Hmmm.
I used to play Brand X online flight sim. Once upon a time, only a small fraction of the fields could be captured in Flight Sim X, and they were pretty easy to capture -- much easier than in AH.
The battles over these fields could be incredibly fierce, and they tended to add focus and structure to the game. Yet, because the other fields (around 90%) could not be captured, there were always plenty of places to fly from, if you were one of these people who likes to fly.
One day, though, the situation was reversed, and now nearly 90% of the fields were capturable. Thus began what many deemed the "porkfest landgrab." The game was never the same, and in my opinion, never as enjoyable. Even when you could find a place to fly unimpeded, you were constantly carped at to man goons, and you had to spend more time defending against bombers, because whether or not you cared about the landgrab, the landgrab affected you.
Now, I'm not saying that AH should change, or that it should be like Brand X. I left Brand X months ago, which should say what I think.
I'm just trying to explain why I dislike your idea. I don't think it needs to be any harder to keep a field up and usable. I know that certain folks like to deride "furballers," but for some of us, that's where the fun is. We don't particularly want to cruise at 30000 feet looking for enemy bombers, or get sliced up as we try to climb to them from 15000 feet. But every one of these sorts of ideas (crater damage, more difficult supply, etc) means that we have to devote more time to it.
I don't deny that it's fun for a lot of folks to man bombers -- hell, I do on occasion. What I am saying is that every time I hear some scheme or another to make it easier to damage fields, or harder to repair the damage, I wince, because it always seems that the "strat players'" schemes wind up making it harder and harder for anybody to play any way other than theirs.
[ 11-26-2001: Message edited by: Runny ^Skull^ ]
[ 11-26-2001: Message edited by: Runny ^Skull^ ]
