Knocking out HQ

[JunkyII]

Knights HQ went out 3 times in the few hours I played today, with the city already knocked down to almost single digits....I spent most of the day trying to find fights by jumping towers and flying over long distances hitting multiple flashing bases......

Not what I think many call fun.

Can we put a time limit on how often a HQ can get hit?

I was thinking once every 6 hours.

[Triton28]

Some are going to say, "You should defend your HQ".  Ehhh, I can't say I disagree. 

[Someguy63]

For HQ I think that the only thing that should be changed is th loss of dot dar. Only dar bars should be lost...and I guess also lengthened time intervals for resupply convoys...

[JunkyII]

Some are going to say, "You should defend your HQ".  Ehhh, I can't say I disagree. 

For sure, and I do help defend when I see it....who doesn't want to fly a rocket. But with the addition of B-29s it does take a Snailman approach to the game to catch that 30k B-29. Some maps you can also use NOE missions to knock out HQs, thing is already down by the time 163s make it there.

This type of night really doesn't happen too often but it has happened twice recently, and IMO does warrant some sort of action so one side isn't blinded 45 minutes for each hour played. Logging in and not being able to tell where a good fight is, isn't that players fault for not defending, just bad luck.

[BnZs]

Some are going to say, "You should defend your HQ".  Ehhh, I can't say I disagree. 

I'm sure you sit at 30K over the HQ a whole lot  Which is to say, don't even lie, you be furballin' when HQ goes down  

The HQ down thing is an extremely bad game dynamic. In an arena where action is hard enough to find, it makes it more difficult for players to find each for combat. And it doesn't just effect the team who gets their HQ bombed...if you are a Knight trying to pick a fight with Bish and their HQ is down, they can't tell you're coming in force, and thus may not up, thus killing the whole point of flying to an enemy base in the first place.

[WW1965]

I'm sure you sit at 30K over the HQ a whole lot  Which is to say, don't even lie, you be furballin' when HQ goes down  

The HQ down thing is an extremely bad game dynamic. In an arena where action is hard enough to find, it makes it more difficult for players to find each for combat. And it doesn't just effect the team who gets their HQ bombed...if you are a Knight trying to pick a fight with Bish and their HQ is down, they can't tell you're coming in force, and thus may not up, thus killing the whole point of flying to an enemy base in the first place.

 

[Zimme83]

This have been up before and the strategic value of killing HQ isnt that high most of the time, atleast people rarely use the hq downtime for base taking. Killing HQ should disable troops instead. that prevents the nmy from capture bases but fighing can go on anyway. Its more valuable strategic and its not ruining the party for those who just want a good fight.

[Lusche]

The combination of HQ connection to city health, City and HQ locations on the current map and the fact it needs only one NOE Lanc pilot to kill the HQ for hours really creates a game balance problem.
"Defend HQ" wasn't really possible for the Nits yesterday unless you had a staggered constant CAP above it. Even a Me 163 won't get you fast enough to the HQ if you only know about the attack the moment the HQ starts to flash.

How cutting the connection between HQ and City for a start?

For the record, I never have been a fan of the "all or nothing" HQ function..

[waystin2]

The combination of HQ connection to city health, City and HQ locations on the current map and the fact it needs only one NOE Lanc pilot to kill the HQ for hours really creates a game balance problem.

This is correct and definitely needs to be addressed.

[Randy1]

+1 till we get smaller maps or more players.

Defend HQ sounds good but just isn't working.  Most good fighting is so isolated from the HQ you often never see it coming.  If we go to smaller maps then HQ protection would be more in order.

[BnZs]

This have been up before and the strategic value of killing HQ isnt that high most of the time, atleast people rarely use the hq downtime for base taking. Killing HQ should disable troops instead. that prevents the nmy from capture bases but fighing can go on anyway. Its more valuable strategic and its not ruining the party for those who just want a good fight.

+1,000,000

[caldera]

Killing the darbars is just an annoyance that makes it harder to find a fight in a combat game.   

My personal favorites for an alternate result of a destroyed HQ:

1. Disable all AA.  This means fields, towns and even CV groups.  This would be a big incentive for the long and dangerous trip to the HQ and also much more incentive to defend it.  HQ battles would have a huge significance, as they should.

2. Disable base capture.  Supplies would still work and troops could be deployed, but an arena setting would keep any bases from being taken.  Most people like to be on offense.  If their troops are going to be nullified, they will be more inclined to defend the HQ.  Big fights at the HQ would happen, especially when a map is almost won.


Also, add my +1 to upping the HQ damage requirement so that a single set of Lancs can't take it down.

[Tinkles]

Killing the darbars is just an annoyance that makes it harder to find a fight in a combat game.   

My personal favorites for an alternate result of a destroyed HQ:

1. Disable all AA.  This means fields, towns and even CV groups.  This would be a big incentive for the long and dangerous trip to the HQ and also much more incentive to defend it.  HQ battles would have a huge significance, as they should.

2. Disable base capture.  Supplies would still work and troops could be deployed, but an arena setting would keep any bases from being taken.  Most people like to be on offense.  If their troops are going to be nullified, they will be more inclined to defend the HQ.  Big fights at the HQ would happen, especially when a map is almost won.


Also, add my +1 to upping the HQ damage requirement so that a single set of Lancs can't take it down.

I like this idea.   

[Volron]

Hmm...  Bish/Rook HQ goes down, nothing shows up on forum.  Nit HQ goes down and we see a topic on the forum somewhere.  Am I missing something here?


Upping the required ords to knock out HQ is something I can agree on though.  As pointed out, a single set of lanc's can take it out.  What if it is upped it to double or triple ords to knock it out but leave result the same?  Or revamp the HQ to be a multi structure thing, with a degrading effect for buildings down?  Crude Idea: 4 Buildings can be spread to a quarter to half a mile apart (at least close enough to each other so that you can resup all 4 at once), each requiring around 40k ords to knock out.  1 Building out: Enemy Dot Dar Out. 2 Buildings out: Enemy Dar Out. 3 Buildings out: Friendly Dot Dar Out. All buildings out: Current effect when HQ is down.


Regardless, I say there should be quadruple the amount of auto ack and puffy over it.  Something so important shouldn't be so lightly defended.

[Lusche]

Hmm...  Bish/Rook HQ goes down, nothing shows up on forum.  Nit HQ goes down and we see a topic on the forum somewhere. 

I'm pretty sure you can dig up such a thing from different sides in the past. And for the record I, having commented in this thread, am a Bishop this tour