Capturing Zone Bases

[shoresroad]

Capturing Zone Bases moves the Strats back and makes it more difficult for individuals and/or squads to reach them with bombers.

On two occasions this week I have asked squad leaders why they took a Zone Base moving the Strats back, and the answer was the same in both cases:

"Because I can and have every right to, and I don't care if the Strats have moved back making it more difficult for you to reach them in bombers."

My questions to these two squad leaders and anyone else who agrees with their reasoning is this:

When you are sneaking a CV up to the Strats or a base to secretly shell either and I up a plane from the CV to attack your target because I can and have every right to, what are your thoughts?

When you are running an NOE mission and I run a high cap mission directly above your NOE mission because I can and have every right to, what are your thoughts?

I don't do these things because I don't want to screw up your plans, but when you capture Zone Bases for no good reason other than "because they are there" with no regard to how it effects the efforts of others to bomb the Strats, I'm considering beginning the above activities to embellish the missions of these squad leaders "because I can and have every right to."

Is there something I'm missing in the logic above

[cobia38]

 On some maps,bumping strats to the rear after porking them will hamper re-supply efforts. 
   some day the armchair generals will figure this out   

[shoresroad]

On some maps,bumping strats to the rear after porking them will hamper re-supply efforts.  
some day the armchair generals will figure this out  

That wasn't the case in the instances above, but that would be a valid reason.  That is why I asked the squad leaders why they did it.  The Strats were mostly intact and attractive targets prior to being moved to the rear of the map.

[Lusche]

On some maps,bumping strats to the rear after porking them will hamper re-supply efforts.  
   some day the armchair generals will figure this out  

And maybe others will figure out that this 'advantage' is not present on most maps, and on the others it's only very temporary (3h) at best. While the strats will stay retreated as long as that side is smart enough to not capture it back... which most of the time they are.
It's always a massive advantage to have the strats retreated, as resupply plays only a very minor role. Actually I would love seeing the enmy put a lot of effort into resupply, as it is less efficient than bombing them by an order of magnitude.

[Nathan60]

Your Answer: DONT FLY BISH of course they are going to go for the easiest bases no matter where

[shoresroad]

Your Answer: DONT FLY BISH of course they are going to go for the easiest bases no matter where

Hi Hammy,

I'm now flying Rook, and this was done by the Rooks in my case.

[Nathan60]

Hi Hammy,

I'm now flying Rook, and this was done by the Rooks in my case.

They are also getting justa s bad bring your boys to Knight never have to worry about zone bases

[waystin2]

Hi Hammy,

I'm now flying Rook, and this was done by the Rooks in my case.

Heya Badger,

The only thing more evil than a Bishop, is a Rook.

 

Way

[The Fugitive]

It's easy to figure out. Nobody.... well at least ALMOST nobody plays the game as a strategic war. There are very few tactics used, very few plans, and the only organization is to put together a horde.

To most of the players to "win the war" you have to capture as many bases as you can as fast as you can. They strip everything down to the bare minimum in all most all aspects of the game. Why take bombers to kill a base when you have enough players in your horde to do it in fighters which is much faster. Why try to hinder the enemy by hurting his supply when you can roll base after base with them full up any way. Why learn to fight when you and 5 of your buddies can HO the crap out of the only few players that up to defend.

This game is so full, deep, and rich with elements of game play and most are ignored and not used just because it is better to cut corners to get the job done.

[matt]

Your Answer: DONT FLY BISH of course they are going to go for the easiest bases no matter where

  its nice when nits take bish zone bases keep up the good
work.

[LCADolby]

This has reminded me of the old way we had zone bases, proper zone bases!
Bring that set up back 

[5PointOh]

It's easy to figure out. Nobody.... well at least ALMOST nobody plays the game as a strategic war. There are very few tactics used, very few plans, and the only organization is to put together a horde.


This game is so full, deep, and rich with elements of game play and most are ignored and not used just because it is better to cut corners to get the job done.

These two statements I agree with!

[HawkerMKII]

Your Answer: DONT FLY BISH of course they are going to go for the easiest bases no matter where

so very fast on the blame game.........facts first

[WEZEL]

Capturing Zone Bases moves the Strats back and makes it more difficult for individuals and/or squads to reach them with bombers.

On two occasions this week I have asked squad leaders why they took a Zone Base moving the Strats back, and the answer was the same in both cases:

"Because I can and have every right to, and I don't care if the Strats have moved back making it more difficult for you to reach them in bombers."

My questions to these two squad leaders and anyone else who agrees with their reasoning is this:

When you are sneaking a CV up to the Strats or a base to secretly shell either and I up a plane from the CV to attack your target because I can and have every right to, what are your thoughts?

When you are running an NOE mission and I run a high cap mission directly above your NOE mission because I can and have every right to, what are your thoughts?

I don't do these things because I don't want to screw up your plans, but when you capture Zone Bases for no good reason other than "because they are there" with no regard to how it effects the efforts of others to bomb the Strats, I'm considering beginning the above activities to embellish the missions of these squad leaders "because I can and have every right to."

Is there something I'm missing in the logic above

If that was the answer given to me I would up off the cv's and fly cap over the noe's for a day or two  but hey thats just me 

[DREDIOCK]

It's easy to figure out. Nobody.... well at least ALMOST nobody plays the game as a strategic war. There are very few tactics used, very few plans, and the only organization is to put together a horde.

To most of the players to "win the war" you have to capture as many bases as you can as fast as you can. They strip everything down to the bare minimum in all most all aspects of the game. Why take bombers to kill a base when you have enough players in your horde to do it in fighters which is much faster. Why try to hinder the enemy by hurting his supply when you can roll base after base with them full up any way. Why learn to fight when you and 5 of your buddies can HO the crap out of the only few players that up to defend.

This game is so full, deep, and rich with elements of game play and most are ignored and not used just because it is better to cut corners to get the job done.

This.

Especially the  first few sentences.

Wiht the number of people i typically see hording a base for capture. They should be able to capture two or three at the same time with proper planning and execution.

After several years now of being without it. I still think the old Zone system was better. Could it have been tweaked a bit? sure. But it even as it was was better then what we have now.

I'd rather see the old zone based system with perhaps primary country wide strats (factories, refineries, troop training) in groups spread out to several areas deep within a coutry kinda like HQ is now With secondary and more local effecting strats (depots, camps) spread out  around the map. Attacking deep strats (factories, refineries, troop training) effects the entire country. Local strats (depots,camps) are just that. Local to a zone attacking them effects things only within a zone and only for a limited time unless 2/3 of the zone bases (one of them being primary) are captured by the enemy at which point the zone strats become property of the capturing country. supply runs from the owning country to the local zone strats and outward to those zone bases. A captured base would not receive any supply at all but manually unless 2/3 of the zone bases are owned. Bases originally belonging to the home country would always receive some sort supply albeit reduced because of the lack of owning the zone strat

This would help prevent the local milkrunning we saw before as porking a zone strat could have a detrimental effect on your own captured bases if indeed you wanted to advance. Yet they would still be important for porking purposes and defending against them.

Right now. Other then to up and stop the bombers for the sake of stopping the bombers going o a strat raid. Nobody really cares if strats get porked or not