Author Topic: Capturing Fields: Opinions Wanted  (Read 6136 times)

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Capturing Fields: Opinions Wanted
« Reply #150 on: July 25, 2003, 05:06:04 PM »
beetle is not really agreeing with me except in the problem... that of suicide jabo... he is unable to grasp or, more likely, too proud to admit, that my solution is the most elegant and makes the most sense... simply perk all bombs for JABO over 100 lbs say.   the perk points could be adjusted to suite.   The large fluffs have allready been adjusted down in leathiality to a relaistic and good gameplay level.

beetles solution does nothing except get rid of pee 51's in the arena... the -1 corsairs and f6's are excellent jabo platforms as are other planes that aren't currently all that popular..  A suicide P47 is allmost impossible to stop and yet he would do nothing to limit them.   He attacks the problem from the wrong angle and comes up with a non solution.

slap... with closer fields... a whole clump of em... so what if they took the field?  you up pne back and you and I and the dozen other guys all enjoying the fight would just fly the 3/4 sector or less to fight again.  the strat guys would be patting themselves on the back or writhing in agony depending on if they had "captured" the field or "lost" it.    we, of course, would not care one way or the other but everyone would have a good time.  If the field were down to 25% fuel... who cares? plenty of fuel to get to the fight 3/4 sector or less away...  I would also suggest that all planes could take off so long as any hanger was up.   I would call "capture" when all hangers, ack and VH were down.
lazs

Offline beet1e

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7848
Capturing Fields: Opinions Wanted
« Reply #151 on: July 25, 2003, 05:46:02 PM »
Lazs, me old China - you are wrong about me. I'm not trying to solve your suicide jabo "problem". I would like to see fewer of the big 3 - P51/LA7/Spit ix - and that was the subject of my nominal perks suggestion. Said suggestion would also mean that the P51 would be less likely to be used as a suicide jabo, but that was not why I made the suggestion. As for perking bombs, it would not make any difference. The P51 can  carry 8 rockets - or is it 10? And if I wanted to embark on de-ackage/fuel porkage, that would be my loadout - NOT bombs. About the only thing I use bombs for is the VH, and only then the VH at a major airfield. Vehicle base VHs can be killed with 8 rockets.

And that is why my perkage extension would apply to planes - not bombs/ammo.

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Capturing Fields: Opinions Wanted
« Reply #152 on: July 25, 2003, 08:27:32 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by beet1e

....So why don't we introduce some nominal perk costs for some planes, for the same reason that the Chog was perked, which was that it was completely unbalancing the arena just as all this suicide/horde/steamroller/pork-n-auger/fuel-porkage is unbalancing the arena right now? A nominal 4pp for a P51 or TYPH would not seem unreasonable.....

...The suicide fuel porkery etc. would be reduced because [/b]the dweebs that do it would have to earn PP to fly their P51 pork-n-auger sorties,[/b] and...
  • ....


.....so that we couldn't have a horde of P51 P&A guys beating up a field and making it impossible to take off - or at least it would get very expensive for them to fly those dweeb P&A sorties at 8pp a throw.

 
Shortly thereafter Beet says:

Quote
Originally posted by beet1e Lazs, me old China - you are wrong about me. I'm not trying to solve your suicide jabo "problem". I would like to see fewer of the big 3 - P51/LA7/Spit ix - and that was the subject of my nominal perks suggestion. Said suggestion would also mean that the P51 would be less likely to be used as a suicide jabo, but that was not why I made the suggestion.
 

Ya have to love someone that can twist, turn and double back on himself that quick while denying he did any such thing.

Too funny.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline beet1e

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7848
Capturing Fields: Opinions Wanted
« Reply #153 on: July 26, 2003, 04:51:27 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Mr. Toad
Too funny.
Seems like you're the only one laughing.

Except me. :D

I'll try to say it again - slowly - and more concisely. Bombs do not enter into it. Fuel and acks can be porked by strafing or by rockets. Perking bombs won't change your enemies ability to pork your field. Lazs said
Quote
beetles solution does nothing except get rid of pee 51's in the arena...
... and that's because my solution addresses a different problem - over use of the Big Three (or Four if you prefer, but mainly P51/Spit/LA7). I mentioned the TYPH because it becomes one of the overused planes when someone decides to design a missun. I had a screenshot somewhere with 15 TYPHS on a missun - ridiculous.

