Gameplay gone fer a ^&%$%$# IMO

[Toad]

Laz, all the maps favor faster planes. Because that has nothing to do with the map.

Faster planes are simply more capable than the slower early war planes and always will be.

When you mix them together in an essentially unrestricted manner it isn't the MAP that's causing the early planes to be less than "viable". IMO.

[lazs2]

toad.. you are correct.  all the maps favor faster planes but.... it is a matter of degree.    Ther smaller maps favor faster planes to a MUCH lesser degree.   I can ignore faster planes if there is a lot of planes around.    I can't ignore two pee 51's if I am a sector away from safety low on fuel with no ammo and no friendlies around.    

beetle...  you are as full oif it here as you were in WB.   You  were never a furballer that I seen.   you were allways ogvercautious with a timid agenda and you simply migrated to a philosophy that would justify it.    B&Zing the occasional poor slob who had his head up his butt  with your 190's was not exactly an evolutionary thing so much as a "finding your niche" thing for you.  Glad you found your niche but don't get it mixed up with anything noble or particularly bright.  ability to withstand boredom should not be considered a talent.

you claim that hitting undefended bases is... is what?   Ok cause if someone wanted to they could stop you or at least... defend?    Who cares if you take undefended bases?   it just fgives the other teams more timid grous a chance to milkrun your undefended bases while you milkrun theirs....   All in all.... prety timid and unimaginitive gameplay...  the worst furball has more variety and action than the best "missun" to an undefended base.

I don't know why you think i would be proud of cherry picking my way to a 5/1 K/D ratio in an MA where a 190 flown timidly was untouchable.   Like I said.. I don't count timidity or patiience or tolerance for boredom to be talents...   I make no claim as to any great ability or talent only to enjoying good fights.   I get more satisfaction out of a kill where they guy seen me than one where he didn't.   I get more satisfaction from action than from lining up foolproof kills.   I am mediocre at best but I feel that you would have a difficult time flying as I do.    If it were easy I suppose I would "move on".    Nice explanation of why axis vs allied never works tho.

oh... a quarter is 25  U.S. cents.   I knew that they taxed watching TV over there but didn't realize they had moved to computer games... welll, it was bound to happen.   Be a good boy and put in the quarter... don't want to be jailed now.
lazs

[eddiek]

Hey lazs,

I've been playing around with the terrain editor, and the idea of an early war area within the arena keeps baffling me.
So, since you initiated the idea, I wanted to ask you:
What planes should be included in the early war area of this map?

So far, based on service introduction dates, we have:

B-26B      May-42
Bf 109F-4      Jun-41
Bf 109G-2      Jul-42
C.202      Jul-41
C-47A      Dec-41
Hurricane IIc   Apr-41
Hurricane IId   Jun-42
Ki-61-I-KAIc   Nov-42
Lancaster III   Mar-42
Seafire IIc   Oct-42
Spitfire IX                   Jul-42
Spitfire V      Apr-41
TBM-3      Jan-42
Typhoon   IB   Jun-42

Could not find the service introduction dates on the A6M2, D3A1, P-40B and P-40E, F4F, or SBD-5, and I almost forgot the Ju-88, but those planes would certainly fall within the early war criteria of the war's start to Dec '42, which is as late as you can go and honestly call something early war.  IMO, anything from Jan. '43 to mid '44 is mid-war, after that you are into late war rides.
So, I've laid out the planeset within the early war area, bases would have to be placed close enough to ensure constant and fun fights (canyons?) and varied enough in altitude to balance things out.
On rereading the list, I would disable all the bombers, make it an all fighter area, immune from and unaffected by events outside the ring of mountains which will encircle the area.  Who cares how many bases are left outside the area anyway, right?  This area is about furballing.......
To keep pesky late war plane out of the area, #1: the mountains will have to be high enough to discourage attempts to cross them; #2: lots and lots of acks placed on top of the mountains.
This is just a rough draft, and I am still learning how to use the editor, and I am open to suggestions..................

[SKurj]

Ok clarification time +)


I have NO, NONE issues with the terrain that the AK's submitted to HTC.

I am assuming eh base layout as far as which country starts with which bases was not an AK decision.

Also, they made the map based on the new size requirements as per HTC.

The terrain itself, the canyons, the GV bases around the edge, the textures are all great!

The issues I have are not the result of something the AK map team did..

