How about asking Hitech to make a change to the terrain building requirements that 50% of airfields have no town with the map room placed on the field. Or small airfields only get a map room on the field with some percentage of airfields on a terrain required to be a small field.
The only rule about capturing an airfield when you build a terrain for the MA, is that you place either a town object which has an integrated map room on it next to an airfield. Or, place a map room object on the airfield so in either configuration the airfield can be captured. And you have seen on some terrains towns placed well away from feilds 3-4 miles. Towns are supposed to be focal points for the 6 square mile mini war called a base capture because of the map room. Team A defends it any way they can, Team B blows everything to scooby snacks and tries to get 10 troops through the door. How far the town is placed from the airfield combined with how far spawns are from the map room will dictate a lot of how much fun defending or capturing an airfield will be.
Placing the map room on the field, base capture is just de-ack and sneak in the troops.
Pop the vehicle hanger with a single bomber pass, de-ack with a few fighters before it comes back up. Fool the defending fighters into upping and defending or, vulch them in place while your M3 sneaks onto the field and a c47 drops troops from 10k. No real GV defense to get in your GV's way of hammering the field. Bomber guys would love this because they could toodle along at 25k, drop vehicle hangers with a few bombs a few feilds at a time, M3s and c47s roll in behind a few fighters. Rinse and repeat all night long. In a way it would be AH1 all over again where three guys could roll feilds with a tank, a 110 and a c47. Some even did it with a lanc in two passes on the town and a c47.
Any of you consider the heart of your complaints are for the game mechanics to be simplified to reflect today's smaller numbers?