The reason that the P51 IS so popular/overused is because it is a good all round plane - fast, manoeuvrable, good fire power, and provides good survivability - in an environment in which 6-calls are not always forthcoming. It does carry bombs, but so do P47/P38/F4U/F6F/110 etc. I am not advocating that those planes (or their bombs) should be perked at all. I have never suggested that bombs should be perked. BTW, I have done plenty of de-acking and fuel porking, but only rarely used bombs.

I think it's time for you to lie down in that bed you made for yourself. I didn't say what you really, really wanted me to have said, and you just can't face it but can't let this ¼ of a chance pass by. Remember that movie with Fred Astaire dancing on the wall while a guy played cards? Maybe he wasn't dancing on the wall, and it was the room that had been "twisted and turned" around. That would explain why, in the out take, the cards flew past the guys head when he let go of them. Think on the analogy for a while in relation to your comments about twisting and turning...

... and then put away your fishing tackle. It's a bad day, and the loch is as smooth as a mill pond. You've cast your line and caught nothing. And now even the worm on your hook is laughing at you.

And there I must take my leave of you. The warmer climes of Côte d'Azur beckon. See you on Thursday.

Toodle-Pip! :D

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Capturing Fields: Opinions Wanted
« Reply #154 on: July 26, 2003, 06:52:49 AM »
LoL!
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Capturing Fields: Opinions Wanted
« Reply #155 on: July 26, 2003, 08:56:57 AM »
believe me.. toad is not the only one laughing at you beetle... sooo.... you want to perk the big eight or ten pr so in order to .... Have more variety?   and you don't care about jabo except that you did care a few posts back except that you also worry about overused planes like the yak that is number 16 except that it can kill you so you...

Or is this just one of your long winded and convoluted "perk the La7" posts?   And they say I have a one track mind!
lazs

Offline muckmaw

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3874
Capturing Fields: Opinions Wanted
« Reply #156 on: July 26, 2003, 02:06:00 PM »
Ah..nevermind

Offline Shiva

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 966
      • http://members.cox.net/srmalloy/
Re: Another idea
« Reply #157 on: July 26, 2003, 08:21:57 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Bubbaj6
Sorry if this was already mentioned, but halway through the thread and almost time to leave work.. sooo:

I know this porbably isn't possible currently, but perhaps if it took 30 troopers from a goon (arbitrary number) and only 10 from an m-3 to capture a base?


And this penalizes people attacking from a direction where the vehicle spawns don't allow you to spawn vehicles to the field. Go back and look at the various terrains, and look for cases where fields sit with unidrectional spawns -- in some cases, there are fields that can only (in practice) be attacked by vehicles from a single other field, which are nonetheless sitting in the middle of four or five fields. You'd have to go back and redo vehicle spawns to equalize the situation.

Offline SKurj

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3630
Capturing Fields: Opinions Wanted
« Reply #158 on: July 26, 2003, 09:10:55 PM »
Capturing fields too hard??? WTF ARE YOU GUYS ON??


Kill a dozen buildings, 3 ack, and land troops is too hard?  Same thing required to capture a dirt runway as a huge zone field....   At the very least I feel it should 10,20,30 troops based on field size..

I say move map room back to the base and still require town to be flat.  Its already too easy.  One guy can do it...  

Making fields easier to capture just helps the milkrunners.

someone said they didn't like the flashing base icons...  HELLO??  the flashing icon makes perfect sense IMO.  Or are these 'bases' and 'towns' deserted with no communication system?

Capturing a base with 1 or even 2 guys is a joke IMO.  I'd like to see base capture require more realistic strategies/tactics.   Even a heavily defended base can be stolen out from under a team currently  which again I dislike +)  Sure it feels great to get the steal.


Dunno where the solution lies... for me.. Hmm best setup that comes to mind is two maprooms, one in town one on the base.  Both have to be captured to have a full functional base.  Capture the town maproom = cuts off supplies and troops to the base. (though any existing troops at the base are ok)  Capture the base maproom, no troops or supplies until town also captured.
Player mannable 88's at both town and base, more acks at town, and town 4x larger.  Stead of having to destroy whole town, have key buildings/encampments which need to be destroyed.


