An alternative Map Maker's Main Arena

[Chilli]

Fester has shown how the placement of bases and Task Groups can be used to funnel action, even on large maps.  What if, someone were to create a map where only the air bases were capturable and the percentage of bases owned were adjusted to accommodate the win objectives? 

I briefly contemplated this idea, when pondering if a constant presence of ground forces near captured territory would benefit air activity.  Currently, maps can be rolled by simply gathering up enough forces to overwhelm base after base (and nothing wrong with that).  But this experiment would possibly require the conquering force to both advance and defend behind the lines acquisitions.

How would it work?  Hopefully, the forces that currently protect and loiter at ground bases will be freed to participate in air combat.  The ground war could still exist for the purpose of capturing / defending airfields or even shutting down enemy fields.

My good friends and I that enjoy the stealthy ground grabs, will have to instead use our resourcefulness to concentrate on strats and airfields.

[MrKrabs]

Imagine the shenanigans if you could us "Bomber Perks" as payment for transportation for your vehicles... The further away from the default spawn the more bomber perks. Or just reaching out to the nearest next spawn area...

[Chilli]

Crabby,

Funny, I was thinking of the "transport" of instant spawn points when this idea came to me.  I recall another game where requests for supplies were radioed and then delivered behind enemy lines. 

Pretty much the uncaptureable vehicle bases, would represent resistance fighters and enemy strongholds (well not really all that complicated, but hopefully fun none the less).

[bustr]

Talk to the AvA guys, I think they tried something like this once.

[JimmyD3]

Another option would be to set the capture ability of vehicle base(s) on the the capture of specific Air bases and or towns.

[bustr]

Hitech once set an order of base capture that we had to follow to win a map with arrows on the map showing the order of feilds. Not around anymore is it.....

I seem to remember the AvA guys tried this out some years back.

[Chilli]

Hitech once set an order of base capture that we had to follow to win a map with arrows on the map showing the order of feilds. Not around anymore is it.....

I seem to remember the AvA guys tried this out some years back.

Being an AvA enthusiast, there might have been some sort of order of capture in order to get additional equipment or to win the 'scenario'.  That is NOT the same as keeping vehicle bases of the chess piece's origin active (by making them uncapturable).

Another option would be to set the capture ability of vehicle base(s) on the the capture of specific Air bases and or towns.

Jimmy,  that still 'closes the door' to nearby attacks on 'behind the lines' acquisitions.  It might cut down on the loitering time at vehicle bases, but I am looking for an overall effect of increasing air combat while still having a very active roll for ground vehicles to recapture airbases that have been surrendered.

A little back story.  There is a certain map(s) in which certain ground bases have spawn points across a broad body of water from each other.  No one questions how do those ground vehicles "spawn" there (I mean were they air lifted, shipped, or somehow smuggled up the coast).  In any case, those vehicle bases are targeted to get a foothold on another chess piece's shore.  This can go back and forth, stalemate, or eventually give way to a flood of captured territory.

Making airfields the only property that changes hands, keeps the balance in check and reduces the milkrun base captures during off hours.

Not that I am looking for anyone to agree with the idea, but I would just like to know that I am stating the objectives clearly enough.

[bustr]

Join the AvA CMs and get them to help you create a map to do this.

[Chilli]

Thanks Bustr, but the AvA is an entirely different animal from the Main Arena.  They already have plenty of good ideas that will never fly in the MA in order to promote quick action.  For instance, aircraft CAN lift from Vehicle Bases in many setups that do not have an abundant airfields that are close in distance.

I do however, have a great desire to pay tribute to the battle of Iwo Jima, that would do well in the AvA (two sided forum).  These "ever present vehicle bases" might even have some historical correctness, due to the heavily entrenched (tunnel systems) and back and forth momentum that took place on the island.

Buster brought out a good point in our personal discussion we had, that I would like to add here.  Your point which I have to concede, is that many would not want to make it easier to recapture a base that was won fair and square. 

The flip side of that argument, is by keeping downtimes low, the recapture effort would most likely run into problems with having buildings out of sequence.  Therefore a country taking advantage of factory downtime additions would lose some advantage in defending newly acquired bases.