Ideas for Better field defense

[Vinkman]

The Vets are getting to good at gaming a field... here are some idea to make it a fight instead of a turkey shoot.

1) Ability to choose spawn directing when exiting a vehicle hangar on a base.
       - parking between two buildings with a clear shot into the back of the VH is really too gamey at this point. All vehicles spawn with turret facing forward and there is no way to fight back with GV. Spawning facing backwards would at least make it an equal fight.

2) Tower map should show direction field guns are pointing when you spawn.
       - I can't figure it out and spend too long trying to figure out which way I'm point, and which way to rotate, even when I know where the bad guy is.

3) An actual compass on the map that shows the direction that field is in the Arena when selecting a field gun.
       - Some times you get shot down and you've seen the GV on the way in. It would be nice to look at the map and know what field gun to jump in. But  there is no good way to know which way the base is oriented in the arena. So I jump in the wrong guns twice before I pick the correct gun. By then they have it targeted.

Seem guys on a base would be aware of these things and fight like the Three blind mice. 

[EagleDNY]

Agree totally on #1: we get to choose which runway to spawn on, why not which VH??

Better field defense would also be accomplished by having the placement of the guns on the fields themselves.  It really has a haphazard feel to it rather than a concerted effort to provide cover and defense for the strategic assets on the field.  88s and 12 pounders need to be on the periphery of the field to provide AA and AT fire vs anything moving up to attack.  AAA would be better served by a mix of 37mms and Quad 20mm mounts, and I think the AAA tower should be introduced on large fields. 

[Lazerr]

Agree totally on #1: we get to choose which runway to spawn on, why not which VH??

Better field defense would also be accomplished by having the placement of the guns on the fields themselves.  It really has a haphazard feel to it rather than a concerted effort to provide cover and defense for the strategic assets on the field.  88s and 12 pounders need to be on the periphery of the field to provide AA and AT fire vs anything moving up to attack.  AAA would be better served by a mix of 37mms and Quad 20mm mounts, and I think the AAA tower should be introduced on large fields.

Get in a plane

[Randy1]

Get in a plane

Vulching a deacked field with late war planes has gotten so popular, GVing is getting to be more fun.

[Lazerr]

Vulching a deacked field with late war planes has gotten so popular, GVing is getting to be more fun.

I think what you meant to say was defending a field before its deacked is becoming less popular because its easier to shoot guys from field guns and wirbs.

[bustr]

When I was building my first terrain I spent much of the base layout period worried with each placement location that I was giving my country's bases away. For a time I talked to myself like two players whining over a map they were getting their kesters kicked to the curb. I channeled all the old time arm chair generals with each base location choice. Then I had an epiphany........

All the bases are not there to protect your country from getting kicked to the curb and keep themselves from getting captured. They are there to be activity focal points and  promote combat regardless of who looses the fight for that base.

Eagle's base defense formula would wet blanket every field attack during that terrain's time in rotation. Lazerr is right in that you have to get out into the AH world and fight or this game is nothing. Fortifying bases will lead the game down the road to bunkers is us.

My first terrain I built in some tests to see how players perceive what they want to attack, and what they will put energy into as activity. I'm amazed that the most popular airfields to capture are the 9 with no GV spawns to them. They are setup in a triangle of being closer together than most other airfields. Rescue fighter sweeps are not uncommon because of that. I thought they would promote only furballing because of their proximity. Instead, looking defenseless because of no GV spawns, everyone clobbers them generating lots of activity. Shows you just how much M3's are really thought of as fun killers and activity greifers.

Getting players to invest in flying somewhere in our world appears to be simple. Give them places to go that "appear easy" to capture and\or shorten the time they have to invest in flying to that location. My next terrain I'm experimenting with 7 small airfields in each country that have the maproom next to the tower and a river with three bridges just off the GV spawns blocking their access to the airfield. Hitech's rule for bridges is they are to be indestructible. That should generate some interesting activity since all you will have to do is de-ack the airfield and run in troops. It's 100% the defending country's airfield to loose if they don't get out and fight to keep it. And I've shortened the distance between airfields for as many as I could to the minimum allowed spacing. 

