Capturing Fields: Opinions Wanted

[SlapShot]

I trust ya Rude !!! Sounds logical ... I never flew those sims, but I believe ya.

You know what ... I'd be willing to try anything that would improve/change the current behaviour that is the norm in the MA.

I think that any of these ideas/changes will not take place until AH II : TOD is running in full swing. If/when that takes off, then the Strat genre will be completely satisfied. At that point those that live for the fight might be able to transform the MA to satisfy their needs.

[Toad]

Originally posted by SlapShot
If/when that takes off, then the Strat genre will be completely satisfied.  

Slap, you are the most optimistic guy I know.

[lazs2]

yep... debate it all you want but... history (flight sim history) proves that easier capture fields closer together promote fights while making fields harder to capture promotes animostiy between player groups and lack of action...   Long flights to nowhere in order to do nothing.

slap... no I don't think so.   nothing is dweebproof to a determined dweeb.   Witness the guy who ups over and over from a vultched field never getting past the engine start up or the suicide fluffers who low level attack a cv during an intense furball and probly die what?  10 times?  

with more action.... suicide guys only succeed in putting themselves out of the action.

tojo... sure seems that quake is more like the simplistic  capture the flag strat that we have and quakers would be the simplistic strat guys.
lazs

[fullback]

- It seems reasonable that town size should be related to field size (and strategic value i.e. zone base). A large base could have a substantial size town and a zone base capture could require the status of the associated city be reduced to a fixed percent - say 32%, or perhaps all strategic targets of the zone be reduced to 65%.

It could bring escorted bomber missions into the game and people may even gravitate toward protecting the bombers. I read somewhere that this actually happened during the war...

- 2 vehicle hangers at a medium field and 3 at a large field doesn't seem unreasonable.

[muckmaw]

There's one problem with your argument, Rude.

AW..OUt of business
WB's...200 subscribers?
AH (The early years) Much less subscriptions than it has now.

Now AH has benefited from being the the last man standing, aside from WB's but the game must be doing something right in order to have survived and thrived.


I like the idea of more ack, mannable ack, quad 50's, 4 times the town..hell give me 4 towns with 2 map rooms.

I tend to think harder captures leads to more furballs, and more strategic thinking. The longer a field stays under assault, the more time for the word to get out, people to land or die at other fights, and join the struggle at the contested field. This can only lend to a bigger, nastier, down in the mud furball, with the capture only being that much sweeter.

I detest any capture than can be done with 3 guys flying under dar. It's simply not even close to historically accurate.

As always, anything that brings a challenges, buts buffs back in the game and promotes a good furball with more fun for all. I also support anything that takes suicide dweebs out of the game.

And now for the Lazs challenge....

Lazs can take anything you say and turn it into an argument for closer fields..

Let's test him...

Lazs,

I prefer carpet to hardwood floors...your thoughts..

[rshubert]

Originally posted by Toad
Here's some tinder and a few sticks for the bonfire that's sure to come.

I'd say make the field capture way easier. Make it like it was back in beta.

Make it so easy you don't need a horde to steamroll a field. Make it so a small squad could do it with a little jabo practice and goon escort.

I think that would make it so that you'd need a horde to defend what you took, all along the front. Leave a base untended, you'd lose it.

Maybe the tide of battle would ebb and flow much more violently, with much more fighting. End runs and rear field sneak attacks might become more prevalent and add interest.

Just a thought.


I will now grab a lawnchair and a beer.

I'm sure this will turn out to be an interesting thread.

Oh, my gawd.  I find myself agreeing with Mr. Toad.

[Mini D]

The idea of modifying the field capture system does nothing to adress the fact that its field capture itself that is simply the stupidest most gamey aspect of AH.  The aura around it is also the number one cause of arguments between all sects of players.

You want shorter flights to fights?  Move the fights away from the fields.

You want more realistic missions?  Stop promoting missions that are completely unrealistic.

Its time to come up with a strat system that does not revolve around field capture.

MiniD

[lazs2]

fullback... escorting bombers is like watching paint dry.   you will never get the majority of simmers to want to do something so boring.

muck..  AW didn't die till recently and AH picked up the players cause WB was stuck in "realism" mode.

as for carpet vs hardwood floors... your choice proves that you know nothing about choice and action...   Closer fields in AH would at least get you thinking properly.
lazs

[rshubert]

But I still don't like the "closer" idea.  That simply puts the reinforcements lower when the cavalry does arrive.  Flying off in a different direction to gain alt simply recreates the same situation that the close fields are supposed to "correct".  And putting the fields closer could make it easier for the attackers to keep reinforcements from getting to the attacked base.

The extra 10 miles takes less than 2 minutes at 300 mph.

[muckmaw]

Originally posted by Mini D
The idea of modifying the field capture system does nothing to adress the fact that its field capture itself that is simply the stupidest most gamey aspect of AH.  The aura around it is also the number one cause of arguments between all sects of players.

You want shorter flights to fights?  Move the fights away from the fields.

You want more realistic missions?  Stop promoting missions that are completely unrealistic.

Its time to come up with a strat system that does not revolve around field capture.

MiniD

What do you propose MD?

Lazs-

Very disappointed in your answer. I don't think you worked on it hard enough. Though it had the trademark disparaging comment, it completely lacked the word "Fluff" or "Strat-weenie" and did not take a shot at me, the MAW, Beetle or Shubert.

I'll give that one a 6.

[Rude]

Muck....are you saying that AH has succeeded due to the method of field capture currently in place?

Did you fly the other sims I mentioned? I'm just curious:)

[Toad]

Don't worry Shubert, the exhilarating, light-headed, dizzy, dancing way you feel will soon pass and you'll return to your normal feelings.




Just a small question or two, or three... or (OK, Mini...) SOME questions for the crowd:

Did the "dweeby low level buff tactics" (TM) start (become much more prevalent?) before or after the successful the hue & cry to make buffing "much more difficult"?

Did the "dweeby suicide jabo attacks" (TM) start (become much more prevalent?) before or after the successful hue & cry to make field capture "much more difficult"?

So the new solution to cut down on "dweebiness" (TM) is to make everything more difficult?

Just curious.

MiniD, a decent hypothesis. Any ideas? If not "capture the flag", then what?

[muckmaw]

I flew Air Warrior from the AOL days until about 2-3 years ago.

I don't think any one thing makes AH successful, but any one thing can be a game killer.

With that in mind, I doubt AH could have grown if field capture as well as the many other aspects of AH from graphics to customer support were not at least satisfactory.

It could also be that AH is the last stop for guys with low end machines. Who really knows. The point is, the game must be working at least well enough to attract and maintain new and old customers. This is something neither AW nor WBs could do.

[Toad]

Originally posted by rshubert
The extra 10 miles takes less than 2 minutes at 300 mph.

How much altitude can an early/mid/late war plane grab in a 300 mph climb in 2 minutes? You were dicussing "lower" as a problem, right?

[Alpo]

I guess I don't mind the current implementation of capture so much as I dislike the radar.  

If a raid is NOE or GV, why should ANYTHING start to flash (town or base) until you are well within sight of said target?  One of my favorite things to do is look for the poor goon who has camped waiting on his buds to arrive and I only had to notice the flashing town icon.

Town buildings could also be a little tougher IMHO.