base capture quota

[flippz]

my idea:  why cant we initiate a base capture quota?  what I mean is say country A captures 2 of country Bs bases they then have to capture 2 of country Cs bases before they can take anymore of countries Bs bases.  now country A can still defend against country B but cant steam roll them. 
I believe this will keep the fights moving around and curb some of this country double teaming that seems to happen all weekend and week nights.  It makes for poor fighting conditions and the loosing team of the double team starts logging after a few bases and the fighting gets worse. 
the capture quota can be ignored if say country C owns 20% or more of country As bases and 90% or more of there own.  At that point country B can be captured with no quota. 
this should also help low number countries as well as the higher number countries cant just beat them back to non capturable bases and forget about them.  I have talked about this with a couple rooks and a few bish players and everyone seems to like it that I have spoke with so I wanted to put it out there and see what you guys thought.  I don't know a lot about the history of the game but from what I have heard is the 2 front war didn't work out well and will not be put back into effect, but we need something to quell the constant double team of a country whether it be in the low number am or the high numbered pm action.  it should also introduce a new strategy into base take options and base capture timing
just a thought let me know what you guys think 

[Vraciu]

Wut???

[noman]

I never understood the logging cause we getting ganged argument. Up from a base a little farther away and kill incoming bombers or push the fight down where help can clear the field. Not to hard to figure out. The other thing people don't do much of anymore is pork fields. Fastest way to blow the steam out of there sails is to pork Ord or Troops.

[perdue3]

my idea:  why cant we initiate a base capture quota?  what I mean is say country A captures 2 of country Bs bases they then have to capture 2 of country Cs bases before they can take anymore of countries Bs bases.  now country A can still defend against country B but cant steam roll them. 
I believe this will keep the fights moving around and curb some of this country double teaming that seems to happen all weekend and week nights.  It makes for poor fighting conditions and the loosing team of the double team starts logging after a few bases and the fighting gets worse. 
the capture quota can be ignored if say country C owns 20% or more of country As bases and 90% or more of there own.  At that point country B can be captured with no quota. 
this should also help low number countries as well as the higher number countries cant just beat them back to non capturable bases and forget about them.  I have talked about this with a couple rooks and a few bish players and everyone seems to like it that I have spoke with so I wanted to put it out there and see what you guys thought.  I don't know a lot about the history of the game but from what I have heard is the 2 front war didn't work out well and will not be put back into effect, but we need something to quell the constant double team of a country whether it be in the low number am or the high numbered pm action.  it should also introduce a new strategy into base take options and base capture timing
just a thought let me know what you guys think

Just switch countries.

[flippz]

Just switch countries.

well for the past week I have been traveling around the aces high globe visiting each country as the horde and the horded.  not sure how "switching countrie" helps this but I have.  it really has made no difference at all.  many instances people will not up airplanes in a horde.  the other night we were on pizza map and I changed to the rooks.  went to the southern base,52 I belive, there was a double dar bar of red.  up north at 44 I think again the bish had a double dar bar and rolled three bases before stalling, again not really many uppers to help with the air plane crowd. 
so in the instance above after the bish had taken the second base from the rooks they would have needed two knight bases before a capture of the third rook base would have been possible.  this does two things it gives the country being horded a reprieve (or at least lighten the load) to fight back and also gives them the chance to go on the defensive.  this may also help to get planes in the air as fighter will thin a bit and start looking to knight side enabeling them to actually get off the ground. 
Jan 29 after the map flip from buzz saw it was an instant double dar bar on both fronts for the bish.  the vulching picking and hording was so bad to the point I saw guys in gvs that in over 8 months of being bish I had never seen in a gvs.  most lasted for about an hour then started to bail (including myself). 
and all I am saying is it cant be fun for either side, safer but not fun.  its not any fun being unable to get off the field and at one point we couldn't even get out of surrounding bases of 44.  and it can not be fun for 25 knight planes to try to get the kill on the 4 bish planes that attempted to come to fight. 
but I digress after this post just wanted to show I attempted to help with the issue of the evening hordes that is really crippling the evening time game for many. 

[Lazerr]

I see what he is saying.. i think something similar to this would really help in off peak low numbers time.  Concentrate the small amount of players on a certain objective or two.

Maybe a system message saying "game population down to xx%, inatiating base chain component", and have a few capturable bases clearly indicated on a map.

I havent been able to play US primetime in quite some time, so i cannot comment on the hoardes.

[The Fugitive]

they had a base capture chain system in once before and it was horrible. But 5hat isn't what Flippz is asking for. He wants a system where once your country captures 2 bases for country "A" you can no longer capture bases from that country until you capture 2 bases from country "B".

Doing this forces the countries to NOT gang up on a single single, but doesn't LIMIT a country to a certain "path" of capture just a front.

I like it because even when the number a good you can have one team with nobody to fight while the otherfront is hoppin.

[popeye]

One way to discourage piling on a single country would be to modify downtimes according to percent of bases owned:

Bish own 25% of Knit bases and 5% of Rook bases.

