HQ Downtime should be tied to 25% fuel reduction - Reasons Why

[DREDIOCK]

One thing that needs to be adressed before anyting else though.
Fix the damn darbbar colors on the map that was up lastnight

[Slate]

ps- the HQ still needs to be hardened so that a single player cannot destroy it.

   ^^^^^ This is what I was thinking. Why couldn't the HQ have % like the other strats. Hit some of it radar out for 15 min. hit more 30 min, ect. it would at least give time for a defense and not resupplying it and have one more bomber that was already on the way to take it totally down again.  

[Aspen]

I would rather HQ just have a shorter max down time.  Either 15 or 30 minutes.  Its still a punch in the nose but it eliminates the 2 hour stints that make people decide to go to bed, do the dishes or watch old Barnaby Jones reruns instead of play.

[Lusche]

Triple damage required to 112.500 lb, set HQ downtime to 30 minutes fixed - no modifier, no resupply. 

[Xavier]

Triple damage required to 112.500 lb, set HQ downtime to 30 minutes fixed - no modifier, no resupply. 

B-but my lancs...

[Wiley]

Triple damage required to 112.500 lb, set HQ downtime to 30 minutes fixed - no modifier, no resupply. 

That sounds reasonable to me.  Question- how long does bomb damage stick to a ground target?  If I drop a bomb on a target, how long before that damage is reset or repaired or whatever if that target is not hit again?

Wiley.

[Lusche]

That sounds reasonable to me.  Question- how long does bomb damage stick to a ground target?  If I drop a bomb on a target, how long before that damage is reset or repaired or whatever if that target is not hit again?

Half basic object downtime (without any modifiers)

[DubiousKB]

Place the HQ in the middle of the City strat - No more NOE attacks due to the shredder ack around City strat.

As for the fuel thing, I like it, in addition to an affected dar bar/ dot dar reduction. There needs to be a significant advantage to dropping the HQ, as in most maps to get to HQ requires a fairly significant investment of time on the attackers part.

[pembquist]

The HQ target is the only thing next to a CV that the lone bomber has as a big satisfying binary goal. If you increased the ord requirement to destroy it by just a little bit to take it out of the single lancaster formation capability I would expect it would go down a lot less.

Is it a problem? Yes and no. I think it is a real annoyance when the population is super low, otherwise....so so.

[DmonSlyr]

For something as grand as the HQ is deemed to be in this game, it should definitely take more than one set of bombers to take it down, it should be a a squad/effort.

The point of killing it is to put the other team at an extreme disadvantage so that the other team has a chance to capture a couple of bases.

I'd say 15 minutes is a good enough time.

Even a warning from that chick that the HQ specifically is being attacked may help out.

It should cause horrid effects to the other team. But it should also be quite more difficult to take it down.

[Zerstorer]

For something as grand as the HQ is deemed to be in this game, it should definitely take more than one set of bombers to take it down, it should be a a squad/effort.

The point of killing it is to put the other team at an extreme disadvantage so that the other team has a chance to capture a couple of bases.

I'd say 15 minutes is a good enough time.

Even a warning from that chick that the HQ specifically is being attacked may help out.

It should cause horrid effects to the other team. But it should also be quite more difficult to take it down.

^^ this.

[Chilli]

I have run into this problem at work.  The logic, "it is done that way because it was always done that way." 

I say tie it to fuel and leave the supply and hardness the way it is.  It works for other strats, and the only big stink with HQ, is the negative impact on finding fights and causing players to loose interest and log off.

Fuel (to be clear Floob, I did suggest no drop tanks and 75%) limits would be an adequate reward for flying long, possibly dangerous mission to HQ.  As Latrobe pointed out SOME folks would hardly notice, and I am sure that some folks would just about hit the roof in disappointment over limitation of their aircraft choices (see any ENY thread).

The logic of connection of HQ to radar, should only affect the information received from HQ via maybe telegraph, or some other wired connection.  Otherwise all the radar towers are still operating fine (unless also damaged by enemy attack). 

So, the immediate "lights out" for the entire country is NOT anywhere near as logical as "rations" for fuel until supply line has been re established.

IMHO, "lights out" across the board should be a thing of the past, even for short periods of time.  Many days a few minutes to log in and have fun is all that is available.  the last thing that I want to do is see a barren looking map.   

Killing DAR is killing potential FIGHTS  (note I will kill a radar tower for that purpose, only when I see there is an attempted mission to that field).

[Chilli]

The HQ target is the only thing next to a CV that the lone bomber has as a big satisfying binary goal. If you increased the ord requirement to destroy it by just a little bit to take it out of the single lancaster formation capability I would expect it would go down a lot less.

Is it a problem? Yes and no. I think it is a real annoyance when the population is super low, otherwise....so so.

Bombing HQ is dead last on my list of satisfying achievements, and I fly bombers plenty.  However, hitting a single building to do the destroy HQ, can only reward a single player who puts the final blow on the structure, or did I miss something on the way damage is scored (could just be the damage text message that I am confused by).

I disagree, Pembquist, it is annoying anytime it happens.  Only has a very limited effect on ground vehicle game play.  In all other areas, it is pure horse manure.

[JimmyD3]

You could always move the HQ closer to a resupply source and add some decent "puffy ack" like the City has. Another option is to eliminate the DAR BAR on HQ going down, keep the local radars up but no DAR BAR, this would maintain the local base info, but eliminate the global info.

[Naughty]

     My 2 cents.. Taking from all the suggestions.

         #1 If HQ is so important, it should be better defended. I like the idea of having it in the middle of the city. it makes sense ! Almost every country in history had their HQ in a major city, not out in the middle of nowhere.

         #2 It should be harder to take down. it should require atleast 2 sets of lancs to have to make it there.

         #3 with each base having it's own radar, HQ being down should not effect local dar, only sector dar bars. and out of dar circle friendly cons.