By Eagle's plan, those 7 airfields should be ringed with strat level AA towers because of how defenseless they will be unless actively defended. Some two weeker with a D9 conceivably could de-ack one of those airfields, then auger and run an M3 with troops across a bridge and make a single player base capture. But, probably someone will see the flashing base and up a B25H and vaporize the poor two weeker who was just trying to have fun. 

The more things Hitech agrees to do to make capturing a base difficult, the more boring this game gets because game mechanisms are taking over the defending.

[Vinkman]

When I was building my first terrain I spent much of the base layout period worried with each placement location that I was giving my country's bases away. For a time I talked to myself like two players whining over a map they were getting their kesters kicked to the curb. I channeled all the old time arm chair generals with each base location choice. Then I had an epiphany........

All the bases are not there to protect your country from getting kicked to the curb and keep themselves from getting captured. They are there to be activity focal points and  promote combat regardless of who looses the fight for that base.

Eagle's base defense formula would wet blanket every field attack during that terrain's time in rotation. Lazerr is right in that you have to get out into the AH world and fight or this game is nothing. Fortifying bases will lead the game down the road to bunkers is us.

My first terrain I built in some tests to see how players perceive what they want to attack, and what they will put energy into as activity. I'm amazed that the most popular airfields to capture are the 9 with no GV spawns to them. They are setup in a triangle of being closer together than most other airfields. Rescue fighter sweeps are not uncommon because of that. I thought they would promote only furballing because of their proximity. Instead, looking defenseless because of no GV spawns, everyone clobbers them generating lots of activity. Shows you just how much M3's are really thought of as fun killers and activity greifers.

Getting players to invest in flying somewhere in our world appears to be simple. Give them places to go that "appear easy" to capture and\or shorten the time they have to invest in flying to that location. My next terrain I'm experimenting with 7 small airfields in each country that have the maproom next to the tower and a river with three bridges just off the GV spawns blocking their access to the airfield. Hitech's rule for bridges is they are to be indestructible. That should generate some interesting activity since all you will have to do is de-ack the airfield and run in troops. It's 100% the defending country's airfield to loose if they don't get out and fight to keep it. And I've shortened the distance between airfields for as many as I could to the minimum allowed spacing. 

By Eagle's plan, those 7 airfields should be ringed with strat level AA towers because of how defenseless they will be unless actively defended. Some two weeker with a D9 conceivably could de-ack one of those airfields, then auger and run an M3 with troops across a bridge and make a single player base capture. But, probably someone will see the flashing base and up a B25H and vaporize the poor two weeker who was just trying to have fun. 

The more things Hitech agrees to do to make capturing a base difficult, the more boring this game gets because game mechanisms are taking over the defending.

Can we address the OP's suggestion now please?   

[bustr]

It's all parts of a whole.


Knowing where your gun is pointing from the hanger selection would be nice but, not really a game stopper if we never got it from Hitech. Knowing how Waffle built the airfield object, and what on the object defaults to North unless you rotate the object after laying it down is the key. You have the option to rotate it to E,S,W as the terrain builder. By default when you first lay down an airfield object in the terrain editor, the tower is to the north edge of that square object. All guns on that object were laid down as their default which has the barrel pointing north. It's probably the same for ports and vBases. You can always see if he could have Waffle update all of the base icons with something that points the direction the tower is oriented on its object square. All guns will be pointing that direction.

I cannot speak for Hitech if he wants to create a new spawn object where you can choose one of 8 directions to point when your tank spawns into the hanger. Or even place a spawn in all of a vBase's hangers. Seems like he is keeping things simple though, your "vehicle entry" object allows the terrain builder 8 directions for the vehicles that use it to line up logically with the spawn pad directions in the tower.

