Alternative simple way to make AH GV-friendly and increase subscribers

[TDeacon]

I LIKE bombing gvs, much like I like shooting buffs and fighters down.

You would still be able to do this under the changed regime.  

You looking to give gvs a bomb free zone. Let's doe the same for bombers and fighters as well and everyone can hide in their little safe zones....... All 8 or 10 of the final game subscribers any way.
<snip>

GVs clearly need at least one place in the MA where they can "furball" unmolested, because of their massive inferiority to planes WRT speed, position (i.e. they fly), and firepower.  Planes clearly do not have an equivalent need relative to GVs.  Again, take out a few 100 point King Tigers into the typical battle, and see what happens.  Not very fun is it?  One shouldn't post on these matters before trying to play on both sides of the fence.  

MH

[surfinn]

Unless they make the spawn in totally random over a large area Decon the fight wouldn't last long in the GV "fur ball area". Take 85 spawn for example. Its a great battle at first but as soon as a tiger or panther gets to the rear of either side people stop spawning in as it is impossible to kill them. I wasted 5 tiger2s at that camp once trying to nail the guy on top of the ridge. I took at least 20 rounds while I was turning my gun to aim at the guy. I got him eventually but man the perks I wasted
TDeacon I have to ask do you think its fair for a tiger 2 or panther to postion himself to the rear of a spawn and shot everything that ups in the rear?  I like snailmans Idea a lot. I personally don't care that the tiger guy loses his perks just that hes not shooting me in the rear anymore when I up

[FLOOB]

AH is GV friendly. Wish granted.

[TDeacon]

Unless they make the spawn in totally random over a large area Decon the fight wouldn't last long in the GV "fur ball area". Take 85 spawn for example. Its a great battle at first but as soon as a tiger or panther gets to the rear of either side people stop spawning in as it is impossible to kill them. I wasted 5 tiger2s at that camp once trying to nail the guy on top of the ridge. I took at least 20 rounds while I was turning my gun to aim at the guy. I got him eventually but man the perks I wasted
TDeacon I have to ask do you think its fair for a tiger 2 or panther to postion himself to the rear of a spawn and shot everything that ups in the rear?  I like snailmans Idea a lot. I personally don't care that the tiger guy loses his perks just that hes not shooting me in the rear anymore when I up

I agree that sometimes spawn camping is too unbalanced and not good for the game.  While Luche's idea might help lessen the impact of being spawn camped by a horde, there may be better ways.  One of them is to consider ways to "spread out" the spawn.  There could be a set of multiple available locatons (like 10 to 20), 1K out from the the spawn point in different directions, choosable by the spawing player (so you can pick one out of LOF and don't have to reorient yourself each time).  The former is a game-mechanics change, and wouldn't require map changes, btw.  There are other ideas as well, which have been floated previously in the Wishlist Forum.  I think the problem is that the devs haven't yet focused on the spawn point problem.  Maybe they don't yet think it's a problem, and we should lobby them with some more "fix the spawn point" threads.  

MH

[asterix]

You inadvertently point out one of the essential reasons why we need some sort of GV-safe areas in the game.  A player can always unilaterally take precautions to protect his/her perk plane, such as altitude in the case of the B29.  There is no equivalent unilateral precaution that the Tiger II guy can take.  Of course operating in a horde solves all problems, but forcing this behavior lessens the quality of the game.  

BTW, you are entirely mistaken in suggesting that attacking GVs *need* attack planes in order to succeed.  Several common ways to counter a concealed GV are bring a friend to approach from 2 sides, or if alone, take a route 1-2K off to the side thus forcing him to move if he wants to engage you, or climb a hill (if the terrain has any) to see over the ambusher's cover, etc.  Since I play alone, I often do the latter 2, although there are other tactics as well.  There is a lot more depth to the GV game than stationary spawn camping and shooting from a "firing line" of GVs.  In fact, the more interesting part of the GV game is experienced when you realize this and begin to play and learn accordingly.  

MH

There are several precautions a Tiger II guy can take. You can make a sortie with a perk free tank to see who else and what are present (Wirbles, friendly fighters etc). It takes roughly an hour to reach 30k in a B29. One could drive a Tiger away from the spawn and approach from a different side. Attack planes usually hang around the spawn. If you see friendlies leaving then the Tiger could be driven along the convoy road away from enemies and exit on the road near to the supply depot for a maximum chance of keeping the perks. Once a perk plane`s icon is seen many will go through a great deal of trouble to catch that aircraft. Same is with the GVs I imagine. B29`s or any aircraft`s position can be found by following a dar bar.

I did not suggest anything about the attack aircraft. I just said I am glad when a friendly aircraft takes out a sitting GV that is very difficult to spot. Long time players probably know all the best places for sitting and waiting. Sometimes I enjoy fighting in a GV and I don`t mind getting bombed or seeing friendly aircraft attack enemy GVs.

[The Fugitive]

You would still be able to do this under the changed regime.

LOL!!! no I wouldn't. Who would come out of the bomb free zone? very few because much like the the draw of the MA ove any other arena most of the GVers would fight in the bomb free zone because thats where most of the players are. 

GVs clearly need at least one place in the MA where they can "furball" unmolested, because of their massive inferiority to planes WRT speed, position (i.e. they fly), and firepower.  Planes clearly do not have an equivalent need relative to GVs.  Again, take out a few 100 point King Tigers into the typical battle, and see what happens.  Not very fun is it?  One shouldn't post on these matters before trying to play on both sides of the fence.  

MH

I'm sure the buff guys feel the same way while they are "just trying to bomb" something and those pesky fighters keep coming along to shoot them down.

I'm sure the fighter guys feel the same way while they are "just trying to furball" and those bomber guys keep killing the Fighter hangers.

You can't take away the fun of one player to insure the fun of another, not when BOTH are paying to play.

[Zodiac]

I can only speak for myself, but the motivation for my suggestions is to give me and others a place where GVs can play relatively unmolested.  It has nothing to do with any sort of us-versus-them dynamic between GVs and AC, since I like both.  It's also not part of some sort of master plan for gradual eroding the GV-AC relationship.  If nothing is changed, I will still play the game, because I am experienced enough to deal with the current situation.  However, if HTC is hoping to attract and keep new players based on their GV game, I think the current situation will frustrate the new guys too much for optimal retention.  

I do think that your fear of GVs having an overwhelming advantage over AC is kind of silly, since the latter can fly, go over 10 times as fast, and have more firepower.  

Yes, the consistency thing bothers me too.  However, I haven’t yet thought of a better way to do it, except for doing new maps with separate chained VBases and chained air bases, separated by distance or mountains.  Nobody is going to do maps like that, though.  

MH

The bold section really cuts to what you want, an area where GV's are basically so hard to spot that no one is going to want to fly an A/C over there and bomb them OR strafe them with ground attack A/C. However what you seem to want to ignore is AH is a MMO, guess what that means. That your gameplay is absolutely NO MORE IMPORTANT THAN ANYONE ELSE'S GAME PLAY. The GV icon range has already been reduced to a point that wirbs are extremely difficult to spot until you are well within their effective range. You have a GV "furball" going on and you're being harassed by enemy A/C then a couple of the friendly ground pounders up a wirb and provide protection. No one is going to do that to "babysit" you say? Then you're going to get bombed and strafed, Period. I don't see how you think the entire game should be so skewed to provide you with the exact type of game play you want. I have never had a problem upping a wirb or asking a squadie or countryman to up a wirb and help provide cover from enemy A/C when I GV. Eliminating/severely restricting combat in a combat game is tantamount to playing Monopoly with out the money because people get their feelings hurt when they go Bankrupt.

Yes, that is correct.  However, what you guys keep ignoring is that it would just be in the VBase circles, so that normal style of play would still occur everywhere else.  There is no way to fix the problem without changing behavior, since the behavior is the problem (yes I know you think it isn't a problem, but you are mistaken).  Note that it is inherent to any game that the *rules of the game* are designed to control the behavior of the players.  Thus, our game is already full of mechanisms designed to control behavior, such as the strat system, perk points, killshooter, etc., etc.  
MH

 Did you stamp your foot and cross your arms when you thought/typed this?   Because you think that other people's behavior is the problem and if someone disagrees they must be wrong right? Because as we know, you are THE expert on what is wrong (if you truly believe something is wrong) with the GV/AC relationship.

Look I am all for improving the game and bringing in new players, but if you can't see how much this would restrict players options then it is because your thinking is clouded either by the fact that it is your idea or by the fact that you just don't want A/C to be able to kill GVs, which I am sure would have thrilled actual tankers throughout history as well.

[Kazaa]

The best way to increase a flight simulation's subscribers is to focus on tank gameplay.

[Mano]

The nice thing about AH LWA is no matter what terrain is up, there is always something to do. Pt Boats, Fighters, Bombers, tankers, even the guys that just man the guns on the CV. It is a Wishlist forum nothing more.  Anyone can make a suggestion. It does not hurt anything.

I'm glad you have heavy battle armor on TDeacon !   

<S>

[SirNuke]

there is always something to do

 

[alskahawk]

 What I find annoying about aircraft vs tanks is how easy it is for the aircraft to kill the tank. Unlike real ww2 the tanks in AH can't hide in trees. Just as soon as you get a good GV battle going, someone calls for air support and then it's over. There is no GV strategy then. It's all who has aircraft in the air.

