About the new terrain

[Karnak]

So the solution is to remove the 'war winning' aspect which clearly causes problems in the game if people are gamey enough to destroy the game balance just for this.

That is a "destroy the village to save the village" type of solution.   That would probably cause the loss of 50-90% of plyers immediately,  shortly followed by the rest.

[zack1234]

This is a outrageous suggestion

What would the Jokers do in game if this was implemented

The horde would no longer be valid!

[The Fugitive]

So the solution is to remove the 'war winning' aspect which clearly causes problems in the game if people are gamey enough to destroy the game balance just for this.

Base takes could be made attractive simply through awarding perks and score to people who participate to the fight in the area. And to avoid gaming the game by all hording to one side, make perk/point rewards directly related to the numbers. If you're in a 10:1 horde in the sector when base take happens you get awarded 1 perkie, if you're 1:10 under dog when base take happens, award 100 perkies. Only dumb people would horde after that as balance would be more beneficial whatever way the base take would happen.

As an idea bases could be tied to certain planetypes (i.e. own base A1, get use of Spit16, Pony D...) for example, which would make fighting over strategic bases interesting even without the 'war winning' aspect. Just like losing your last port rips you off of a CV capability.

One, you can't do away with the "win the warz" as that is what drives most of the battles. Sure you get some furballs/spawncamps that pop up and have nothing to do with the "war" is is nothing but battle for the sake of battle. For the most part, if there is no war, the arenas would soon look like WWI arena.

Incentive by perks.... naw I don't think so. The reason the "win the warz" guys race to grab base after base is because that is what the game is ..... to them any way. The whole object of this game is to capture as many bases as it takes to WIN DA WARZ! So perks are unimportant... ask the P38 drivers that lawn darted all along the landscape   So earning less perks isn't going to do a thing. Upping the score and/or perks for defending out number might help get more defenders.

Tying planes to bases is like forcing players into something. HTC has never been into forcing anyone to do anything. Again these players rarely take bases due to strategic reasons. More often than not it's the next undefended base that no body is watching.

The problem is the horde as I see it. If the horde was split up there would be a longer front for battles to happen on. As it is now you have the Bish horde hitting the Knits and the Knit horde hitting the Rooks and the rook horde hitting the Bish..... never the hordes shall meet! So you either ride with the horde or fight against it.

So in the "not forcing anyone to do anything" or the "take anything away form players" mode what things can be done to create more fights? Sure some like Panos, Rocky, TonyJoey love hordes as they think fighting is just circling over a group of planes to dive in pick one and blow out the other side to only turn back once they have their perch back. For for most of the "fighter" types flying with the horde your spending all your time trying to beat your teammates to the kill or fighting against the horde your spending all your time dodging HOs taking snap shots to try and get a kill, neither can really be called "fighting".

Tying the requirements for the base capture to the number of attackers would still allow hordes to attack, but being harder to capture would give defenders more time to fight back. Small fast attacks wouldn't have to work as hard to capture bases. This would encourage small attack groups but still allow the horde should players still want that kind of mission. While it still allows the hordes Im thinking that as I believe todays players are more interested in grabbing as many bases as they can to win da warz that you would see the groups split up and attack 2-3 base at the same time looking to do quick easy grabs over the long drawn out horde attack. Picture 2 or 3 new attacks coming along every 20-30 minutes or so all over the map. Quick attack, grab the base or not, move on to a new attack. There would be short quick fights all over the map.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

One, you can't do away with the "win the warz" as that is what drives most of the battles. Sure you get some furballs/spawncamps that pop up and have nothing to do with the "war" is is nothing but battle for the sake of battle. For the most part, if there is no war, the arenas would soon look like WWI arena.

I never played a second 'to win the war'. I played to have fun battles and couldn't care less for the map winning part. The map winning hording is what pushed me away from AH.

Incentive by perks.... naw I don't think so. The reason the "win the warz" guys race to grab base after base is because that is what the game is ..... to them any way. The whole object of this game is to capture as many bases as it takes to WIN DA WARZ! So perks are unimportant... ask the P38 drivers that lawn darted all along the landscape   So earning less perks isn't going to do a thing. Upping the score and/or perks for defending out number might help get more defenders.

