Author Topic: Yet Another Plea for Historical Gameplay  (Read 1841 times)

Offline Ace Rimmer

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Yet Another Plea for Historical Gameplay
« Reply #60 on: October 26, 2001, 02:47:00 PM »
<bump>

Ok we have an MA.. How about an ADDITIONAL HA or "Historical Arena"? Where we could run continuous historical scenarios?   :D

There we could have only Axis and Allied, US and Japanese planes and vehicles and maps.. ??? Kind of like a continuous "Event"?

What you think HTC?

Offline texter

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 123
Yet Another Plea for Historical Gameplay
« Reply #61 on: October 26, 2001, 03:22:00 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Ace Rimmer:
<bump>

Ok we have an MA.. How about an ADDITIONAL HA or "Historical Arena"? Where we could run continuous historical scenarios?    :D

What you think HTC?

I'm sure if you paid for the extra bandwidth for an arena that would be lightly used he'd have no problem opening another arena.
  :mad:

So, who wants to pony up?

Tex

UBB SUCKS PURPLE MONKEY BALLS!

Offline Arlo

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24759
Yet Another Plea for Historical Gameplay
« Reply #62 on: October 27, 2001, 12:02:00 AM »
There ya go .. yeah ... rotating smotating.

 Get that Spanish Civil War planeset and arena up and running! I'm sure theres a few here that aren't pure Dorka dweebs ar Stang studs ... or Niki nerds ... or ...

 Uber? Uber? You want UBER?

 Uberbipes!

Offline CRASH

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 186
Yet Another Plea for Historical Gameplay
« Reply #63 on: October 28, 2001, 12:26:00 AM »
An agenda? Advantage? Advantage in what?  Dude, it's a game.  We all fly around in circles and shoot each other down.  The agenda's to have more fun at it.  Inject a little variety into it once in awhile. No organized conspiracy to take away your favorite ride for the rest of your life.  Geez, you act like somebodies comin' to repo your furniture or somethin'.

CRASH

 
Quote
They, most of em, have an agenda that has nothing to do with parity and everything to do with gaining some sort of advantage.
lazs[/QB]

Offline lazs1

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 996
Yet Another Plea for Historical Gameplay
« Reply #64 on: October 28, 2001, 09:07:00 AM »
crash... anything past the BOB that is a "historical" and "allied vs Axis" planeset is lopsided and boring.  Who do you think want's to be the p4o and spit 5 guys during the 190a period?   Who wants to be a 190a guy during the mustang period....   Who the hell wants to fight in an arena that is either flying or fighting.... all 109/190 all the time.   Many LW guys want allied vs axis so that their rides will have a place in the sun... so that people will be forced to fly or fight against the vboring LW rides.
lazs

Offline Seeker

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2653
Yet Another Plea for Historical Gameplay
« Reply #65 on: October 28, 2001, 09:45:00 AM »
I'm not sure I agree with you there, Laz; I can think of several post BoB scenarios that are tense and well balanced for both sides:

Scwinfurt (Can we say Bigweek?  :) )

Malta

Operation Strangle

Operation Crossbow

Operation Carthage

Bodenplatte

Nieman

Leyte Gulf

Kursk

etc........

Offline lazs1

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 996
Yet Another Plea for Historical Gameplay
« Reply #66 on: October 29, 2001, 08:43:00 AM »
seeker... you will admit that there were very few timeframes where there was parity and... even when there was there was very little variety of planes.   Most of the scenarios you describe were just that.... scenarios not parts of a timeframe in WWII.

You would of course admit that there is infinitly more parity and variety possible with non historic planesets?
lazs

Offline Seeker

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2653
Yet Another Plea for Historical Gameplay
« Reply #67 on: October 29, 2001, 11:00:00 AM »
"seeker... you will admit that there were very few timeframes where there was parity "

I take it you mean a fair and even balance of forces? Then yes, I whole heartedly agree with you, it was extremely rare. However I maintain that's irrelvant, on two grounds:

A) The historical record shows that parity doesn't count for as much as command. The Battle of Britain is the archtype of this type of conflict - far, far away from parity, yet we all know the result. the point of a scenario being could you improve on history?

B) Parity doesn't automaticaly mean fun, and it's fun we're after. I'm aware that the events team take terrific pains to research their projects for accuracy, and I'm aware that there are people who jump down their necks for having an incorrect serial number painted on the plane - and what's the result? One poorly attended scenario since March. Hardly a strong argument for the status quo. War is hell. This is a war game, deal with it and have fun.

I'd have to agree 100% with your second point, but I'd suggest your running the risk of obsessing on parity. Parity schmarity - can you not imagine a fun event on *your* terms? I'm sure it would be different from mine, hopefully intrigingly so.

You know, just to stir things up, I'd love to see the 10 best luftwaffles in 262's up against, say - twenty or thiry Hurri IIC's or Shturmi's. Can you imagine the fragile ego's, the whining, the hilarity? The screen shots? *This* is the stuff community legends and memories are born from - some one like FD or Mitsu or even better some one completly unknown silencing Grun for the next three years with a screenshot of a HO'd 262 every time they start their "We are ubermen in undermoddeled uber planes" dance.

I'd like to jam *you* in a Mossie and see how you make out taking down the Copenhagen gestapo HQ. I *know* Supongo would love the chance to plan a reception for you.

Lets get making legends, and have a laugh doing it.

Offline lazs1

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 996
Yet Another Plea for Historical Gameplay
« Reply #68 on: October 29, 2001, 02:23:00 PM »
seeker... we don't totally dissagree.  Comand and determination and talent were very important in WWII.   This however...

Is a game.  A game needs to have the appearance of parity.  especially, and MA type environment where people come on and ofrf at all different times for different lengths of time and..... most importantly... to get different things out of the game.

Scripted scenarios are the place for "historical" gameplay not the MA.   Like I said... In the MA "historical" planesets becomes mindnumbingly boring at best and totally lopsided at worst in very short order.   Even those as acking in imagination as fluff drivers and those who fly for the girly grey, soon tire of the sameness of "historical" matchups.  

With such a lack of variety... people tend to focus on every little imagined "slight" to their prefered ride...  2 mph too slow... penetration wrong.... damage model unfair... we had mw50 and jatos and hyperdrive on this model... your plane didn't come out till april.. etc.
lazs

Offline moose

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2702
      • http://www.ccrhl.com
Yet Another Plea for Historical Gameplay
« Reply #69 on: October 29, 2001, 02:40:00 PM »
Plea for historical gameplay?


somehow i got a vivid image in my mind of you guys on your knees praying to a small effigy of hitech.
<----ASSASSINS---->

Offline Rotorian

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 470
Yet Another Plea for Historical Gameplay
« Reply #70 on: October 29, 2001, 03:54:00 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by texter:


"The MA is practice for scenarios."

Tex

YOU HEATHEN

  ;)