Though this rant started after fighting a couple of AK's milkrunning for 2 hours got me pissed +)


SKurj

[lazs2]

eddiek... I would say that "early war" would be better served byu this list..
early war set. NOT allied vs axis...
f4f
p39
p40b
p40e
spit 1
109e
early 110
a6m2
val
ki43
mig1
il16
hurri 1
I am sure that there are others of parity

Parity is the key.    A spit 5 would slaughter these others.   A 109F would be a triffle overkill also.   In WB.. the idea of "generations" or, planesets based on parity more than strict intro dates was used and I thought it was a good one except that they screwed it all up with the axis vs allied nonsense.   Look at how many planes in my set are useful/would be used.   You could do equally well in just about any of em yet still have enough variety to find the best fit for your particular "style".    With your set.... everyone would be in Spit 9 typhoon and spit 5 with a few in 109G's and...  even the 190 was in '42.    No place for most early war planes in your set.    In fact... you don't even mention most of em... perhaps you are being facietious?    Either way...  I think you can see that a fun early war set with parity is more than possible.

As for seperation.... simple.    put 4 sectors between the early area and the closest later war one.  So what if you have to erase 20 or so fields..   who would miss em?   Yes... put the early war area in the canyons.  It would showcase their abilities.

[eddiek]

And, yes, your proposed planeset does appear more attractive.  I merely listed the planes that fell within what I consider early war criteria.
True, most people would be in the Spits (when are they not, though?) and restricting people from flying a plane just because it could dominate others within it's realm would almost guarantee that the area would fail to attract the very people who propose it's implementation.
Some of the planes you listed (and I am not criticizing your list) are not yet in AH, but they would make things more challenging if and when they are modelled.
I've based my "criteria" on the total of 72 months (pretty close anyways) from Sept 1, 1939 when Hitler invaded Poland, to August 1945.
Divided into three 24-months sectors, early-war, mid-war, late-war, I got:  early-war=Sept 39 to Sept '41; mid-war= Oct '41 to Oct '43; late-war= Nov. '43 to war's end.
And no, I am not being facetious, but I wanted lazs' feedback on what he considered early war planes, as he has numerous times in the past mentioned "early war planes" not having much of a chance with late war monsters lurking about in the same area.  His ride, the F4U-1 would not make it into the area, but that is not a slam against him, it is one of those situations where you ought pick your words carefully and be careful what you ask for, no?

[Toad]

I for one would like to try Laz' idea.

If Laz can work with a mapmaker and a "strategist" to come up with the "Early arena within an arena" map I'd surely give it a good try. I'd even volunteer to try and help although I'll tell you up front I'm not a software type.

As I've mentioned before, my primary interests in AH lie almost exclusively in flying fighters. I really have minimal interest in the land/naval/bombing aspects, although I do those on occasion (usually as a squad function). Of course, I'm all in favor of having that stuff in the game for those who find it interesting. (Check the sig block. )

I'd like to see his ideas given a fair try. I think it would at a minimum prove to be as popular as the CT idea. I suggest using the totally abandoned Dueling Arena server space for the trial.

Laz, I do hope you don't have any of those "degrade the radar and eliminate the icon" wild hairs up your nose. No point in severely limiting the interest before you even start.  

[lazs2]

eddiek... I know exactly what I am asking for.   I have no interest in flying a -1a in the early war area.    I fly a mediocre plane in the current arena and I would most likely fly an F4f or p40 in the early war set.

My set would include a spit and a hurri.    The actual timeline is not as important as parity.   Spit 5 and spit 9 fit well into a mid war area and would be flown there in any case.    A spit one would do quite well against the lightly armored planes of my set.    Being bound by introduction dates and axis vs allied simply kills all chance of parity and variety.

Toad... i would say that the less you change at one time the better.   I would simply add the early war area onto a large (512) map by putting it in one corner with 4 or 5 sectors of seperation.  nothing else need change.    If it worked out then people might consider dumping the perk system and adding a mid and late war area.    Maybe even keeping the perk system for the late war area....  but for now.... try the early war area.
lazs

[beet1e]

Lazs,  I have almost given up trying to understand you. You want a furball arena – OK, I can understand that even if it’s not what I want myself. But then you pour disdain on staying alive! Was I timid in WB? I don’t think so, not in the way that you mean it. I died plenty of times, but generally killed more. The whole WB culture was different from what I find here. The emphasis was on staying alive. What’s the point of getting kills if you’re dead yourself? You are no good to anyone if you are dead. The Japanese kamikaze missions were hugely effective at what they achieved, but I’m not interested in flying them, not even in a sim.

If I may digress for a moment, and go completely off topic by mentioning the real WW2, it has to be said that planes were flown in groups. Of course there was communication, and of course there was organisation. That’s what I had with the Scanian Griffins, and I saw how effective it could be. I flew with those guys over a period of months and only ever died once – my own fault – prop struck water surface when in pursuit of a P47. No shame there – Gabreski did the same thing in Germany and had to ditch, and was captured 5 days later. Just because the SGs and myself were well organised, and the opposition was in disarray, does that make us dweebs? I hardly think so.