Yes so we return back to the unhealthy attitude caused by efforts to 'win the war'.

Tying planes to bases is like forcing players into something. HTC has never been into forcing anyone to do anything. Again these players rarely take bases due to strategic reasons. More often than not it's the next undefended base that no body is watching.

Oddly enough nobody has cried out on quitting the game because the CV is not usable after the last port is lost. What people do? They fight to get it back.

The problem is the horde as I see it. If the horde was split up there would be a longer front for battles to happen on. As it is now you have the Bish horde hitting the Knits and the Knit horde hitting the Rooks and the rook horde hitting the Bish..... never the hordes shall meet! So you either ride with the horde or fight against it.

Yes which is why I brought up the issue of 1) negating the need for hording and 2) punishing the players by reducing points if they attend a horde. It should be more rewarding to be the underdog than going where the bar is the lowest.

So in the "not forcing anyone to do anything" or the "take anything away form players" mode what things can be done to create more fights? Sure some like Panos, Rocky, TonyJoey love hordes as they think fighting is just circling over a group of planes to dive in pick one and blow out the other side to only turn back once they have their perch back. For for most of the "fighter" types flying with the horde your spending all your time trying to beat your teammates to the kill or fighting against the horde your spending all your time dodging HOs taking snap shots to try and get a kill, neither can really be called "fighting".

Tying the requirements for the base capture to the number of attackers would still allow hordes to attack, but being harder to capture would give defenders more time to fight back. Small fast attacks wouldn't have to work as hard to capture bases. This would encourage small attack groups but still allow the horde should players still want that kind of mission. While it still allows the hordes Im thinking that as I believe todays players are more interested in grabbing as many bases as they can to win da warz that you would see the groups split up and attack 2-3 base at the same time looking to do quick easy grabs over the long drawn out horde attack. Picture 2 or 3 new attacks coming along every 20-30 minutes or so all over the map. Quick attack, grab the base or not, move on to a new attack. There would be short quick fights all over the map.

If score would be tied to numbers, defenders could decide to abandon base leaving the horde to have its inevitable result of a base take but deny any victory points for it Same thing would make milk running empty bases fruitless, a solution that would solve the two stupidest things in AH that I know of. Perhaps the system could also reward points and perks to base defenders after a successful defense against a mission or a large horde pounding.

[-error]

Are we going to get something like this
with new terrain engine?

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Are we going to get something like this (Image removed from quote.)
with new terrain engine?

RC planes high?

[Megalodon]

The new terrain system is looking very promising so far. If needed I can rework my CraterMA terrain for it once the tools are available to do so.

Cool your while there ....add some Ju87G2's for the v-bases inside the crater 

[KG45]

'excreta' ? 

[The Fugitive]

I never played a second 'to win the war'. I played to have fun battles and couldn't care less for the map winning part. The map winning hording is what pushed me away from AH.

Like I said to Semp, this isn't about you. It doesn't matter whether YOU ever play to win the war it's what most of the players are doing.

Yes so we return back to the unhealthy attitude caused by efforts to 'win the war'.

Winning the war type of game play isn't "unhealthy", it is what drives the combat. Look at WWI arena. There is no base capture, no win the war, and it's a ghost town.

Oddly enough nobody has cried out on quitting the game because the CV is not usable after the last port is lost. What people do? They fight to get it back.

Yes which is why I brought up the issue of 1) negating the need for hording and 2) punishing the players by reducing points if they attend a horde. It should be more rewarding to be the underdog than going where the bar is the lowest.

You can't take away the horde. If you stop it you will lose a bunch of players as that is the type of game they want to play.  New players hide in it until they feel they have enough skill to move out..... for those looking to improve. For those that couldn't care less about being a good dogfighter they have to have a place/style to play as well or they are gone. That's why I suggests letting the horde continue, but some way must be brought into the game to counter it. Either by changing how hard it is for a larger group to take a base or some other adjustment to game play mechanics.

If score would be tied to numbers, defenders could decide to abandon base leaving the horde to have its inevitable result of a base take but deny any victory points for it Same thing would make milk running empty bases fruitless, a solution that would solve the two stupidest things in AH that I know of. Perhaps the system could also reward points and perks to base defenders after a successful defense against a mission or a large horde pounding.

Like ALL scoring it is open to "tweaking" ....bombing town centers, using the cookie only and rearming and any other trick you wish to name to work the scoreboard. However it is a "carrot" you can use to turn game play into another direction. If there was a bonus score for killing troops and goons how many more "hunters" do you think you'd see?

Horde play is very much part of the game and HTC has shown that they are ok with it seeing as they haven't done anything to curb it. Building it into the game and providing a counter or a way to make it "fun" or worth going against is  or should be the next step.

[Bizman]

'excreta' ? 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/excreta  I'm not any kind of an expert in coading, but I believe that must be something that makes the grass pop up when you're close enough to the ground. Some kind of virtual instant fertilizer, that is.

[Greebo]

Cool your while there ....add some Ju87G2's for the v-bases inside the crater 

Actually one thing I would like added to the game is a new forward airfield with no ord bunkers and bomber hangars. This would let terrain designers place airfields near tank town for fighter defence without bringing bombers too near as well. Give it an "F" prefix so it would be obvious from the map. It could have a pierced steel runway and a temporary looking, largely tented infrastructure.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Like I said to Semp, this isn't about you. It doesn't matter whether YOU ever play to win the war it's what most of the players are doing.

First of all, please never EVER put me and semp in the same sentence!

Second, I can only speak of my personal experience. Since I belong to the crowd that HAS flocked away from AH and I know the reasons why I did it, I talk about it. The people who like the current situation seem to be diminishing rapidly.

Winning the war type of game play isn't "unhealthy", it is what drives the combat. Look at WWI arena. There is no base capture, no win the war, and it's a ghost town.

WWI arena is a ghost town due to lack of players and a limited planeset. If war winning was important the EW and MW servers should be bristling with players too. Well they aren't so your point is void.

You can't take away the horde. If you stop it you will lose a bunch of players as that is the type of game they want to play.  New players hide in it until they feel they have enough skill to move out..... for those looking to improve. For those that couldn't care less about being a good dogfighter they have to have a place/style to play as well or they are gone. That's why I suggests letting the horde continue, but some way must be brought into the game to counter it. Either by changing how hard it is for a larger group to take a base or some other adjustment to game play mechanics.

You can install a penalty for joining the horde. You would get your easy kills but you wouldn't gain much score that way. So players who care about bragging rights and rank would pick a C202 to fight with the under dog instead, in my idea of a scenario. A single C202 kill of a P51D against a horde would score you heaps - as it should because it's infinately more demanding for a player to achieve.

Like ALL scoring it is open to "tweaking" ....bombing town centers, using the cookie only and rearming and any other trick you wish to name to work the scoreboard. However it is a "carrot" you can use to turn game play into another direction. If there was a bonus score for killing troops and goons how many more "hunters" do you think you'd see?

I think there is reward enough in preventing the base capture as it is. Most people will immediately drop a goon if they see it.

Horde play is very much part of the game and HTC has shown that they are ok with it seeing as they haven't done anything to curb it. Building it into the game and providing a counter or a way to make it "fun" or worth going against is  or should be the next step.

HTC has shown that they're on a decline and they need to turn direction or go the route of Warbirds. AH was WB:s WT. Reinvent yourself or die, this is the sad truth.

I'm not saying my ideas are a miracle solution to anything, this is just the first things I would change in the gameplay if I could.

[-error]

RC planes high?

Not sure what are you saying. It's a screenshot from WT. 

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Not sure what are you saying. It's a screenshot from WT. 

The grass texture gives me the impression that the plane is an RC plane sitting on a dry grass field.

[Lusche]

WWI arena is a ghost town due to lack of players and a limited planeset. If war winning was important the EW and MW servers should be bristling with players too. Well they aren't so your point is void.

It took a long time (years) of gradual decline for EW & MW to arrive at the current numbers. WW1 lost it's appeal very quickly, within a few weeks only. And the main reason was indeed a very one dimensional style of combat, which will get quite boring for most players after some time. More so, if you are not an 'ACM god', which very few are. Most ppl do suck in fighters compared to that top 10%, and having a fully developed gameplay enables them to contribute in different ways (and get a sense of 'winning' every once and then)