New game stucture

[BaldEagl]

You'll never convince people to give up a means to "win".  They'll have to do that of their own accord or be coerced by gameplay mechanics.

Many changes have been made over the years from the addition of star wars ack to increasing town sizes to centralizing the strats to reducing radar alts and more.  Each has had an influence on the hordes and how they operate.  Not all of these changes have been for the better.

Personally I'd like to see the spread out zone strat system returned.  More ways to play and have fun and win in your own way would help to disburse some of the hordes.  I also like the idea of limiting how many and what types of aircraft can take off from a given size airfield (although there has to be accomodation to launch as many as needed from the uncapturable fields) and the idea of a zone based ENY system that would better localize the ENY restrictions.

Everyone plays the way that best allows them to feel they have won, whether that's by capturing territory, killing enemy's, chasing scores and ranks or garnering achievments (probably another tweak that could influence behavior) among others.  Everyone plays in the same sandbox by the same rules.

You can beat your head against the wall for another 11 years trying to shame people into playing differently or you can provide constructive ideas that subtly modify game behavior.  Obviously the first choice isn't working.

[The Fugitive]

You'll never convince people to give up a means to "win".  They'll have to do that of their own accord or be coerced by gameplay mechanics.

Many changes have been made over the years from the addition of star wars ack to increasing town sizes to centralizing the strats to reducing radar alts and more.  Each has had an influence on the hordes and how they operate.  Not all of these changes have been for the better.

Personally I'd like to see the spread out zone strat system returned.  More ways to play and have fun and win in your own way would help to disburse some of the hordes.  I also like the idea of limiting how many and what types of aircraft can take off from a given size airfield (although there has to be accomodation to launch as many as needed from the uncapturable fields) and the idea of a zone based ENY system that would better localize the ENY restrictions.

Everyone plays the way that best allows them to feel they have won, whether that's by capturing territory, killing enemy's, chasing scores and ranks or garnering achievments (probably another tweak that could influence behavior) among others.  Everyone plays in the same sandbox by the same rules.

You can beat your head against the wall for another 11 years trying to shame people into playing differently or you can provide constructive ideas that subtly modify game behavior.  Obviously the first choice isn't working.

I'm not beating my head against the wall, nor am I trying to shame anyone into changing how they play the game. My constructive ideas include laying out other options for these "generals" to change game play on there own. I have also made suggestions HTC could institute to change game play. However the biggest reason I post questions like this is to get as many people involved as possible to get as many ideas posted as possible. I am smart enough to know that I don't have all the answers and so look to see what others think. Maybe someone will post something that will spawn an idea in Hitechs head that will become a great addition to game structure and game play.

Many people posting ideas and thoughts is better than one person just "pizzin and moaning" on the boards. At this point I still enjoy this game, even in its current "horde mentality" form. I just don't see an active future for the game if it continues down this road. If the game isn't fun and exciting why would people continue to PAY and play it? If all you know is the horde mission how long is that going to be fun?

[pembquist]

While I like it and don't want to shot down your idea, have you ever seen a "gamer" start a new game? From what I've seen instruction sheets are pristine after years of non use (I don't think they even bother printing them any more) and they jump strait into the "action". Unless forced very few will bother using a training system.

I don't mean a training system. I have seen people suggest tutorials that you have to successfully complete. That is exactly what I am not talking about, that's the clutter most people want to skip over. I mean an offline resource that provides instant access to air combat with drones of selectable ability and selectable energy states/altitudes. Basically a drill area with a high ratio of drilling to time, no reading, diagrams, or level completions. The game doesn't have to explain maneuvers it just has to afford a way to practice them, optimally with the fewest clicks possible. Better skills lead to better game is my thinking.

[Franz Von Werra]

Fuel burn changed from 2x to 1x would be the New Game Structure that would blow your minds!

