Author Topic: Capturing Fields: Opinions Wanted (Read 5310 times)

Grizzly · « **Reply #105 on:** July 25, 2003, 12:33:37 AM »

Regarding arena play and base capture.

First of all, I don't like the pork the arena concept because it totally messes up game play for the country who has less players... something that can't easily be controled. That being said, suggestions for a few alternatives to land grabbing.

First, I would like to try to think outside of the box and not lock in on arena capture as the only game objective. Yes, HiTech made it so, but he can change it if we convince him. So no suggestion should be summarily dismissed.

What's with the base capture thing? This was seldom a wartime objective. The territory certainly, but the airfields were more often attacked to damage the enemy's resistance. Capturing territory was usually left for the infantry to do, while the planes provided air superiority. So superiority was an objective, and to gain that the fighters had to eliminate enemy planes. To accomplish this the fighters had to fight. So our first keyword is fight... which happens to be a major source of entertainment in an air combat sim.

Another objective was to damage a country's resources to the point where they could no longer attack your country or resist your infantry. This mainly required bombers, protected by fighters, and supplimented by attack planes in air to ground assaults (our jabo buddies).

In Aces High air planes are somehow empowered with the task of capturing territory. Our infantry consists of ten drunken paratroops delivered by a single C47 or one glorified truck. This then becomes the main objective of the game. But how now to best accomplish this objective? The answer is by avoiding a fight, either with massive force, by zooming past the defenses to jabo a field and auger so you can do it again quicker, or by attacking bases that are not defended.

For the country getting attacked it has the appearance of a locust infestation, and about as fun. To the attackers, it's certainly a rush, but how long can one do this before it gets old? And how much glory is there in defeating an enemy by avoiding him? All so you can earn perks to buy a Me262 with which to cherry pick... more super fun I'm sure.

How about getting back to basics? How about making the objective destruction of the enemy's resources? Included in these resources would be enemy fighter defenses and their airfields. Airfields would still be attacked, but to damage them, not capture. This would return a major role to the bombers. Fighters could once again fight. The jabo guys would be doing important work, but the world would no longer revolve around them enticing them to drop and auger.

At some point, a country's resources would reach a minimal level and the infantry march in. To the victors would go the perks for their Me262's... which would actually have bombers to attack. (I noticed lately them being used for ground attacks... probably something Hitler would have approved of.) And right up to the end the enemy could still fly and otherwise continue playing. If players choose to go fight each other in a far corner of the arena, they could and any damage they inflicted upon the other would still count to their country's main objective. Even the furballers would be contributing.

What do you guys think? Does this give you other ideas of how to make it even better?

Kweassa · « **Reply #106 on:** July 25, 2003, 01:10:15 AM »

It's not gonna work.

People in the MA follow a purpose. They identify themselves by the country they are "serving". They feel fun and satisfaction not from the contest of skills, but by following a common cause and making things happen, according to it.

In the case of the MA, the common cause is winning the war. The things that happen, which confirms that a certain pilot has done something for his country, which makes him proud, which gives him fun, is seeing a field get captured.

In short, the mentality is totally different from what AH used to be. It's a new AH now - a war oriented one. When AH was young, and not many people were in it, the countries didn't mean much. Just a loose means of dividing the sides so they can fight each other.

However, like a small city-type state grows into a gigantic territorial country, AH has grown out of that stage. The competitiveness of the countries, which now holds hundreds of pilots in it, has grown considerably. In the younger days, pilots feel the fun when their personal skills were adept. Now, pilots feel the fun when their country is winning.

As long as your country is winning, and you can do something to help your country in winning, then you're satisfied. That's what drives the folks in MA. That's why some of the vets can't stand the changes of recent - individual skill and quality means nothing now. The things they have learned and practiced, don't effect the outcome at all. The factors that constitue the situations of the MA has changed - concentration of force, using that force with impunity, is now favorable. It is continuously being depersonalized, and more and more changing into a war-machine.

In short, the growth of numbers, and change of strat, is bringing us closer and closer to the "War" aspect. Old days, we fought with the WWI concept of strategy and honor, contest of ACM. We know who the enemy pilot is. We know where he is. We salute him, we fight wih him, we chat with him.

Now, it is becoming more like the depersonalized air combats of WW2 - no time, no luxury of contest of skill, personal gratification, personal satisfaction. Only the victory of your country, and the efforts which support such victory, can give you an opportunity to survive.

......

So, there are a few things which we have to try not to confuse.

If the purpose of discussing strat is to revive the good 'ol days of pure fighter battle, contest of ACM, it's not gonna work, unless we decide to go back to the snuggy 150 guy arena.

What we can do, is try to relieve some of the quirks in the strat system, so it can adequately react and do away with the most extreme form of dweebery, so that even in this depersonalized, large-scale battle, a certain level of precision and skill is required to have any effect on the outcome of the war. Currently, people don't need any of those, to feel their satisfaction as a part of a team effort.

We wanted a better strat, a more "war" like environment. In truth, the MA is growing towards that direction.

We can either request changes to refine the problems with it, and adapt to the changes that follow a 'war' like environment,

Or we can request to do away with strat totally. Making it a massive, country divided version of the DA.

Of the two, I think Toad's suggestion, fired by nostalgia, is based upon the latter.

Toad · « **Reply #107 on:** July 25, 2003, 08:10:33 AM »

Yeah, I'm one of the old dinosaurs I guess. I don't care who's winning the war or even if there is a war of territorial conquest. I came for the fight and only the fight.

However, I disagree that easier capture does away with strat. It just makes it different. After the Golden Horde rolls over 13 bases, their rear/flank areas become very vulnerable to a small strike force... due to easy capture. I think it would make "war winning" tougher. Who really knows?

However, isn't AH2-TOD supposed to be what you've just described as Nirvana? All that skill, co-operation, strategy, personal satisfaction and gratification when you get "promoted" and all that?

That's why I personally have such high hopes for AH2.

'Cuz I'll still be in the MA.

SlapShot · « **Reply #108 on:** July 25, 2003, 08:22:47 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by nopoop
Muck it does work, been there done that in WB's heyday.

Any beer left ??

AH is the only sim that I have ever played, but from what I have heard and read on these boards, those games never saw the numbers that we have on in AH prime time. It's been said that the other games would, at most, have the same amount of numbers for the whole areana as we have per country. I don't see how you can make a direct correlation between the past gameplay of other sims to what we currently have in AH.

With that in mind, and what I was trying to say before, is that the "horde" mentality is here now and is here to stay. Making things easier for the "horde", will not, IMO, eliminate or discourage that type of play. I believe that it will only encourage timid play and fights that will end as fast as they start.

Zanth · « **Reply #109 on:** July 25, 2003, 08:54:07 AM »

"Timid" people are not going to become "brave" (or vice-versa) because of a map or base layout. Guys who like to suicide into stuff, are always going to suicide into stuff because they think it is fun. Guys who don't, aren't going to start just because the ground looks different.

Players are who they are, and will play the way they want to, no matter how anyone might attempt to mandate it to be otherwise.

P.S.(A weak example and a different topic but first one that comes to mind is the perk multiplier. Sort of worked for a while, but now things are back to normal. People resumed their natural behavior.)

lazs2 · « **Reply #110 on:** July 25, 2003, 09:12:12 AM »

soda.. with closer fields and easier captures it won't matter if the guy ups a thousand times... he won't be able to. his field will fall. He will have to move one back. suicide porkers will, first, have no point... There will be no point to it because the field falls and second... they will have to get through a group of guys all fighting.

Fighter sweeps? not gonna happen this side of the "tour of duty" arena.. no true furballer will take orders and do a dumb fighter sweep in the ma. Like Toad said... none of us give a crap about who is winning the capture the flag part of the game.

now... I have said in the past... It wouldn't bother me if we had huge cities and when those cities were bombed into oblivion then the country with the least damage to it's cities "won"... that would be fine with me. guys that want to carry bombs could hit the cities.

but for now... closer fields... easier capture and more CV's will help gameplay.. and while they won't stop suicide morons... those features will make suicide ineffective.

The only people that will be hurt by this will be the HUGE squads and the missun doodz. there will be no point to having a large club to swing... simply look at the people who want to arrange the arena so that it requires more and more teamwork to succeed... success for them means lack of fun for everyone else.
lazs

SlapShot · « **Reply #111 on:** July 25, 2003, 09:14:23 AM »

You old farts ... you know who I am talking about ... have got to get out from under the past. What was, is not now, and never will be again. You can wish in one hand, and ****e in the other ... tell me which one will come true first.

