Author Topic: Mindnao (Read 869 times)

Tac · « **Reply #15 on:** December 17, 2001, 10:23:00 AM »

Baaa! Tiffie dweeb. You need 4 hispanos to pray for the snapshot kill that is your trademark.

Cerra el culo que esta diciendo bobadas

Octavius · « **Reply #16 on:** December 17, 2001, 10:31:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Tac:
The fields are also layed out VERY well. No side has a marked advantage nor a clear cut path to win the reset. The only bad thing I see in mindanao is that the left side of the map is too easy to defend.

What? I disagree. I have never seen the western country become the cause of the reset.

Sky Viper · « **Reply #17 on:** December 17, 2001, 10:53:00 AM »

This is just one of many threads about Mindanao's design.

I think that what I see both in playing and in reading the oppinions here, is that we are not playing the map correctly.

What I mean, to follow with Tac's great assesment, is that furballing is easy and yet useless.

There are 2 general types of flying in our community. Fighter Jock Furballs, and Strategic Minded Land grabbers.
Now, we could obviously split the 2 into arenas that are conducive to such game play, but do we really want to break up such a great bunch of pilots?

I think Mindinao just as a couple of bases that are to tightly spaced.

What we need is a terrain that perpetuates both styles of play. It should also need to allow for GV's and Naval forces to get equal billing.

Check out my Celebes map and see if it fits the bill.
BTW, there may be just enough flat area to satisfy Tuck's need (even if it's not sand)

.

Viper

lazs1 · « **Reply #18 on:** December 17, 2001, 11:29:00 AM »

best map we have. CV's need to be toughened up a bit tho. Who cares about GV's anyway?
lazs

Raubvogel · « **Reply #19 on:** December 17, 2001, 11:35:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs1:
Who cares about GV's anyway?
lazs

Funny, I feel the same about CVs

lazs1 · « **Reply #20 on:** December 18, 2001, 10:33:00 AM »

yeah but... you fly LW so... your opinion about CV's is worthless.

Still.. If I flew short ranged, (and short sighted) fast climbing planes I would like to see CV's show up near my fields.
lazs

Raubvogel · « **Reply #21 on:** December 18, 2001, 10:46:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs1:
yeah but... you fly LW so... your opinion about CV's is worthless.

Hmmm....I could apply that same logic to you and your opinion of buffs.

lazs1 · « **Reply #22 on:** December 18, 2001, 10:52:00 AM »

you could but.. you would be wrong. Faulty analodgy. A common LW problem. Fluffs are modeled poorly in a reverse fashion to CV's. CV's have too little effect on the game because of their poor modeling while fluffs have too much effect on gameplay because of their poor modeling.
lazs

Raubvogel · « **Reply #23 on:** December 18, 2001, 12:41:00 PM »

Well lasz, opinions are like amazinhunks.

Wilbus · « **Reply #24 on:** December 18, 2001, 12:49:00 PM »

Mindnao one of the very best maps, if not THE best map, VERY fun to fly on.

If any one map should go it's the Isle map, nothing but movable acks, CV to field vulchs and more movable 88's all over the freaking place, no where to fly and no where to go without getting a 88 up yer but.

Am0n · « **Reply #25 on:** December 18, 2001, 01:31:00 PM »

It would be a great map if it had some flat areas. It almost seems the only level land on the whole island is the bases them selves. Canyon fighting is fun so i would hate to see it totaly flat, but some areas need it (to promote GVs).

Also if it was possible to fly under the proximity radar this map would be great, but then i think every map would be great if that were the case

[ 12-18-2001: Message edited by: Am0n ]

lazs1 · « **Reply #26 on:** December 19, 2001, 08:28:00 AM »

"Well lasz, opinions are like amazinhunks.
--------------------

Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps
Someday, I think I'd like to own a pet bat."

Yes they are and that is why I have stated the facts after you stated your opinion.. Kinda cleans up the air.
lazs

Raubvogel · « **Reply #27 on:** December 19, 2001, 10:22:00 AM »

The facts as you see them = an opinion. I'm not going to play semantics with you.

jpeg · « **Reply #28 on:** December 19, 2001, 12:12:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs1:
you could but.. you would be wrong. Faulty analodgy. A common LW problem. Fluffs are modeled poorly in a reverse fashion to CV's. CV's have too little effect on the game because of their poor modeling while fluffs have too much effect on gameplay because of their poor modeling.
lazs

Buffs don't have too much effect on gameplay at the moment because hardly anyone flies them. Most of the times fields are taken via jabos.

They SHOULD be a major effect in the game.

Have you learned anything about the role of aviation in war?

Bombers were a HUGE part of the war effort in WWII (and they still are now in conflicts)

CVs dont have as much effect as they should..why?
IMO: CVs can only reach so many fields plus there is only one carrier in a group.

hazed- · « **Reply #29 on:** December 19, 2001, 12:36:00 PM »

laz is busy looking up semantics in the dictionary.