*imagine the term... 'altitude' so ON THE DECK speed wouldn't be most important factor!
*Massive formations of fighters bombers, and c47's going across a map...
*Massive formations of fighters trying to guess their course and where to intercept (not so easy when enemy is at 30k or higher)...
*Fuel buys time for large groups of players to form up! <--- the key!
*Every plane can come along because ALL would have RANGE, except for the FURTHEST MISSIONS, where FUEL tanks can be used and required! Capital to Capital would be the only exclusionary case depending on the map.
*Your fight will rarely be against TIME, mostly against FUEL WEIGHT!
*Base captures far behind enemy lines, and continuing intense fights that require strategic choices and teamwork to win the day.
*Squad nights with other players or squads added/picked up, would see better action than FSO, since main arena has dar, icons, working radar, etc etc...
*Enemy fighters show up ANYWHERE, with new improved range, especially if NOE radar is raised to higher than tree level, like it used to be!
*Fighters could even circle really slow, just under radar near enemy bases, I used to even land, hide near a barn or something, have lunch or do homework waiting for something to up! *yes fighters camping!
*Fighter sweeps over the other two enemy fights! New meaning to 'cherry pick' (like a Rook flying around a Knite-Bish fight.)
*Add troops to the He-111, and it would be sooo totally ON... (better than the pingy thing the old days c47's had poking out right side of the plane...)
*Game population would probably go exponential!

And about these claims of "la-7 planes with 100% fuel vulching for an hour"... NOT, they would get pwned by other planes upping with 25% fuel (50% by current flight time) that would loop and turn all over them.

The ONE FAULT of FUEL BURN 1X... fuel load does become 'the great equalizer' even more so than our 2x... A spit1 with 25% fuel might pwn a spit16 with 100% fuel, in most catagories. How you fly might TOTALLY BE DETERIMED BY YOUR FUEL GAGE.

Blow your minds! Most of you might think you can imagine, but you weren't there! You don't know!...
I feel like an actual war vet trying to tell you guys how it was... you don't even know what you're missing! :/
I'm sure that others here, from the old days, would agree... 1x would blow your minds!
And to the 'online vets' vets of days of old... this game (version) would be better! This game is new and improved since those days!
I can't believe it was ever changed... What's HTC know that the rest of us 'online vets' don't?  
As is, very fun, but every fight winds up a flying through ack, and then a vulch fest? Me no like flying thru ack!

A new study and wishlist topic: which planes had a switch to drain a fuel tank

Put fuelburn to 1x on the least populated day, and watch it become the most populated day within... two weeks, really!

Notice my sig?

[Karnak]

It would be popular because people could haul less fuel to accomplish the same thing making the P-51D, Mosquito Mk VI, A6M and other such long ranged aircraft more agile while also giving La-7s, Fw190s, Spitfires and Bf109s the range to go wherever they wanted.

It would not cause people to fly at high altitudes or in large numbers as you suggest.  There is currently no barrier to doing so in bombers as most bombers can reach any location on the map after climbing to 20-30k.  Fighters, even Spitfires and Bf109s, also have no problems operating at those altitudes, though the shorter ranged fighters cannot penetrate deep into enemy territory.

[The Fugitive]

I was here when the fuel burn was 1x and don't remember high alt masses of planes.

I agree with Karnak that all that would do is have planes upping with less fuel to try and get an edge in maneuverability. 

[Franz Von Werra]

Karnak:
Most players know that the fuel tank hurts plane performance, even after it's dropped, few would fly sooo far to be at such disadvantage!!! Difference!

Yes they DID up in masses in the old days, SQUAD NIGHTS... and pickup groups, taking off from 3 bases within friendly lines, flying to 4 or so bases behind enemy lines! All this at a time when home computers were not in every household!... we have the same or less population #s now, yet there are a billion more pc's out there than back then!

If you doubt it, then LETS TEST, fuel burn 1x Wednesdays!

I wasn't here when fuelburn was 1x IN AH, but I was in AW2, and AW3, exact predecessors of this game...
FUEL BURN 1X could cause this game to actually be MASSIVE multiplayer... we get 300 players with half in tower is not quite massive!

Check FSO... more players than in the MAIN arena and ALL in the AIR... and again, 1x in main with icons, dar, radar, is better than FSO!!!

Fugi if you didn't see masses, I wonder if you were at the ending stages of AW3 when the arena's were split to Europe and Pacific, meaning a Zeek couldn't fight a 109... causing numbers to drop off terribly. AW ended for a reason! Or were you in the early stages of AH1?