And then your latest posting starts rambling. You ask who cares if we take undefended bases? Why, the people who took them from us, I guess.

Lazs, what exactly do you seek to prove? You don’t give a toejam about WW2 or strategy, and yet you play this game as if you want to explore the “What if” scenario. What if what? Are you seriously trying to arrive at what might happen if F4U pilots attacked an enemy in ones and twos, fought to the last bullet and then died? I don’t think that’s how it was in WW2 (oops, I went off topic again). So given this totally abstract scenario in an equally abstract arena, all you can prove is that you can get a high rate of kills per hour – in totally unrealistic circumstances, ie. it proves nothing.

Remember that other PURP we flew with back in 1998, kilbot? He went to the top of the board one ToD. I called him on the phone one time and talked for 45 minutes, and I remember kilbot commenting that the bulletin board combat was often more aggressive than what could be found in the arenas – LOL!  How right he was

Well Lazs, I’m beginning to see Ripsnort’s point of view when he explained that “the universe revolves around Lazs. No-one else, just Lazs.” But I am no closer to seeing things your way.

I went for an enforced furballing session tonight - got 5 kills (3 in a 190A5, and 2 in a P47-D30) without losing any of my own planes. I suppose the fact that I didn't die makes me a dweeb.

[Apache]

beet1e,

why is the core of your furballers argument...dying? What gives you the impression that we "fight to the last bullet and then die", when any cursory glance at stats proves otherwise?

Staying alive is a goal and I simply can't stand being shot down. Why you think otherwise, simply because we enjoy furballing, is quite baffling to me.

[Toad]

Originally posted by lazs2
Toad... i would say that the less you change at one time the better.   I would simply add the early war area onto a large (512) map by putting it in one corner with 4 or 5 sectors of seperation.  nothing else need changelazs

Works for me. I see no reason to fool with radar or icons given the current setup options for these features.

Now, if we could SHOW icons at a normal RL distance and have them DISSAPPEAR as you get close enough for the current technology to give you adequate visual cues... THEN there'd be a reason to have "no icons".

This way, "no icons" would occur at relatively close range when you don't need them. You'd still have them at longer ranges where in RL you'd be getting good visual cues but current technology just can't supply similar info.

The idea of getting rid of icons at the longer ranges.. when you'd actually be getting similar information from RL visual cues.... has always seemed strange to me. Especially when the proponents of "realism" suggest it.

[lazs2]

beetle... the "what if" I speak of concernes the aircraft of WWII.   In WWII the height of prop plane evolution occured.   The "what if" is simplyu what the real pilots of WWII did.   "how will my Hog do against this P47 or Mustang?"   "how will my mustang do against this spit?"    they did "what if" dogfites more than they did the real ones.   Difference was.... they didn't get to fire their guns..  we do.    I want to see how these famous planes woulda done against each other and how I would do against another human in the same plane... or... any combination.   I certainly don't want some stuffy reenactment of the obvious.

You obviously don't know what I want and you aren't really looking at yourself either.   You want things your way every bit as much as anyone else.   You want to tailor an arena to suit your style as much as anyone does.

Who cares about the undefended fields you take?   You don't consider what I do a skill and I certainly have never considered what you do a skill.   Worse...  we both consider the others skill a waste of time.    Perhaps we are both right.
lazs

[AKcurly]

Originally posted by SKurj

(delete)

The issues I have are not the result of something the AK map team did..

Though this rant started after fighting a couple of AK's milkrunning for 2 hours got me pissed +)

SKurj

This has nothing to do with Skurj, but he just used the word "milkrunning" and I would like a clarification.

What are reasonable activities in AH?  Well, you can 1) seek areas dense in enemy aircraft, 2) seek areas which aren't so dense, 3) try to capture bases which can't be captured (see #1), or 4) seek areas which are lightly defended.

#1 is called furballing and if you do that, folks make fun of you;  #4 I guess is called milkrunning and if you do that, people curse you.  If you do #2), then your presence turns it into #1.  #3 doesn't make sense.  Hell, I guess I might as well not login.

Wait, wait, I have an idea!!!  Everyone do whatever they want to do, flying whatever they want to fly.

If someone is capturing undefended bases (and you don't want to stop them), why just ignore them!  Either they'll die from the AI or they'll become a serious threat and others will attack them.  As I understand it, at that point it won't become milkrunning.

I'm confused!

curly

[Toad]

Well said Curly.

[SKurj]

In the case i referred to a couple guys were gv'in undefended bases.  I would defend for abit when all of a sudden the # of attackers would drop.. and lo and behold another base nearby (undefended) would start flashing

Avoiding fighting other players so u can fight AI and an easy victory in an MMOG is what i call milkrunning +)

Hey i don't deny that i don't do it once in a while +)


SKurj