SKurj
« Last Edit: July 26, 2003, 09:14:08 PM by SKurj »

Offline Grizzly

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 399
Capturing Fields: Opinions Wanted
« Reply #159 on: July 27, 2003, 12:19:27 PM »
A swarm of planes storms in, first one kills the VH, the rest de-ack the field, and then they have a vulch fest until the city is dead and their goony comes in.

With a well coordinated attack it's easy to capture a base. With a few well placed hits, it's all over and the defenders can't do anything about it. This just isn't right.

And what of the field defenses? Manable ack that fires so slow it's harder than hell to hit an enemy plane unless he is coming directly at you. Constant warps just as the enemy plane comes into range. And one tiny hit from way out instanly kills the ack.

Then, of course, you have the Osty, which is almost as difficult to hit an enemy, but at least can survive a bit. But has a range far to short to do anything about bombers... even low ones. The M16 is better at hitting moving targets, but too easy to kill.

Then you have the cities located out of range, and often out of sight from the field without any defense but a couple of ack that can be taken out on the first pass. With the VH down and swarms of planes over the base, there is no defense. Worst are the cities with spawn points right next to them. It's easier for the enemy to get to them than the defenders.

Then there are trhe jabo guys who can take out hangers on every drop. What happened to the non-precision bombing we were supposed to have back then? How can one plane take out the VH every time, first try, without worry about getting killed? I know some guys practised until they could do it well, but no amount of practise can stop them.

All in all, there is very poor defense at the fields making it so much easier for the mass swarms to take them with impunity. Give us manable 88s, and give us some defense for our cities. Else it's just a contest to see who can swarm faster, and that would be the side who has the most players. We could just as well count the players on each side and declare the one with the most winner.

Offline Devourer

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 92
      • http://www.106thvag.org
Capturing Fields: Opinions Wanted
« Reply #160 on: July 27, 2003, 12:30:12 PM »
I was just wondering if  ammo bunkers and fuel tanks in real WW2 fields could take as much bullets as they do in AH.

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Capturing Fields: Opinions Wanted
« Reply #161 on: July 27, 2003, 01:16:18 PM »
hmmmmmmmm...

Maybe 40 mannable 88 batteries at the field, each with 4 guns. All are AI until taken over by a player. And additional 50 or 60 mixed .50 BMG and/or 20mm quad mount positions. About half again of those placed around the city, 20 88's and 30 lighter quads....

Now the 40 plane steamroller attack might be fun for the defenders... if you like that "groundpounder" sort of action.

Moving the pendulum ever closer to the uncapturable base.  :)
« Last Edit: July 27, 2003, 01:21:10 PM by Toad »
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Jackal1

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9092
Capturing Fields: Opinions Wanted
« Reply #162 on: July 27, 2003, 01:46:24 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Toad

Moving the pendulum ever closer to the uncapturable base.  :)

  ...and ending the game entirely.
  I am not a supporter of the massive missions. IMHO recruiting for 15 to 30 minutes is ridiculous  ( once again IMHO)..
  If a base is not defended or can`t be defended due to mass  numbers in a mission it`s just simply no fun.
  On the other hand uncapturable bases is defiinitley not the answer, that`s what the game is all about and why it is played by the vast majority.
Democracy is two wolves deciding on what to eat. Freedom is a well armed sheep protesting the vote.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Capturing Fields: Opinions Wanted
« Reply #163 on: July 27, 2003, 04:44:16 PM »
well... In my opinion... it isn't so much that the fields are too hard to capture as it is that they are too easy to make useless...  If they are useless they should be automatically captured or... they shouldn't be able to be made useless.

too far apart and too easy to make useless is the problem for both camps...   everyone would have more fun if the game moved a little faster with more action.
lazs

Offline Replicant

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3567
Capturing Fields: Opinions Wanted
« Reply #164 on: July 27, 2003, 05:13:08 PM »
Two maprooms, one in town, one on the airfield.  Only 10 troops still needed but 5 in each.  The town has to be destroyed as per usual but to get the 5 troops in the airfield means that you have to deack the airfield.  Defenders may have a chance at straffing troops before they get into the airfield maproom ala AH of old.

It will also mean either more goons/M3 or a very careful goon to drop 5 on each maproom.

If you want to make it harder then make the town larger.  Put in dispersed AA batteries around the perimeter of the airfield.
NEXX