And I for one DID NOT make the transition from AW3 to AH(1), 8 years break or so, to Microsoft flightsim, etc, not all of us accepted the 'month free' or what what when we AW3'ers got our AH1 CD mailed to us.
Not to mention there were other games competing and coming out then too probably.
These days, for air to air, this is the ww2 plane game without any competition for what it does... base capture etc etc.

[Karnak]

AH never had 1x in the MA.  It used to be 1.5x and then was changed to 2x.

The lower player population or different player culture or different gameplay goals in the game are far more likelier to be the cause of the gameplay changes you've seen than any fuel consumption changes.

In the Mossie, my most commonly taken plane, I take 50% fuel.  If the fuel burn was 1x I would simply save 700lbs and take 25%.

[Franz Von Werra]

Karnak, you are obviously stuck in 2x mode...
Your thoughts don't seem to see past the nearest base...   

You must unlearn what u have learned... too old to begin the training! ~ Yoda
You seemingly can't even imagine 'epic' compared to this nearest base stuff.

Is there an expense issue that HTC doesn't want to spend? Like the split main arena thing back when?
HTC is Karnak defending that which is hidden to the public?

What's wrong with 1x????? sooo epic even '20,000 posts' Karnak can't imagine!

WHY CAN'T WE TRY IT ONE DAY A WEEK???

[Tinkles]

Karnak, you are obviously stuck in 2x mode...
Your thoughts don't seem to see past the nearest base...   

You must unlearn what u have learned... too old to begin the training! ~ Yoda
You seemingly can't even imagine 'epic' compared to this nearest base stuff.

Is there an expense issue that HTC doesn't want to spend? Like the split main arena thing back when?
HTC is Karnak defending that which is hidden to the public?

What's wrong with 1x????? sooo epic even '20,000 posts' Karnak can't imagine!

WHY CAN'T WE TRY IT ONE DAY A WEEK???

If most players are going to pick the uber rides, the low ENY, easiest to get a kill with rides. Like the Peee51 then what do you think people are going to fly when fuel is dropped to x1?

I would like the option for certain low range planes to have the option of x1 burn rate, I don't see it happening.  It isn't about imagining anything, or hoping for the best.   It's about looking at the consequences, something you don't do.

[ReVo]

Here are my thoughts on some changes that I think might help promote combat over simply running over a base.

1:While not my idea I do like the concept of limiting the number of aircraft that can come off a base in a set time. Though I am unsure how this would best be implemented.

2:I think a small perk cost (2-4) added to Wirbles only when a player spawns at an airfield would help encourage people to up aircraft for defense. Perhaps some other AA vehicles that aren't quite as tough should be added as well?

3:Remove the 88mm flak guns from all airbases, and increase the number of 88's and other anti-aircraft guns on vbases. Vehicle bases need the extra firepower to defend against mass bombers/attack aircraft, airfields have fighters.

4:Count any gun that is destroyed while being controlled by a player as a kill for the attacking party, and a death for the defending party. If people towering when they see a con diving on them will be a problem then a five second delay should be imposed from the time a player ends flight.

5:Increase the hardness of hangars, or increase the number of hangars on every base. This should be implemented along with either a reduction in accuracy of the auto-calibrating bombsite as altitude increases or players should be required to manually calibrate. With the current mechanics two or three sets of 25k bombers can shut down an entire field in one pass.

6:Increase the hardness of ordnance bunkers. One suicide Pony should not be able to pork ords at a field.

7:Introduce perked ordnance loads for the P-51 and F4U-1D.

[Tinkles]

Here are my thoughts on some changes that I think might help promote combat over simply running over a base.

1:While not my idea I do like the concept of limiting the number of aircraft that can come off a base in a set time. Though I am unsure how this would best be implemented.

2:I think a small perk cost (2-4) added to Wirbles only when a player spawns at an airfield would help encourage people to up aircraft for defense. Perhaps some other AA vehicles that aren't quite as tough should be added as well?

3:Remove the 88mm flak guns from all airbases, and increase the number of 88's and other anti-aircraft guns on vbases. Vehicle bases need the extra firepower to defend against mass bombers/attack aircraft, airfields have fighters.

4:Count any gun that is destroyed while being controlled by a player as a kill for the attacking party, and a death for the defending party. If people towering when they see a con diving on them will be a problem then a five second delay should be imposed from the time a player ends flight.