 I think the GV only idea has been tried but without any success. As long as AH is adding tank buster aircraft, the situation is clear. AH is aircraft orientated and GV's are a side show.

[caldera]

The top twenty in total kills for the last tour:



GVs are #1, 2 and 3, as well as 4 out of 5 and 6 out of 10.

How much more "GV friendly" can it be made, without grounding all the aircraft? 

[Easyscor]

I agree that sometimes spawn camping is too unbalanced and not good for the game.  While Luche's idea might help lessen the impact of being spawn camped by a horde, there may be better ways.  One of them is to consider ways to "spread out" the spawn.  There could be a set of multiple available locatons (like 10 to 20), 1K out from the the spawn point in different directions, choosable by the spawing player (so you can pick one out of LOF and don't have to reorient yourself each time).  The former is a game-mechanics change, and wouldn't require map changes, btw.  There are other ideas as well, which have been floated previously in the Wishlist Forum.  I think the problem is that the devs haven't yet focused on the spawn point problem.  Maybe they don't yet think it's a problem, and we should lobby them with some more "fix the spawn point" threads.  

MH

I also like part of Lusche's suggestion for less perk loss when killed by a bomb. I think it has merit but you know it can't be a free ride, otherwise every airbase would be swarmed with perked GVs killing the FHs.

You asked for adding 10 to 20 choosable spawns points but that would require a massive change to the game engine and user interface. Why not limit your request to things that can already be done?

The current default GV spawn circle is 1500 feet in radius with a maximum available radius of 26400 feet. That's 5 miles from the designated spawn point, and also potentially 10 miles from the target base or right inside the base itself. You could probably get htc to widened the spawn circle out to 1/2 or a one mile radius to make it harder to locate the incoming GVs and that change could happen this afternoon if they agree with you. btw The default distance between a spawn point and the center of a base is 5 miles.

Now then, if you want a relatively unmolested tank battle today, you might check out the setups in the AvA that are running over the next two weeks. They are designed to support many of the requests from GV guys and both weeks are running on brand new terrains with custom ground textures. Plus, the staff will accommodate requests that include disabling ALL bombs if enough tankers show up.

[CMan]

Sounds good, but doesn't work, because people don't like to fly CAP.  We see this everywhere in the game (strats, CVs, etc.) and not just over GVs.  Calling for help after the A20 shows up is futile; even if someone ups to help you, you are dead way before they get there.  In the Wirble case, sometimes people show up in a Wirble. However, having it follow you around is impractical without ruining the GV “furball” experience.  It’s like requiring a fighter escort for a plane-versus-plane fight; not practical.  Believe me, I’ve tried these types of solutions, and about 20 other ones, and none of them work very well.  The sad fact is, we have a fundamental imbalance in AH with respect to the GV-AC tactical interactions.  If HTC really wants to take advantage of this additional game play (and subscriber) opportunity, which they themselves have introduced into their game, they IMHO need to provide a portion of the map where this imbalance is corrected. 

I really encourage you to try GVing yourself (outside of a horde, and to make it really educational, use an expensive perk tank).  You will see how it goes, and understand the motivation for these threads better.  If you want, I can up with you and give you pointers.  I’m not the best GVer in the game, but I am certainly competent.  Shoot me a PM. 

Remember, this isn’t the OzKansas TT thread.  Also, FYI, I enjoy game fighter-to-fighter combat as well as GV combat; I started out with the former over 20 years ago.  However, the former can be found anywhere on the AH map, while worthwhile GV combat areas are  hard to find. 

MH

While this wasn't directed at me, I'd like to touch upon this briefly having very recently had the exact experience you suggest.

I've played the game on and off for ages, but never really did the GV thing. Tried it a few times, insta-died in camped spawns and figured it wasn't for me.

I recently joined a squad which has a fairly significant GV component, and having some experience, I am finding it quite enjoyable. I have GV'd outside of a horde (I love rolling a single tank into a town or a base and seeing if I get a response). I have flattened towns with a single M4. I do use perk tanks when the situation is well suited to the capabilities of a particular perk tank. I've even used Tiger 2's off concrete in hostile territory *GASP!* (pretty sure I'm net negative on perks doing that, but it's fun  ) I can now say that I drive tanks. I've killed lots of planes with wirbles and ostis. I've been bombed countless times by planes. I've been bombed in Tiger 2s. I've bombed expensive perk tanks. But I still find that GVs are very, very useful in the right situation; even under enemy air superiority. I find myself driving tanks into bases with no air support, and often causing some real headaches. I am killed by aircraft about as often as I kill them.

So ultimately, I have done exactly what you suggest, and I find the current mechanics to be quite balanced. GVs have their uses, in the right situations and with some skill; but yet they are not invulnerable insta-win buttons either. This, in my opinion, is exactly how it should be.

[USRanger]

http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,354934.0.html