The game play

[nugetx]

Hell no.  Just stop dude.  If you start to auto balance squads I promise you that will be the final death blow go this game.

and why ?


Having the game balanced, fun and fair will be final death for the game?  that is really interesting.

[JimmyC]

Have you played..your idea is ludicrous
You would know that if you had spent any time in game, in a squad or spent a few years in game.

[nugetx]

Have you played..your idea is ludicrous
You would know that if you had spent any time in game, in a squad or spent a few years in game.

Are you saying that OP doesn't know what he is talking about even though he is an old stick?  i'm not the one that made this thread.

[JimmyC]

Your squad leader balance idea..
Ludicrous...on so many levels..
I find you offering solutions to problems you don't understand annoying at best.
Do some time in game to earn a tad of credibility.. you might find out some stuff before wading in with your over bloated opinions.

[nugetx]

Any why it would be ludicrous? Please explain.

Squad wants to fly together - so they fly together, just on a side picked by the game so the game is balanced, what's the problem with that? There is no AvA, there are no 2 sides, every plane is the same, there is no reason there should be a problem with this for anyone.

[Dundee]

Currently, AH players spend about 28% of the time 'in sortie' per tour in GV vs 72% in planes. 

I'm pretty sure the number of GV'er will drops some as those folks are leaving the game..........

[TequilaChaser]

I'm pretty sure the number of GV'er will drops some as those folks are leaving the game..........

Please provide the Aces High Community with your imperical data to prove your ridiculous post

 

[ImADot]

Hey guys, you know what is ludicrous? Chess piece loyalty...that's what. When all sides have access to the same exact equipment, there is no reason to not switch sides to balance the numbers. Don't say "but my friends are on side 'x'"; you are missing out on increasing your number of friends by 2/3. 

[Zygote404]

I think its more of a strategic issue with the game play, Capture a base instant unlimited late war planes and gv's available straight away usually..   

What I think would be better would be slow population of models after base capture based on ENY.  If you take a plane the highest ENY planes are available with the lower ones coming in over 30 minute period.   That would reduce the horde steam rolling base to base with fresh late war models available instantly.   

There are other issues obviously.   But that would be start.

[Zener]

Currently, AH players spend about 28% of the time 'in sortie' per tour in GV vs 72% in planes. 

I don't doubt your stats but frankly I am surprised it isn't higher.  When you have a map that contains 18 Af and more than that for Gv bases/side then it seems logical many conflicts will be primarily ground based with limited air support. More drivers than fliers.

Sometimes circumstances dictate the best choices are GVs particularly if a base is captured that spawns into an enemy strat fac.  I could take the time to climb and go there in a bomber to maybe drop strat 30% with good hits, risking attack inbound and outbound; or I could up a Jeep and drop vehicle supps then return in an M4/rockets and take the strat down to 0% in less time than it would take to reach target in a buff.  Not a really hard choice if my goal is to damage strats.

As to the topic of game balancing, I don't believe there is a way that will always work and always make things fair.  ENY is an attempt at that, but even a great plane isn't a match for a swarm of older models.  I've just come to accept that this is a game about butt-kicking; sometimes you gives, sometimes you gets.  If someone doesn't accept that - and I imagine every country has those who scream in the text buffer until you want to take an Excedrine - its only going to lead to them souring on the game.  But that's their loss.  Why pay to have fun if you spend all your time making it NOT fun?

I like to use those times my side is getting stompped to fly planes I normally wouldn't or go drive a vehicle I don't normally drive.  going to get killed anyway so why not learn something new?

[cav58d]

I don't doubt your stats but frankly I am surprised it isn't higher.  When you have a map that contains 18 Af and more than that for Gv bases/side then it seems logical many conflicts will be primarily ground based with limited air support. More drivers than fliers.

Sometimes circumstances dictate the best choices are GVs particularly if a base is captured that spawns into an enemy strat fac.  I could take the time to climb and go there in a bomber to maybe drop strat 30% with good hits, risking attack inbound and outbound; or I could up a Jeep and drop vehicle supps then return in an M4/rockets and take the strat down to 0% in less time than it would take to reach target in a buff.  Not a really hard choice if my goal is to damage strats.

As to the topic of game balancing, I don't believe there is a way that will always work and always make things fair.  ENY is an attempt at that, but even a great plane isn't a match for a swarm of older models.  I've just come to accept that this is a game about butt-kicking; sometimes you gives, sometimes you gets.  If someone doesn't accept that - and I imagine every country has those who scream in the text buffer until you want to take an Excedrine - its only going to lead to them souring on the game.  But that's their loss.  Why pay to have fun if you spend all your time making it NOT fun?

I like to use those times my side is getting stompped to fly planes I normally wouldn't or go drive a vehicle I don't normally drive.  going to get killed anyway so why not learn something new?

Can we please remove GV spawns into the strats.  And while we are at it, can we balance the damn strats so they are all equal hardness and the field object hardness corresponds with its associated strat hardness.

Other then the city the strats are too soft to begin with.  If you must, keep refinery and troop training at the measly 313 hardness, but please increase the hardness of the others to at least match the city -844lbs. 

And speaking of the city strat...844 but it's associated objects - town buildings are 2.5 x's less.  Doesn't make sense.

Edit:  And if lame vehicles spawns will always be part of Aces high then give us manned guns at the strats.

[Lusche]

And speaking of the city strat...844 but it's associated objects - town buildings are 2.5 x's less.  Doesn't make sense.

Why does it not? Two different targets, one tactical and one strategic. One being industrial buildings, the other residental ones. Heavy factory machinery was at times quite difficult to destroy.
Besides, what would happen to the gameplay if you almost triple the lbs requirement for whiteflagging the town?

[Lusche]

I don't doubt your stats but frankly I am surprised it isn't higher. 

Actually, this is an all-time high.

[cav58d]

Why does it not? Two different targets, one tactical and one strategic. One being industrial buildings, the other residental ones. Heavy factory machinery was at times quite difficult to destroy.
Besides, what would happen to the gameplay if you almost triple the lbs requirement for whiteflagging the town?

Good point!  Why aren't all the strats 844lbs then?  They all had heavy machinery that was hard to destroy, no?

And going off of what you said, why are ord bunkers, barracks, fuel tanks and radar sites all as strong as their associates strat?  Shouldn't their strat be stronger?  Simple fix, make all the strats 844lb hardness.

[Ack-Ack]

I'm not the only one in this thread who is saying this.

Name one person in this thread of any of your other threads that has experience in working in the gaming industry agreeing with you.