When you look out of the tower from the default view, you are looking 180 degrees away from the primary object edge the tower defines. So if the base object was set at it's default with the tower to the north edge of the object. You are looking south while in the tower. So while you are sitting in the tower, pull up the map and see which way your nose points at that field icon. All the guns will by default point 180 degrees to your default orientation in the tower.

When you are in the hanger choosing a gun, the field object is always shown with the tower oriented to how the terrain builder rotated that field. The top of the chalk board is north. And so the guns will be pointing in the direction the tower was rotated to. Kind of simple and answers many of your questions.

[EagleDNY]

With all due respect I don't think having a reasonably accurate AT / AAA gun defense at a field is going to stop people from taking fields.  People seem to think that everyone expects this game to be an easy-mode xbox.  When the AAA was upped on the CV groups, we had a bit of whining that it was too hard then everybody adjusted.  You see people still coming in to make dive bombing attacks on the BB groups, even though they have arguably the toughest AAA fire of any object in the game.  We still bomb strats (even at low level) despite that cute little AAA tower in the middle. 

A little more realism in the placement of guns, and especially not having guns put in useless positions where the fields of fire are cut off by buildings or nearby trees would not go amiss.  Big guns (88s and 12lbers) need real fields of fire to be effective.  It is bad enough we don't clear trees and obstacles from the ends of a runway. 

[JunkyII]

I think what you meant to say was defending a field before its deacked is becoming less popular because its easier to shoot guys from field guns and wirbs.

The root of the problem...hopefully the younger Steam crowd gets in some planes and isn't afraid to get whacked

[Vinkman]

The root of the problem...hopefully the younger Steam crowd gets in some planes and isn't afraid to get whacked

you're missing the OP's point JunkyII. 

GV are rolling onto fields and killing planes trying to take off, you can;t get in a plane. Then they sit right behind the VH and because you can only spawn in 1 direction they kill you before you can turn the gun.  So the field is capped by two GVs. without having to destroy a hangar or bunker.

Vinkman

[popeye]

The root of the problem...hopefully the younger Steam crowd gets in some planes and isn't afraid to get whacked

At least we've defined the "combat" that is missing from the game.   

[JunkyII]

you're missing the OP's point JunkyII. 

GV are rolling onto fields and killing planes trying to take off, you can;t get in a plane. Then they sit right behind the VH and because you can only spawn in 1 direction they kill you before you can turn the gun.  So the field is capped by two GVs. without having to destroy a hangar or bunker.

Vinkman

I get his point but think about the root of that actual problem...why was he allowed to get there in the first place? It's because less people are willing to up and defend a field with actual intent of engaging in combat...most check the tower...hear town buildings going down...start running supps....seee a high bomber milk running...go to another field....see a plane porking....get in a man gun...

People in this game became soft and afraid to die, they say I got an ego but I'm not afraid to lose, I just want a real fight....it's these guys thinking they are fighting some actual war for bragging rights with the fragile egos....its insane.

[Vinkman]

I get his point but think about the root of that actual problem...why was he allowed to get there in the first place? It's because less people are willing to up and defend a field with actual intent of engaging in combat...most check the tower...hear town buildings going down...start running supps....seee a high bomber milk running...go to another field....see a plane porking....get in a man gun...

People in this game became soft and afraid to die, they say I got an ego but I'm not afraid to lose, I just want a real fight....it's these guys thinking they are fighting some actual war for bragging rights with the fragile egos....its insane.

I know that's your beef, but not how two GVers got there. Combat takes place in GV too. But it's not combat if it's a one sided shooting gallery. 

[lunatic1]

I get his point but think about the root of that actual problem...why was he allowed to get there in the first place? It's because less people are willing to up and defend a field with actual intent of engaging in combat...most check the tower...hear town buildings going down...start running supps....seee a high bomber milk running...go to another field....see a plane porking....get in a man gun...

People in this game became soft and afraid to die, they say I got an ego but I'm not afraid to lose, I just want a real fight....it's these guys thinking they are fighting some actual war for bragging rights with the fragile egos....its insane.

JunkyII is beating that M3 horse again.
give it a rest.