My "Great Compromise" idea to fix the strat game. Opinions wanted.

[USRanger]

Forgive me for going back to the original topic, but here is the final version of a factory min-city going into my next AvA terrain.  I look forward to hearing from bomber pilots how much they enjoy hitting them, at least until bustr convinces them how much they should hate them.



The terrain (avawintr) will be finished & on the server in a couple weeks if anyone wants to try it out for yourselves.

 

[TWC_Angel]

"I say i do believe i hear the roar of heavy bombers overhead."
Amazing work Ranger sir <S>

i shall certainly enjoy it.

[jimson]

In my opinion what the game needs, is more variety in the parameters to be met to trigger a war win.

Just designate additional conditions that will also lead to victory.

A certain number of bases currently need to be captured right now.

Keep, that, but also add a parameter of a combination of a lesser number of bases and a higher percentage of strategic targets destroyed can also trigger a win.

They don't need to be modeled to have a real time logistical choking effect, they simply need to become high value targets.

[The Fugitive]

In my opinion what the game needs, is more variety in the parameters to be met to trigger a war win.

Just designate additional conditions that will also lead to victory.

A certain number of bases currently need to be captured right now.

Keep, that, but also add a parameter of a combination of a lesser number of bases and a higher percentage of strategic targets destroyed can also trigger a win.

They don't need to be modeled to have a real time logistical choking effect, they simply need to become high value targets.

I agree. I'm going to say a line here that MOST people will either just stop reading, or blow a gasket and reply with out reading the rest, but bare with me 

I think the game should be geared more toward making players play the game the right way <ducks>

OK, if your still with me this is what I mean. The game is a combat game, in all it's forms, it boils down to combat period. Whether it's tank to tank, plane to plane, or country to country to win the war it should all be about combat. If you want to avoid a fight or hide try THIS.

I'm not trying to stop anyone from playing the way they want, but I do want to change the rules as to how important it is as to the game. If you want to spawn camp, go for it, but you get nothing in perks and you don't get your name in lights, but it your part of a moving force attacking a base you get perks points and your name in lights. The same with base captures. Your part of an NOE horde you get nothing but the base, but if your part or a force that uses the mission planner and attacks with a full fledged mission with objective that MUST be met, then you get it all, points, perks, name in lights.

Yesterday was tough. We were on OZKANSAS which is the NOE wet dream map. Even a 2 weeker can stay under dar over water. It was like.... as Delirium says... playing "whack a mole". Spent most of the day jumping around chasing NOE missions. Sure there was the Rook horde to join by that isn't much of a fight either. Too many people playing the game the "wrong" way and avoiding combat. There shouldn't be any rewards for avoiding combat, and more for generating it.

[Hap]

Ya know.  I don't know.  This mid-morning all countries had their usual 30 players in-flight.  And the calls for help on country channel just caused me to shake my head.  Also, what counts as "a base we should capture" as in, "let's get A## because . . .."  I glanced at my country's roster looking at the names and rank to try to see what portion of the in-flight players know what they're doing.  It looked to be about 2/3rds or less.  Yet, there was precious little porking going on.

I suppose the appeal, the big appeal of AH is pointing your green plane at a red one and pulling the trigger.  Or diving into a bunch of red ones.  I really think that's what drives subscriptions for HTC.  If that be the case, then all the cooler stuff we talk about from time to time, is just that.  Cooler stuff. 

And for the life of me, all that NOE horde base demolishing . . . not my cup of tea.  But it must be a hoot for others because they keep at it.

[Ciaphas]

I like Rangers Idea. When I fly I don't avoid fights, I tend to slow down to let the enemy catch up so I can put a few .50 rounds in to them.

I hit a strat target the other day and as soon as my bombs hit, the darned thing moved on me. It ran to the back of the country this was after my hour and a half flight to target.

[bustr]

You cannot dictate courage to those who feel insecure about their ability to compete in this game. All you will result in is forcing the insecure into being cannon fodder for the better talented, or out of the game by making them feel punished. You build self confidence in others by leading from the front by example. Accept most simply want to follow a winning leader. Imposing social controls to force combat will drive players from the game.

You can force combat by moving feilds closer together. Putting in a large capturable city ringed by capturable feilds with the requirment of capturing that city in two country's to win the map. Now you have your strategic targets to keep destroyed all the time untill your forces can get the troops into some of the defending feilds and past the big city GV battle. Change radar so all aircraft in the air can be seen everywhere at all times by everyone except in the alleys between radar rings so the timid can partialy hide from fight hunters. Then setup feilds so that you have narrow blind radar corridors to run missions through or run away from fights in.

Unless HTC fundimentaly changes how the game process works, those are the kinds of things that can be changed in the game.

A change example in the current framework:

OZKANSAS, that big island with all the GV feilds in the center. Put a giant city in the center along with those GV feilds and airfeilds. Then require 12% of two country's and ownership of that city to win the map. Place 3 maprooms in the city and require capturing all three to own the city. Start the maprooms out as neutral then upon capturing have manned gun positions around them go live to help defend the position along with your GV moving into the city. Make bridges functional destroyabel/rebuild strategic objects to moving tanks towards map rooms. Tie them to 3 city sectors owned by maprooms and rebuild times of the surrounding buildings. Make the reward for bomber hoards flattening the city adfenitum when it's not owned by their own country substantial. How do you capture the city? Capture the island first.

Downsides: This will focus most players to the center of a large map. The frame rates for many will stutter or become a slide show. Warping will be a real issue in the confined space with all of the city objects and moving planes and vehicals.

You can change things like this within the current famework if HTC wants to go along with it.