M3 Effectiveness.....

[ccvi]

Variable resupply-time sounds pretty interesting. Tieing it to the downtime of the strats only would work if buildings are down'ed on the current strat-status, e.g., killing strats after a town would have a negative effect (easier resupply for the enemey - buildings with short remaining downtime and high resupply value). Better tie it to the remaining downtime, e.g. always resupply 10% of the remaining time. That way, it isn't even possible to bring up buildings instantly as a surprise like it is possible today.

[Electroman]

The number of minutes each box takes off the times needs to be tied to the strats if town buildings are down for over 100 mins then 10 mins per box would be fine if town is only down 30 mins then 3 minutes per box. the way it is right now 2 people in a M3 can stop a 15 man mission in about 7 minutes time.   you want to know why people avoid combat and go for undefended bases this right here is why The M3 is way to effective.   there is many times we will see bombers IB to a base and up M3s drive them to town and as soon as his bombs impact bring it all up under him.   Why up to shoot him down when i can ruin his sortie with an M3.

No....Just....NO.

This has a cascade effect, not just on the GV'ers but the entire game play. For example, there are many dedicated bomber pilots that spend HOURS trying to get to distant strats just to give their country a fighting chance. If you make the change that you propose then hitting the strats become near useless and you take away a key point of a bomber pilots purpose.

M3's are a royal pain at times however when a mission is planned properly then it can be effective. Takeout the VH at the base that spawns into the capture base. If there are multiple spawns, get htose GV'ers active and camp the NME's spawn points with tanks to prevent M3's from getting in.

Whatever happened to creativeness & planning?

Cheers! 
Elec1

[CAV]

In my opinion the best compromise is to have furball lake setup in the middle of the arenas with incapturable bases to allow the dedicated furballers to find a quick fight regardless of the current "war".

In my opinion, give them (the dedicated furballers) their own small arena, with that type of setup and map. Remove all the obstacles that get in the way of furballin and spawn camping, like resupplying, capture-able bases, scores, ranks and let them have their Arcade type fun. Then we can keep the main arena for combat simulation. If we keep watering down the  MA We're going to end up with "War Thunder".   

[Wiley]

Just an FYI for all the M3 enthusiasts- Steam is having a sale on all Astragon produced games.  This means such exciting titles as "Bus Simulator" and "Construction Simulator" are available for cheap.

Wiley.

[Bruv119]

Just an FYI for all the M3 enthusiasts- Steam is having a sale on all Astragon produced games.  This means such exciting titles as "Bus Simulator" and "Construction Simulator" are available for cheap.

Wiley.

    word.

[bustr]

In my opinion, give them (the dedicated furballers) their own small arena, with that type of setup and map. Remove all the obstacles that get in the way of furballin and spawn camping, like resupplying, capture-able bases, scores, ranks and let them have their Arcade type fun. Then we can keep the main arena for combat simulation. If we keep watering down the  MA We're going to end up with "War Thunder".

A note about terrain usage. My previous terrain BowlMA creates activity because a number of airfields are closer together and 9 per country have no GV spawns to them and are 19 miles from each other. Those bases get swamped with air activity for capture early during the prime time window. The other bases being mostly inside of 25miles apart then keep that activity going. The furballers follow the activity and poach the fight for kills. You don't need to radically change the game format for them. Just for now with the lower numbers, change the base distances for flying to a fight, to the minimums to give them access to targets to shoot at sooner. Most of our AH2 era terrains use longer distances to slow down hoards which makes our current numbers feel like they are pulling their teeth to find a furball or any kind of an air combat fight. And many have too many GV bases so even the tin canners get segregated from any kinds of initiatives with GV fights between vBases. So I've drastically reduced GV bases and set the spawns to follow the air combat initiatives. The GVers can self segregate on the center island in the TT object that I ringed with spawns, a canal, and indestructible bridges. 

Hitech does not allow bases other than three near the HQ to be un-capturable. But, got you covered on the next terrain with a furballing caldera in the center. The map room is on the airfield, actually getting an M3 or c47 to the field will be interesting, and since the airfields sit on 600ft cliffs over the water, no sneaky LVT deliveries. And each country has two other feilds in a triangle 19 miles away to take it back. It's been obvious for some time fields need to be closer to keep everyone engaged. The majority of feilds on this terrain are 19-22 miles apart with the three in the center island the same as the furball island in the center of NDisles. I'm down to setting up PT spawns and shore battery's at this point in the production cycle.

[EagleDNY]

For cripes sake if you are worried about resupply stopping your base take all you need to do is bomb the VH at the next base.   Or heaven forbid a couple of guys take out the barracks and kill resupply for much longer.

[The Fugitive]

For cripes sake if you are worried about resupply stopping your base take all you need to do is bomb the VH at the next base.   Or heaven forbid a couple of guys take out the barracks and kill resupply for much longer.

I think the bigger issues are during the low population times. A few guys hit a base to stir up a fight  and instead you see a couple guys doing town resupply runs.

