEW.  WW1 trench warfare hmmmmmmmm........   

[Tilt]

On infantry.

I would rather infantry occupied town buildings rather than we be required to destroy them (town buildings) prior to capture being enabled.

Infantry would occupy Town buildings
Infantry would also be able to occupy destroyed Town buildings.
Infantry would have to occupy more than 50% of the buildings prior to capture being possible.
Infantry can be bombed, shelled or machine gunned.
Infantry (when fixed) can kill mobile infantry via small arms.
Infantry will not have icons. (FR)
Infantry will deploy to Town buildings or Map room which ever is the closer (map room only if 50% is occupied)
Infantry will return to barracks # mins after deployment.

Then some sappers..........

From an Jeep you target an enemy tank and release a sapper team (2  infantry) they work their way to the tank (providing it has not moved) and stick on a mine which blows up after # seconds the team then returns to you if you have not moved else they are lost. Each jeep has 2 mines you have to get both sappers back to a "landed successfully" for one "attaboy".

[Reaper90]

I propose that instead of occupying town buildings or maprooms in some irrelevant town as a requirement for base capture, the troops should run to the tower building and all meet in the o'club.... Where they do the macarena, like in the hanger!

[Chilli]

Reaper,

I had a similar idea even if you weren't serious.  It makes more sense to capture the military objectives than the village.  Maybe a compromise in current base capture.  Troops capture the tower and the base cannot be repaired without the help of the villagers.  To free the villagers the town must be captured separately, and would have their own commando spawn away from the maproom.

[Tank-Ace]

Well, I for one am willing to admit that I don't have the slightest clue as to what is feasible for HTC  .

It was wished for, that troops didn't look and move like Frankenstein.  Look at what we have now....   

You say, that in order for these ideas to be done properly, a whole new world needs to be created???     Oh well, I guess that you haven't noticed that your tank suddenly springs back from laying on its top and is completely fixed from clicking on a text box in the corner of your screen.    Even if like Smokin' says the troop animation attacks hard targets like field guns and other buildings rather than running to the maproom and kicking a cloud of dust as they do now, I don't believe that would break the game engine.    But who knows.....

I am just saying.......  there could be a great leap in fun and overall strategy with a different use for troops.

If HiTech doesn't want to dick around with the main arena, he could possibly give it to us as a custom arena option, or even one better, replace the duplicate game mechanics in Early and Mid War with something NEW.  WW1 trench warfare hmmmmmmmm........   

The vehicle supplys have nothing to do with this. Its a completly different section of the game, much more closely related to how aircraft can be completly rearmed and refueld in 30 seconds. I'm sure the only reason the vehicles don't take 30 seconds to fix and rearm is because they're intended to be used beyond the cover of the auto-ack, and because they have absolutely no cover from enemy tanks.


And a whole new world WOULD have to be created for it to be done RIGHT. For infintry to have any significant place in the game, the entire game dynamics would be changed.

Aircraft would no longer be the main focus of the game, they would simply be support for the infintry and tanks(Aircraft could no longer take a base on their own, they would need people fighting as infintry to take a base)

Ships would only be shoved even further into the supporting role, the entire goal being to provide a base of opperations/support for the aircraft, which are themsevles supporting the infintry.

C47, LVT, and M3/SdKfz 251 drivers would become simultaneously significantly less important in the tactical picture, and critical in the strategic picture: You would try to keep the M3 or goon alive as long as possible, but as long as he is close enough for the troops to walk to town, their deaths are much less significant. But they would be much more important strategicly, since you would need to get enough M3 drivers together to move the infintrymen the 30-odd miles from base to base.

Tanks would no longer be important simply for the fact that they kill other vehicles, and can deack bases/towns. They would be important for the support they give infintry, and because they can kill other vehicles (which would be usefull only because those vehicles provide support for enemy troops). Only here would it truely be a mutual support system. Infintry would help keem infintry away from the tanks, which lets the tanks do their job more effectivly, and their job is helping the infintry do ITS job more effectivly.

The importance of the field structures would be diminished overall, and the vehicle hangers/barracks would be the main target for a bomber raid, as opposed to aircraft hangers, radar, and ordnance.