As I stated before, I am relatively new to this (over a year and a-half in AH), but the parameters for taking a field have not changed at all that I am aware of .... so taking fields is no harder now (in concept) than it was a year and a-half ago.

What has changed drastically is the number of people playing AH. This alone has made field capture harder. What use to take 3-5 guys to accomplish, grew (seems exponentially) due to the fact that when the same 3-5 guys came to take a base, they were met with equal or more numbers. So, they grab 3-5 MORE guys ... you get the idea. Now, with the number of players that we have on at prime time, pretty much assures that you have to have a "horde" to take a base.

If a good defense is put up, then the suiciders come crawling out of the woodwork. If the initial attack group is met with an equal defense, then a certain percentage of that group will suicide to reduce fuel. They will then up again immediately, armed to the teeth, to return to the attack and wipeout any remaining fuel, if not already porked, or start taking out the fighter hangers.

I forgot who mentioned it above, but I am liking the idea that if one drops their bombs and dies, whether it be by suicide or just plain got shot down, if they launch from the same field again, they cannot take ordinance. If they RTB, then they can re-plane or re-load, loaded for bear again.

This would only effect the rinse and repeaters ... If a large enough "horde" was to come to a base, they could effectively scorch earth a base in one suicide pass with left-overs to start the CAP and vulch. This is where the problem still lies. If making the field harder to pork ... more fuel bunkers ... more mannable ack ... more VHs ... then the one pass mentallity will not work, and the fight continures.

This is where I would like to see it go, but I am willing to see if the "easy capture" theory would work. If it fails, then we try a different tack ... lets just get soemthing going to see if we can change the gameplay to satisfy (at least try) all.

lazs2 · « **Reply #112 on:** July 25, 2003, 09:18:33 AM »

one way to test the theories is for the next bright boy who does a map to make an area in the map where it is not important strategicaly... not close to hedquarters etc.. and put the fields, say 14-21 close... 3/4 sector. Make it near a coast with a lot of ports and CV's.....leave the rest of the map with far fields... make em max distance even.. make all the "strat" accdessable only through these fields.

See what happens. My guess is that the enemies of fun will try to trash the close fields because no one will play with them in the strat part of the map. My guess is that the close field area wil be very popular. Even if I'm wrong... what will it hurt?
lazs

Rude · « **Reply #113 on:** July 25, 2003, 09:26:48 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Kweassa
It's not gonna work.

People in the MA follow a purpose. They identify themselves by the country they are "serving". They feel fun and satisfaction not from the contest of skills, but by following a common cause and making things happen, according to it.

In the case of the MA, the common cause is winning the war. The things that happen, which confirms that a certain pilot has done something for his country, which makes him proud, which gives him fun, is seeing a field get captured.

In short, the mentality is totally different from what AH used to be. It's a new AH now - a war oriented one. When AH was young, and not many people were in it, the countries didn't mean much. Just a loose means of dividing the sides so they can fight each other.

However, like a small city-type state grows into a gigantic territorial country, AH has grown out of that stage. The competitiveness of the countries, which now holds hundreds of pilots in it, has grown considerably. In the younger days, pilots feel the fun when their personal skills were adept. Now, pilots feel the fun when their country is winning.

As long as your country is winning, and you can do something to help your country in winning, then you're satisfied. That's what drives the folks in MA. That's why some of the vets can't stand the changes of recent - individual skill and quality means nothing now. The things they have learned and practiced, don't effect the outcome at all. The factors that constitue the situations of the MA has changed - concentration of force, using that force with impunity, is now favorable. It is continuously being depersonalized, and more and more changing into a war-machine.

In short, the growth of numbers, and change of strat, is bringing us closer and closer to the "War" aspect. Old days, we fought with the WWI concept of strategy and honor, contest of ACM. We know who the enemy pilot is. We know where he is. We salute him, we fight wih him, we chat with him.

Now, it is becoming more like the depersonalized air combats of WW2 - no time, no luxury of contest of skill, personal gratification, personal satisfaction. Only the victory of your country, and the efforts which support such victory, can give you an opportunity to survive.

......

So, there are a few things which we have to try not to confuse.

