HQ Downtimes set for 5 minutes

[JunkyII]

looks like the majority of the ones whining about the Fix are almost all in the same Squad, imagine that 

Looks like we need to beat up on them again.

[scott66]

Looks like we need to beat up on them again.

bully!

[dogtag380]

It's about time.  Shoulda happened long ago.  Hope that Hitech makes this a permanent fix... not the temporary fix that is in now. None the less, a positive step in the right direction. 

[bozon]

I point out the first thing we took out in the Gulf War was the Command and Control of Iraq..

... and all the Iraqi players logged out.

How is that relevant to the game?

[capera]

See rule #7

[capera]

1. HQ downtime should be still up to 125 minutes. Neutered?
2. If anything, the single unstoppable NOE HQ raider is "making everyone else play the way he wants".

One single player should NOT be able to drop HQ. This is a simulation, and it only stands to reason that one single soldier/airman cannot/should not be able to effectively shut down a HQ strat.

If that is why this issue is being looked at by Hitech and his team....then that makes sense.

I assumed this was about the 49'ers & friends tactically dropping HQ.

[caldera]

Yes.

Artillery has been in the game since it's inception. The fact that some squadrons are tactically utilizing this feature, should not be an issue. If someone is attacking your HQ, then get off your duffs and defend or prevent the enemy from accessing your HQ.  DONT run to Hitech....whining and sniveling crying foul.

I am totally blown away that Hitech would entertain the idea of regulating the "tactical attack" of HQ.......when him and his programmers put this option into the game. The attackers (49'ers & friends) and not hacking or abusing the system. They are taking the time (usually 2-3 hour drive) to get into a tactical position....and attack. If your country does not like this to happen, pull up your BIG BOY pants and defend. Stop runnin to mamma bear and crying.

Let us know how to defend when they can gun down the HQ without even flashing it.  That 2-3 hour drive must have been harrowing, knowing full well the only danger being your tank hits a tree and stops moving while you are trying to get some shuteye.

Perhaps people should spend many hours of their precious lives vigilantly camping their own HQ, on the chance some grieftard happens by.


Go offline and blow up the HQ.  You'll get the same "action". 

[capera]

Then......there is a problem with giving indication to your country that  HQ is under attack.

You are right, if you have no way of knowing it is being attacked, then how can you properly respond to an attack.

This issue should not be focused on the actions of the people attacking, but more towards finding a way to give notification of attack, so that any given country has the opportunity to defend.

[Interceptor]

HTC was right and didnt "miss the mark" : last week, 3 days in a row, every time i could play (morning in euro time, its low pop), the HQ was down or went down within the 10 minutes i logged in, for hours.

If the HTC decision to SUPPORT low-pop  players hadnt come, i'd have canceled my account two days later.

Once again, just READ what ppl write : problem W A S  N O T the HQ feature, it was few minority of individuals whose goal was to ruin other players game experience by ABUSING the HQ feature at low-pop, knowing it would be a pain in the *ss for so few players in the other side to resup it.

Man, one even YELLED on channel 200 30sec after another time the HQ went down, saying "Hey Rooks, your HQ is down for hours"! 

If you all think the numbers in the game are falling because people are dropping HQ, then you are missing the mark.

[DmonSlyr]

See rule #7

[capera]

Maybe HQ should be an "operational" base, with the capability to launch aircraft/vehicles.

[Copprhed]

So this morning, I go in, and (knights) and find our HQ down AND that the rooks and Bish have teamed up to reduce our fields to 60%. They are not trying to win the game, but only reduce our side. they both had large percentages of rooks, yet little to none of each others'. For the most part in here I see the whiners being from those two sides, with a few well thought opinions from Lusche who has been playing knights mostly, that I've seen. Why is this, I wonder?

[FBKampfer]

Fact is that if your playing generally reduces the amount of gameplay going on, either the rules are broken and need to be fixed (what has happened), or you're abusing a known problem, which can fall under the category of cheating.

But you can't claim everything is just fine and dandy when people start to log off because of your actions. It's bad for everyone that wants to play the game differently than you, and they outnumber you by a signisignificant amount.

[Copprhed]

I cna't edit my previous post now, but intended to say that each of the other side had large percentage of knights, not rooks. not a response to kampfer, just an editorial correction.

[Aspen]

Games are constantly changed when some aspect of how they are coded isn't giving the desired results.  No one was breaking any rules killing HQ, but the effects of it were taking away from the game.  Doesn't matter if players were right or wrong in complaining about it or logging off when they weren't having fun.  You can't recode players, only the game.

There are other ways it could have been handled like having radar around HQ, changing what makes it flash, increasing the damage needed, closer resupply or defense fields on some maps, etc, etc.  I'm guessing that with a new release coming out, the down time band-aid was the best choice when weighing time, resources and results.