[Scotty55OEFVet]

Lol, as an ex-sapper (basically an infantrymen with explosives) I have had the misfortune of never being in any Tank, but in an M113 and I willl tell you this much, those pointy red-hot sharp metal things went right through the thin armor. Now, the early US issued Bazooka was TERRIBLE. You literaly had to be on top of a Tank to penetrate its armor which resulted in A LOT of dead Bazookamen and many wasted rockets. After the use of shape-charge projectiles the American Bazooka became a little more effective. Look it up as I am not even going to attempt to try and post anything. Good Idea, but will play Havoc with many FR's for guys will the old computers : (

[Chilli]

My point about how things magically get repaired, was only one example of how an entire element of gameplay was replaced by a virtual box.  Another example is how the troops stamp their way to the maproom and then kick dust to represent commandos taking over a headquarters (I presume).

Just because you can't envision a simple representation of what is being wished for, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist or that it would be less meaningful.  I have had Des, challenge me to a .45 duel in the middle of the village with the very limited chute (bailed pilots).  The entire time, I was busting my sides and tearing up from laughing at his chute dodging between buildings popping of a couple of rounds and dipping back and forth around a corner.

The only question that really remains, is how does HiTech envision his game advancing. 

Scotty,

It has been my experience that excessive number of troops in an area do very little to framerates.  If the ground aspect were kept at a very minimal scale, such as only allowing limited options of what to do with the troops, the chances of everyone ditching their planes to battle it out at the O.K. Corale will be pretty slim.  So, the framerate issue should not present itself any more often than it does with large hordes of planes.

[Tank-Ace]

If we want player-controlable infintry to have any major role in the game, that can't be better accomplished by fighters, we're going to have to change the dynamics of the game at minimum.


Simply by having player-controlled troops fight it out in the town, you relegate everything else (save possibly tanks, though even thats not a sure thing) to the support role.

[Chilli]

Right now the AI troopers have a MAJOR role in the game (any argument there?).

Giving the player more control or just having diffeent roles or options for the troops would be a plus for the game.  It doesn't have to become a XBox title.  Just enhance the good things that we already have >>>> EXCELLENT flight models.

If we are thinking OUTSIDE of the "X"box, then having troops play a slightly different role that has more player control beyond kicking them out of a perfectly good plane, has countless possibilities.  Even if player control isn't changed, the objectives and/ or actions of the AI troopers could very well propell the gameplay into the next generation of Aces High STRATEGO game board fun.

[Tank-Ace]

No argument there, but theres an incredible difference between having troops that just run for a hillock or set of stairs, and somehow capture a base upon entering that structure, and having player-controled troops (troop vs troop combat would be the main goal, else auto-troops would be simpler and could accompish the same job) that play a significant role in the game (as in they have more of a job than just running strait for the maproom).


Fact is that for anything but troop-vs-troop fighting, a vehicle or plane is and would be a more effective tool than a player-controled soldier. Aircraft and vehciles are more effective at killing eachother, and destroying town buildings, any and all field structures, auto and manned guns, ships, and strats than any WWII era infintryman could ever hope to be.

[Chilli]

Agreed 

I guess, what bugs me is that we have a base capture system that most veterans have become so comfortable with, they know the sweet spots like the back of their hand.  So, instead of a massively fun even sided furball generated by this mechanism, it either rolled over with overkill in numbers or it is stolen from under the noses of sleeping guards.

A new mechanism, that both promotes the high altitude war and the low altitude and ground combatants, that gives equally sized attacking forces an equal chance of CAPTURE or advancement, would do so much more than just provide infantry involvement.  This kind of BALANCED opportunity to obtain territory or tactical advantages would catch on like wildfire and fights could be found around the map, not just in one or two lopsided contests.

[Tank-Ace]

I think we won't see that kind of fight untill the focus of the game shifts away from capturing bases using the fastest, most effective aircraft available, and doing it all NOE. Theres no big incentive we can offer for flying at higher altitude that we haven't already given and that wouldn't be unrealistic. And we can't penalize people that fly at low altitude, because that would be 'trying to force people to play "MY" way  '. We can't offer incentives for fighting that we already haven't without changing the game dynamics, as perks seem to be a rather unimportant factor in dweeb aka lemming (or 'hording **** ' if you prefer  ) motivation.


Only way I can see the crap ending is if we make vehicles and aircraft just support weapons for infintry (and the fly-boys won't like giving up their place in the sun, and EZ mode play-style. They'll drag out the whole "its a combat flight sim. It says air combat is the main focus of the game" argument.). We would also  have to give immediate warning as soon as an enemy set foot within 10 miles of a base, regardless of altitude, or else we would just be promoting the same low-alt low-opening paratrooper missions, only with player-controlled troops.