Bish kills Knit radar; normal downtime is 30 minutes.  Modified downtime is (100% - 25%) 75% of 30 minutes = 22.5 minutes.
Bish kills Rook radar.  Modified downtime is (100% - 5%) 95% of 30 minutes = 27 minutes.

This would be transparent to the players but make each successive capture against a single country a little bit more difficult, without forcing a particular strategy.

[Vraciu]

they had a base capture chain system in once before and it was horrible. But 5hat isn't what Flippz is asking for. He wants a system where once your country captures 2 bases for country "A" you can no longer capture bases from that country until you capture 2 bases from country "B".

Doing this forces the countries to NOT gang up on a single single, but doesn't LIMIT a country to a certain "path" of capture just a front.

I like it because even when the number a good you can have one team with nobody to fight while the otherfront is hoppin.

Seems to me it will just cause a gangbang seesaw. 

[flippz]

fugi gets it.

in my idea there are no certain base #s you have to capture, you can capture any 2 bases for side "a" then have to get two bases from side "B" before going back to side "A".  and you can still pork side As fields and and defend against them taking the base ba back you just cant take any more base of sides A.

Vraciu: it may at times but in the over all aspect it should help to curb the constant evening gang bang on any one side.  will it stop it completely? No, will it help give the team that's getting the gang bang a break and a chance to catch there breath? Yes.
Also another thing this may help is when new folks come in this aint the first thing they see and get vulched 87 times trying to get into the "fight" as the new placement takes you to the nearest front and biggest battle.

just a idea and trying to figure a way to clean up the fights we got.

[bustr]

15 years of non stop experience with Aces High, they do it because it is fun for them. You are looking at the AH community as mostly a monolithic group who adheres secretly to your emotional view of the game. Just the same as DAers used to when they were a small percentage of the whole population 10 years ago. Whether it is 400 players or 150 players, like the Pareto principle, the bell curve to how people play this game remains the same percentages. The smaller the community in the MA, the more stark that bell curve shows itself. The source of your frustration with game play after your touring all three countries.

I will venture Hitech is aware of this from my 15 years of observing how he programs his game. If you want something like this, you need a better explanation to persuade him with your concept. Your current presentation is relying on him filling in the complicated parts.

[Randy1]

It is interesting that the knits are more likely to horde strictly for vulching often leaving the town untouched while deacking the field.  The bish and rooks are more likely to horde for base capture.

What would be interesting that the starts would be weathered in until you get 20% of both countries then to win the map, you would have to destroy a certain percent of every strat, city or hq.

[flippz]

15 years of non stop experience with Aces High, they do it because it is fun for them. You are looking at the AH community as mostly a monolithic group who adheres secretly to your emotional view of the game. Just the same as DAers used to when they were a small percentage of the whole population 10 years ago. Whether it is 400 players or 150 players, like the Pareto principle, the bell curve to how people play this game remains the same percentages. The smaller the community in the MA, the more stark that bell curve shows itself. The source of your frustration with game play after your touring all three countries.

I will venture Hitech is aware of this from my 15 years of observing how he programs his game. If you want something like this, you need a better explanation to persuade him with your concept. Your current presentation is relying on him filling in the complicated parts.
[/

Seems every time you reply to my threads you asking me to do hitecs work? Not my job again. Just coming up with ideas to help with the stark numbers and shear boredom that many complain about. What’s your next reply go start my own game?
When people call my tow company for a tow to the body shop I do not tell them to hook up there on car and I am sure the body shop doesn’t hand them a bucket of bondo to fix they own car,  you beginning to pick up what I am putting down? You talk like you’re intelligent so I hope you cqtch the drift

[Wiley]

I like it because even when the number a good you can have one team with nobody to fight while the otherfront is hoppin.

Except quite often when that happens it's because one of the fights has turned into a good furball and not a lot of mud gets moved in that scenario.  This wouldn't change anything to address that.

This idea gets a solid "meh" from me.  About the biggest effect I can see is it would likely just tick off the base rollers by killing their momentum when they get rolling.

Wiley.

[bustr]

A tow truck service is not applicable to a game that you play as a discretion. In real life most people don't plan for the issues that cause them to suddenly need a tow truck and as such are almost at a condition of being at your mercy. More so in their mind but, still, needing a tow is more often a condition with little or none discretion wiggle room.

A game is all discretion by the customer. So how you design your core game to function will set the emotional expectations. This game is an open sandbox world and the only restrictions or force to play in any ridged manner are minimal. So the expectation is an unlimited choice to act at any moment in any direction. What you are trying to outline poorly is asking Hitech to force his customers to follow a ridged path with no exceptions. He tried that about 9 or 10 years ago and it flopped in our three country open world.

What you are asking Hitech to do is force his customers to make themselves available to your guns in predictable manners by him forcing them into it by changing his game to your specifications. Must have been one heck of a three country tour there Gilligan......