Author Topic: Bombing - impact on the game - WHY NOT ???  (Read 623 times)

Offline popeye

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3712
Bombing - impact on the game - WHY NOT ???
« Reply #15 on: July 31, 2002, 08:24:42 AM »
I wonder why HT bothered to models buffs and all that strat stuff, when it's obvious that the game was designed just for furballing.  Bad planning I guess...
KONG

Where is Major Kong?!?

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Bombing - impact on the game - WHY NOT ???
« Reply #16 on: July 31, 2002, 08:37:45 AM »
Not really a mistake...  A way for people who have an interest in WWII but have no hand eye coordination or, are very low on self esteem and lack individuality(people from socialist countries like canada, uk, and seattle) to play in the game.   It is a delicate balance to make them feel needed without ruining everyone elses fun tho.
lazs

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Bombing - impact on the game - WHY NOT ???
« Reply #17 on: July 31, 2002, 08:56:53 AM »
Lazs,

Big cities that when leveled win the war is something I am absolutely against.

That idea doesn't allow bombers to participate in the game, it puts two separate games in the MA and gives bombers a big ol' fancy "Win War" button.

The fun part isn't winning the war.  The fun part is the journey to victory or defeat.  There needs to be an integrated gameplay system that involves all types of aircraft in the war.

Exiling the bombers to their own little sandbox within the big sandbox certainly doesn't meet that requirement.


If your idea were implimented, very few players would bomb them.  Milkrunners would, but few players.  There would be no effect on the actual war for doing so.  The war would not get any easier for your country men.

It would be pretty ideal for you though, unless the resets could be done quickly.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Bombing - impact on the game - WHY NOT ???
« Reply #18 on: July 31, 2002, 09:05:33 AM »
wait a minute karnak.... If "strat" and "winning the war" are so essential to the game.... Then why wouldn't fighters escort the fluffs to the all important city targets?   Why wouldn't enemy fighters rise up to stop the fluffs from killing their cities?  Taking fields would still be sesirable as it would shorten the fluffers airtime and concentrate damage/prevent rebuild.

You seem to be saying that "winning the war" and "strat" is not important and that the real important thing is for the fluffers to feel needed.
lazs

Offline Wotan

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7201
Bombing - impact on the game - WHY NOT ???
« Reply #19 on: July 31, 2002, 09:10:26 AM »
ht could make them (cities, industrial complexes) large enough and spread out enough and rebuild fastest enough (or by resupplied) to a point where it would take a real effort to accomplish a reset.

Plus there tons of folks in the main who would up to defend their cities and escort thier bombers that I would predict resets would take even more effort then the off hour land grabs that currently trigger the resets.

I cant believe you could think that "kill x reduce structure hardness by x" is a bett er solution then the one lazs made. I made a similiar suggestion that was a bit more involved but follows the same principle.

I dont think this idea will preventbombers to participate in the game. The may become the "center" of the game. Shifting the fights to areas over and around the cities and away from the airfields.

Jabos will still wanna hit airfields and base capture would involve taking base to get closer to a city to be able to bomb it faster.

it does not put two separate games in the MA  but allows for 2 types of gameplay. Strategic and  tactical.  

Its a much better suggestion that what we currently have or  your  suggestion.

Its something I bet we could all live with.

Offline tgnr2001

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 56
Bombing - impact on the game - WHY NOT ???
« Reply #20 on: July 31, 2002, 09:26:35 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
Not really a mistake...  A way for people who have an interest in WWII but have no hand eye coordination or, are very low on self esteem and lack individuality(people from socialist countries like canada, uk, and seattle) to play in the game.   It is a delicate balance to make them feel needed without ruining everyone elses fun tho.
lazs


troll :rolleyes:

Offline popeye

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3712
Bombing - impact on the game - WHY NOT ???
« Reply #21 on: July 31, 2002, 09:27:36 AM »
Here's an idea:  Let's make fighter bullets accumulate points for hits, instead of actually damaging the other planes.  When you get enough points the System generates a "kill awarded" message, and your points are reset.  That way, no one would ruin my fun by shooting me down, and making me have to fly that long boring flight back to the furball.
KONG

Where is Major Kong?!?

Offline gatso

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1279
Bombing - impact on the game - WHY NOT ???
« Reply #22 on: July 31, 2002, 09:31:05 AM »
Quote
How many runs did it take you to kill all of the strat at the base?

 A bomber used realistically should drop all of its bombs in one pass.

How much time did it take?


2 passes, less than 10 mins between them. Salvo 4 for each FH in a Lanc loaded with 1K's

Quote
If you'd been using Bf110G-2s, P-38Ls, Mosquito Mk VIs or P-47D-30s you'd have done far, far more damage in the same amount of time.


You're saying you can kill all the FH at a small base with any of the above in 10 mins from the time you shoot the first round? I don't think it's possible.  Jug might have the ord to do it but has to be fairly low over the target, would need all the ack down to finish the last FH with 50 cal, odds are you'd be dead before getting to that stage anyway.

Gatso
« Last Edit: July 31, 2002, 09:38:10 AM by gatso »

Offline popeye

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3712
Bombing - impact on the game - WHY NOT ???
« Reply #23 on: July 31, 2002, 10:08:12 AM »
Gatso, what was your altitude?
KONG

Where is Major Kong?!?

Offline hawk220

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1127
Bombing - impact on the game - WHY NOT ???
« Reply #24 on: July 31, 2002, 10:10:07 AM »
Lazs2:

A way for people who have an interest in WWII but have no hand eye coordination or, are very low on self esteem and lack individuality(people from socialist countries like canada, uk, and seattle) to play in the game.


did your boyfriend in prison not give you enough love? :(

Offline Turbot

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1122
Bombing - impact on the game - WHY NOT ???
« Reply #25 on: July 31, 2002, 10:14:02 AM »
From the fighter side I am not seeing the huge bomber formations I was looking forward to.  In truth I saw more multi-PLAYER formations before the patch, and I find this surprising and dissappointing - I expected more co-op missions didn't you?

Offline gatso

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1279
Bombing - impact on the game - WHY NOT ???
« Reply #26 on: July 31, 2002, 11:38:25 AM »
Popeye - Depends. I think the one time I tried attacking a small base (usually go for big ones, more targets) I was at 15-20k although for the first 5 or 6 flights I never went above the wind layer at 14k.  Recently I've pushed it up to 20k plus because I'm confident that I'll still hit stuff.  salvo 4 from a lanc still drops 12k (4k from each aircraft) so I'm happy that even with dispersion and a bit of error I'm still going to get the required 2500lbs on the target hanger.

I think 1/2 the battle with the buffs is target selection.  Thats probably why I haven't flown them that often I only fly em when I see a chance that I will get to target and be able to drop bombs.  No point flying for 20 mins being bored just to get shot down before doing anything usefull.

I dunno, maybe it just clicked for me, hell I even got an in-squad promotion to 'Training Officer' partly because I was able to show people how I got it working for me.  :)

I too am dissapointed at the lack of multibuff raids being launched, did one with my squad a few nights ago but the timing wasn't great and we kept it below 14k because of the wind thing and people still having some problems.  Ran into 2 262's with alt on us. oops. Target selection again.

Gatso

Offline Grizzly

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 399
Bombing - impact on the game - WHY NOT ???
« Reply #27 on: July 31, 2002, 12:01:37 PM »
I want to talk about something many of you may not want to hear... AirWarrior. I know AW is dead and AH is not AW, but there may be lessons to learn from the 15 years AW existed. A basic concept of AW was that nobody could win.

Jonathan Baron (Blue Baron) was a sage for AirWarrior. He had an ability to understand what made the game so good and communicate it (this applies to AH as it did AW). He ofen compared a Massive Online Multiplayer Game to a boxed game from a store.

The boxed game had to provide a story line, an objective, a means to achieve it, some form of increasing level of difficulty to maintain a challenge as players gain skill, and a reward. These games typically provide some form of artificial intelligence to compete with the player. A major objective in these types of games is to prolong the period of time before the player grew bored with it. How well the game designers accomplish this is a major factor in its success, but none have been able to captivate players as AirWarrior, War Birds and Aces High have (I'll even throw in Fighter Ace).

The MMP online game offers something boxed games cannot, a contest between individuals instead of artificial intelligence. People vs people can assure an almost inlimited variety and challenge if they are free to set their own objectives, devise the means by which to achieve these, and increase in skill to continuously challenge each other. Another factor to consider is that individual preference in game play varies between people. This results in groups of players in different parts of the arena playing the type of game they prefer.

With this in mind, it was Kesmai's intent to provide a place and tools to play, but let the players create the game. (A common statement was, the company provides the location, and the players provide the game.) Kesmai also devised the three country concept to detract from an "us vs them" war mentality in the main arenas.

For those who desired an arena war, there was a place for it (similar to AH's Combat Theater). For those who wanted authentic action with appropriately matched planes, there were the scenarios.

Kesmai wanted happy customers, and when a person logged on for a few hours of fun to find the arena decimated, he might not be a happy camper.

Although AH does provide the game and objectives in the main arena, many players still devise their own form of game. This can result in a conflict when the arena war players disrupt their play. This is most evident when a third party moves in with smart bombs to destroy and capture the bases they were fighting over. Buffs are a great enhancement to the game, and they serve a major part in a war. It's just that they can be a bit intrusive at times.

I'm not taking sides, just saying (tm Pasha) to promote understanding.

Offline popeye

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3712
Bombing - impact on the game - WHY NOT ???
« Reply #28 on: July 31, 2002, 12:22:33 PM »
Wasn't "Fighter Town" an AW thing?
KONG

Where is Major Kong?!?

Offline Grizzly

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 399
Bombing - impact on the game - WHY NOT ???
« Reply #29 on: July 31, 2002, 01:12:23 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by popeye
Wasn't "Fighter Town" an AW thing?


Good question. Like I said, there are different ways to play this game. Fighter Town is for those who only wish to take off and dogfight. This is fine but something that for some gets old fast. When I've seen players talk about "furballing", they often suggest a Fighter Town setup. But this does not cover it.

There is dogfighting and capturing territory, but there is also a fight between somewhat matched groups where the objective can be a single base, or to destroy the base of your foe. This battle is commonly waged between fighters, although bombers can also play a role. The participants are often squads and players between whom a rivalry has developed and they have found it fun to battle each other. The point is not to find ways to bypass the other side and pork their base, but go head to head against each other and damage their base if you can succeed in pushing them back that far. There is no point in playing this form of game if one side has far greater numbers than the other. For then it becomes a land grab, which is also a valid game form, but doesn't require an opponent.

This is just an example, there can be any number of game variations.