5:Increase the hardness of hangars, or increase the number of hangars on every base. This should be implemented along with either a reduction in accuracy of the auto-calibrating bombsite as altitude increases or players should be required to manually calibrate. With the current mechanics two or three sets of 25k bombers can shut down an entire field in one pass.

6:Increase the hardness of ordnance bunkers. One suicide Pony should not be able to pork ords at a field.

7:Introduce perked ordnance loads for the P-51 and F4U-1D.

I agree with all except #3.  I have saved quite a few bases because the attackers didn't kill the 88s and were vulching, making it impossible for anyone to take off (and we had 5+ trying to take off at once).   I agree the 88s can get annoying sometimes, they are legit defense, and are easy to kill (and evade) if you know how to do it.

[guncrasher]

I agree with all except #3.  I have saved quite a few bases because the attackers didn't kill the 88s and were vulching, making it impossible for anyone to take off (and we had 5+ trying to take off at once).   I agree the 88s can get annoying sometimes, they are legit defense, and are easy to kill (and evade) if you know how to do it.

make all the ack down for perhaps 5 minutes at most.  nothing better than to vulch uppers with all ack up and werbies all around.  heck I look forward to dead guys thinking they can hide in the ack at a base.


semp

[Karnak]

Karnak, you are obviously stuck in 2x mode...
Your thoughts don't seem to see past the nearest base...   

You must unlearn what u have learned... too old to begin the training! ~ Yoda
You seemingly can't even imagine 'epic' compared to this nearest base stuff.

Is there an expense issue that HTC doesn't want to spend? Like the split main arena thing back when?
HTC is Karnak defending that which is hidden to the public?

What's wrong with 1x????? sooo epic even '20,000 posts' Karnak can't imagine!

WHY CAN'T WE TRY IT ONE DAY A WEEK???

I didn't say it couldn't be tried.  I said what the outcome would be and I am so confident I am right I would be willing to bet on it.  Say, if it is tried and it turns out as you say I pay your subscription fee forever and if it turns out as I say then you pay my subscription fee forever.

You are so focused on your idea being good that you aren't thinking about the counter points people bring up and are instead reacting to them as generic opposition.  You have provided no mechanism through which the effects you claim it would have would actually happen or even be encouraged.

You accuse me of being stuck on a 2x mindset, but you can't even explain what that means.  I usually pick a fighter that carries so much fuel that even at 2x I only take 50% fuel and when it was introduced it had a mistake in its model that had it consuming double the fuel it should so it was flying around at 3x while everybody else was at 1.5x.  So, if I am taking 50% now at 2x why would I not shed 700lbs of fuel and take 25% at 1x?  If that is the choice facing me, why wouldn't it be faced by almost every other player as well?

[The Fugitive]

Here are my thoughts on some changes that I think might help promote combat over simply running over a base.

1:While not my idea I do like the concept of limiting the number of aircraft that can come off a base in a set time. Though I am unsure how this would best be implemented.

2:I think a small perk cost (2-4) added to Wirbles only when a player spawns at an airfield would help encourage people to up aircraft for defense. Perhaps some other AA vehicles that aren't quite as tough should be added as well?

3:Remove the 88mm flak guns from all airbases, and increase the number of 88's and other anti-aircraft guns on vbases. Vehicle bases need the extra firepower to defend against mass bombers/attack aircraft, airfields have fighters.

4:Count any gun that is destroyed while being controlled by a player as a kill for the attacking party, and a death for the defending party. If people towering when they see a con diving on them will be a problem then a five second delay should be imposed from the time a player ends flight.

5:Increase the hardness of hangars, or increase the number of hangars on every base. This should be implemented along with either a reduction in accuracy of the auto-calibrating bombsite as altitude increases or players should be required to manually calibrate. With the current mechanics two or three sets of 25k bombers can shut down an entire field in one pass.

6:Increase the hardness of ordnance bunkers. One suicide Pony should not be able to pork ords at a field.

7:Introduce perked ordnance loads for the P-51 and F4U-1D.

I don't think field guns are that big  an issue. After all they are pretty easily taken out.

As for adding toughness to target people say that they will just bring more people so adding to the horde. On top of that, hardening of the targets makes it even harder for small groups to attack and take bases.