If the purpose of discussing strat is to revive the good 'ol days of pure fighter battle, contest of ACM, it's not gonna work, unless we decide to go back to the snuggy 150 guy arena.

What we can do, is try to relieve some of the quirks in the strat system, so it can adequately react and do away with the most extreme form of dweebery, so that even in this depersonalized, large-scale battle, a certain level of precision and skill is required to have any effect on the outcome of the war. Currently, people don't need any of those, to feel their satisfaction as a part of a team effort.

We wanted a better strat, a more "war" like environment. In truth, the MA is growing towards that direction.

We can either request changes to refine the problems with it, and adapt to the changes that follow a 'war' like environment,

Or we can request to do away with strat totally. Making it a massive, country divided version of the DA.

Of the two, I think Toad's suggestion, fired by nostalgia, is based upon the latter.

Easier base capture would only expedite strat and resets and also add a capability for those who wish to capture or affect the WAR, all without having to join the 30 player steamroller you seem to want us all to become a part of.

In addition, the above change would keep fights lower and faster allowing those of us who don't like to spend 30 minutes in the air prior to the engagement, to enjoy ourselves as well, all without altering your precious war effort.

You seem to want everyone to play your way, while all I'm suggesting is allowing me to play differently while still allowing you your fun.

What's wrong with that request?

lazs2 · « **Reply #114 on:** July 25, 2003, 09:47:33 AM »

Yep... adding some closer fields and more CV's just adds choice for more people... The enemies of fun allways want the game to be more insect like.
lazs

SlapShot · « **Reply #115 on:** July 25, 2003, 09:53:21 AM »

I am not trying to be hard-headed here, but how can capture be made an easier than it is now ?

Capture, as it is now, can be accomplished with a minimum of 2 pilots. One pilot in a 110-G2 to take the town down and a goon. If done expediantly and the distance is within reason, it can be accomplished with 1 player.

Help me here.

SlapShot · « **Reply #116 on:** July 25, 2003, 09:58:12 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
Yep... adding some closer fields and more CV's just adds choice for more people... The enemies of fun allways want the game to be more insect like.
lazs

Lazs ... I am with ya on these ideas and I think you know that.

What I am getting at is when we (you, me, nopoop, apache, etc) were flying around last week with our "hair on fire" in a base vs CV furball and the dweeby suiciders come in from the rear and pork all the fuel and eventually took out all the fighter hangers. That sucks !!!

muckmaw · « **Reply #117 on:** July 25, 2003, 10:01:07 AM »

One thing we need to concider...

Right now a large force of 20 pilots will attack and capture a base. This is called the Steamroller.

Make base capture easier and those same 20 pilots will divide into 4-5 groups, and bag 4-5 bases at a time.

So you'll have 4-5 smaller engagements instead of 1 large one.

Is that the aim here? To get smaller fights over bases, eventually thinning out the attack group to the point where a battle for a base is a 2 on 2 engagement?

Rude · « **Reply #118 on:** July 25, 2003, 10:05:21 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by muckmaw
One thing we need to concider...

Right now a large force of 20 pilots will attack and capture a base. This is called the Steamroller.

Make base capture easier and those same 20 pilots will divide into 4-5 groups, and bag 4-5 bases at a time.

So you'll have 4-5 smaller engagements instead of 1 large one.

Is that the aim here? To get smaller fights over bases, eventually thinning out the attack group to the point where a battle for a base is a 2 on 2 engagement?

Nevermind.....you guys don't want any change....you like it like it is.

Muck....you must have never flown any other sims to not understand what we're speaking of.....many of us have lived it...it worked and it had nothing to do with the failure of any sim.

I give up.

SlapShot · « **Reply #119 on:** July 25, 2003, 10:20:33 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Rude
Nevermind.....you guys don't want any change....you like it like it is.

Muck....you must have never flown any other sims to not understand what we're speaking of.....many of us have lived it...it worked and it had nothing to do with the failure of any sim.

I give up.

Come on Rude ... I think that everybody that has participated realizes that a change has to be made ... its just which direction to go.

Muck has flown other sims .. I haven't, and I am just trying to understand your point of view, which I have no experience of. Like I said before ... I am willing to try anything at this point. If it fails, then back to the drawing board. I think we all agree that something has to change.

"I give up" ... ha ... I don't believe that for a second. I don't know you personally, but I don't believe that attitude is part of your makeup.