[Crash Orange]

the way it is right now 2 people in a M3 can stop a 15 man mission in about 7 minutes time.

What on earth are the 12-13 people who are not in buffs or carrying troops doing all that time? 12 people can't kill 2 M3s? They must be incredibly incompetent pilots!

I think the bigger issues are during the low population times. A few guys hit a base to stir up a fight  and instead you see a couple guys doing town resupply runs.

The basic flaw in reasoning that keeps popping up here is the assumption that if you stop them from doing that, they will have no choice but to do what you want instead. There's no reason to assume that. Most likely they'll just get in 88s or flaks and bang away until the base falls.

[1stpar3]

They gripe about that now Every day I see a "DWEEB in 88 at such n such....UP a plane"    KILL THE GUN, you get points for it   Personally...I love killing M3s! Heck, I love killing any vehicle. I bomb em,Yes I do. But its sporting when you use a Spit with small bombs. Put a 250lber on a Tank...BIG FUN  Unless its Boom Boom(they are twins) or the Gt feller, then it gets nasty, eh I will just do it again, but with more spite

[LilMak]

A few guys hit a base to stir up a fight...

There was once a time when it happened regularly. Used to be you could get an air to air fight going on any corner of the map. All you had to do was show up in the dar ring. Now there are too many tools to avoid actual toe to toe combat.

M3 resupply wasn't much of a big deal when hordes were 25 strong and there was 300+ players roaming the arena. Now they're just too effective given the player numbers. If you have 30 or so players and 3-4 of them running supplies, your reducing the number of combatants by a significant percentage. The ONLY reason I pay a subscription is to combat other players. M3 hide and seek isn't a part of combat. FedEx pays pretty good to deliver boxes no need to pay HT for the privilege.

[Biggamer]

The reason the Large maps started to stay up for 7 days at a time is M3. The M3 sups should not even be an option to defend a base it kills combat. dont give me the it prolongs a fight BS either thats not true. when you got M3s running in non stop it kills the fight. because the base takers and GVers move on to other things while you got a couple furballers left.  also dont give me the GVers will quit either what is wrong with all the other tanks in game to defend a base with? whats is wrong with a plane to defend with? oh i know that would take some effort and require you to engage in combat and you would rather defend with no risk to you at all while the attackers waste all their time on nothing and you set in tower laughing looking for the next base to run a M3 too.   

[popeye]

Last night I joined a base take effort that was being thwarted by LVTs from a TG parked offshore.  It went on for a long time with plenty of air-air and ground action. 

Then, I noticed a friendly base on the other front that was WF and had no friendly spawn.  No enemy aircraft there, but a stream of GVs who had already killed the VH, ords, and radar and had camped the field.  I joined the 2 guys defending and spent 10 minutes circling the town in a light fighter watching for M3s and dodging Wirbs.  Fun!  Then a few enemy aircraft showed up to pick the defenders on the deck looking for GVs.  Combat!

Bottom line, there was more air-air action at the "stalled" base take than defending a base without resupply.  There's no guarantee that nerfing M3s is going to produce air combat heaven.

[Lazerr]

Last night I joined a base take effort that was being thwarted by LVTs from a TG parked offshore.  It went on for a long time with plenty of air-air and ground action. 

Then, I noticed a friendly base on the other front that was WF and had no friendly spawn.  No enemy aircraft there, but a stream of GVs who had already killed the VH, ords, and radar and had camped the field.  I joined the 2 guys defending and spent 10 minutes circling the town in a light fighter watching for M3s and dodging Wirbs.  Fun!  Then a few enemy aircraft showed up to pick the defenders on the deck looking for GVs.  Combat!

Bottom line, there was more air-air action at the "stalled" base take than defending a base without resupply.  There's no guarantee that nerfing M3s is going to produce air combat heaven.

Actually.. previous to resupply.. there was a steady flow of more and larger fights for bases.. not just furballs.. everyone using all combat aspects of the game to defend or capture a certain base.

Even after a base waa captured there was an "oh toejam.. we bettee defend against that huge dar coming to take it back."

This is one situation where a red dar has been replaced with buttnuggets in m3s.  Ive filmed quite a few also if a picture would better demonstrate where it was an easy method to save a base, and also the cause of someone logging due to bordem.

[Becinhu]

No....Just....NO.

This has a cascade effect, not just on the GV'ers but the entire game play. For example, there are many dedicated bomber pilots that spend HOURS trying to get to distant strats just to give their country a fighting chance. If you make the change that you propose then hitting the strats become near useless and you take away a key point of a bomber pilots purpose.

M3's are a royal pain at times however when a mission is planned properly then it can be effective. Takeout the VH at the base that spawns into the capture base. If there are multiple spawns, get htose GV'ers active and camp the NME's spawn points with tanks to prevent M3's from getting in.

Whatever happened to creativeness & planning?

Cheers! 
Elec1

Actually it would be the exact opposite. That would make start runs MORE effective.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk