Author Topic: An alternative to the base capture thingy...  (Read 803 times)

Offline SKurj

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3630
An alternative to the base capture thingy...
« Reply #15 on: August 19, 2001, 02:35:00 PM »
Always lookin for opinions...

SKurj

Offline DingHao2

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 227
An alternative to the base capture thingy...
« Reply #16 on: August 19, 2001, 03:12:00 PM »
i LOVE this idea--HTC!!!  HIRE THIS GUY!!!  HE'S A GENIUS!!!  HE'LL 'consult W/ STRAT AND MAP ELEMENTS!!  HIRE HIM!!

Offline majic

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1538
An alternative to the base capture thingy...
« Reply #17 on: August 20, 2001, 01:29:00 AM »
I like the basic idea.  My favorite part of the game is bombing and attack missions anyway.  Arado would also become much more usefull too.

Offline SKurj

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3630
An alternative to the base capture thingy...
« Reply #18 on: August 20, 2001, 06:17:00 AM »
Further thought....

When a base is captured..  In reality when forces pulled out of a base they often left booby traps etc as surprises for the captors.  When a base falls into enemy hands it automatically collapses.  All buildings etc are destroyed.
Captured cities/towns offer no bar dar in their respectives sectors, representing the disgruntled population +)  Captured bases however do.
As a team's front moves farther and farther away from its HQ, supply problems arise...  For each new facility/base etc that is captured the supply score DROPS for XX amount of time.  And of course all captured bases have to be player supplied the first time.
Factories that are captured contribute NOTHING to the capturing forces.  Captured towns and cities also contribute NOTHING to the captor.  Each city could be given its own defensive force of XX amount of troops, and AA, and individual morale score.  If the front encompasses a town, an area of resistance surrounds the city (aka Battle of the Bulge)  For every XX amount of damage inflicted upon the city X amount of troops are killed, and morale drops.  The attacking forces must destroy all AA, all enemy troops, and drop troops to capture the city/town.
When the front encompasses the city, its communications hookup is still active to friendly forces, until the attacker captures the city, regardless of whether the radio building is 100% or not.  If the city is not encompassed by the front, and the radio building is destroyed then communications are cutoff.  If the city is encompassed while the radio building is down, communications reopen as soon as the city is surrounded.
Friendly forces can supply the city under attack with supply drops by transport aircraft or using vehicles which will slow down a city's fall.

For the new factories to be built:  I envision a series of random tiles generated at map change well behind the lines which are dormant facilities.  I dunno how the coding works, perhaps they could just contain destroyed facilities.  Once activated they auto repair.

I think these ideas would result in quite a looong war, perhaps that would work well in the CT.  Players would score points by how much damage inflicted.  If they shoot an enemy fighter down X points awarded, an enemy bomber 2*X points, and perhaps a small bonus if the pilot of the fighter aircraft is captured or killed.  Bomber crews all recieve damage points for the bomb run, and all recieve the points for any fighter kills, however only the gunner who scored the kill recieves the actual "kill".
Gooney drivers of course recieve points, as well as perk points which they are able to assign to ANY category they wish. (fighter,bomber etc) perhaps they choose which category they wish to score it as prior to leaving hangar.

More ideas +)

SKurj

Offline SKurj

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3630
An alternative to the base capture thingy...
« Reply #19 on: August 20, 2001, 12:55:00 PM »
Tryin to come up with ideas to prevent a steamroller effect takin place...

Supply:  The farther a base is away from HQ the slower the rebuild time.  The more bases a team has the longer rebuild time also.  If a team has fewer than it started with its rebuild time at bases will decrease due to shorter supply routes.  Porking its supply convoys etc will still slow down the auto rebuild tho.

R&D:  The better a team is doing, the slower its R&D score increases (what do we need new aircraft types for? we are winning. say the politicians +)

Base capture revisited:  When the front encompasses a base that base does not automatically fall into enemy hands.  Its Supply is cutoff (no auto rebuild) and all facilities at the base must be destroyed and troops dropped before it can be captured.

If a base or city has been encompassed but not captured, any damage inflicted on that area, does NOT affect the fluid front at all.

Bombing:  Bombs made less accurate, larger blast radius.  All bombs dropped within the facility perimeter are scored.  Any that actually destroy a building recieve a modifier based on the building type.  A facility cannot be destroyed unless the buildings are destroyed.  What I am tryin to say is, 10,000 misses yet within the perimeter cannot destroy the facility.
Rockets score if they hit (not neccessarily destroy)a structure or vehicle.

I think this will give the Dive Bomber a better place in AH.  With bomb inaccuracy increased with altitude.  If buffs wanna fly at 30k, they'd better bring more planes and carpet bomb.  

The extreme visibility range I think needs some adjustment in AH, its too easy to fly at 30k and spot that C47 at 3k below u.
Would also add to immersion.


Yeah Yeah I know shaddup already...

SKurj

[ 08-27-2001: Message edited by: SKurj ]

Offline jr

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7
An alternative to the base capture thingy...
« Reply #20 on: August 20, 2001, 02:34:00 PM »
Sounds like fun! Now all HTC has to do is write the code  :eek:

Offline pimpjoe

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 944
An alternative to the base capture thingy...
« Reply #21 on: August 20, 2001, 08:32:00 PM »
It sounds like a freaking blast....Im game  :D

Offline jarbo

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 240
An alternative to the base capture thingy...
« Reply #22 on: August 26, 2001, 03:25:00 PM »
Skurj,
  I think the "fluid front" idea is a really sharp twist to the base capture idea.  The global and local front concept is an excellent way to capture effect of tactical and strategic offensive efforts.  C47 resupply is a great way to limit base "ping-pong" and create supply line effect.

This could possibly could be implemented over the top of the current strat system where HQ hurts radar, city hurts rebuild, etc. Goons running to maproom would have to be modified so you could only get resupply points on a disabled base recently captured.
But I can't imagine how complex the equation(s) would be to calculate who owns what base on a 2-dimensional grid (jarbo's brain hurts thinking on this one)

Nevertheless, I really like the thoughts along this line

Offline Enduro

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 830
An alternative to the base capture thingy...
« Reply #23 on: August 27, 2001, 07:07:00 PM »
I really like this idea, SKurj!   :)  My only question is, has anyone at HTC acknowledged this thread, yet?  

Do they think it's possible in AH's future?

Enduro
TBolt
Last edited by hitech on 09-08-2004 at 10:51 AM for flaming everone.

Offline geistx

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 30
      • http://www.flyingwhirlpoolofsuck.org
An alternative to the base capture thingy...
« Reply #24 on: September 02, 2001, 06:01:00 PM »
Skurj,

I really like these ideas.  I think the fluid front concept would add an incredible angle to the game!


  :)

highflyer

  • Guest
An alternative to the base capture thingy...
« Reply #25 on: September 06, 2001, 01:05:00 PM »
Excellent IDEA!

Very good! This idea has much more realistic aspects in comparison to the current system.

Offline SKurj

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3630
An alternative to the base capture thingy...
« Reply #26 on: October 04, 2001, 08:51:00 AM »
boing

Offline Wuf

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2
      • http://na
An alternative to the base capture thingy...
« Reply #27 on: November 24, 2001, 04:01:00 AM »
I like it!!

Dont know exactly the hell it would cause HT to implement it...But it has excellent potential.  And it would also steer us all away from the "cap the town and base...move on" mind set.  I also like the options it would present for ways to play the game.  It would be ever expanding and you would have to start paying major attention to all details around you.  Excellent idea all the way around!!!

Offline Arlo

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24759
An alternative to the base capture thingy...
« Reply #28 on: November 24, 2001, 01:01:00 PM »
Had quite a similar discussion a couple of years ago with some AW buddies on this same subject. R&D, production, morale, partisans and and guerilla warfare. I must say I'm pretty impressed, SKurg.

 A detailed working strat system is a scenario dweeb's dream. From what I've seen, AH shows more potential in this than AW did. Working trains goes a long way towards this goal. Ship convoys and lone fast merchant ships will too, eventually, I reckon.

 The idea of R&D and detailed plant production (including having to think ahead - gearing up a plant to produce P-47s and then changing it to producing jets would take some resources and time of it's own)is great for some added realism to arena play but would be even better for scenarios.

 As far as the "two sided" setup is concerned, in the broad scale I tend to agree (for doesn't it quite often become that by default from time to time?)but there's always been another aspect I think that many sims have overlooked and that's the political one. If 4 .... or even 6 political entities existed in an arena (scenarios have them by design) and each one had different resources available, I could easily envision alliances (no, not the "gangbanging the odd man out" type that some claim, and maybe rightly so, exists already). I'm talking alliances based on more than that. A sharing of resources and knowledge. Not for free, mind you. Perhaps one side can offer to share it's research with another side that's researching the same thing, speeding it up for both of them if they both have a different piece of the puzzle. Maybe one side has completed their research but recently they've taken some hard hits on their production and they want to "contract out" to an ally, in return the ally builds the same for themselves under license to the other. Maybe it's merely in the best interest to keep an ally in better shape to distract a foe and you want to ship them equipment.

 I suppose the highest ranking players would be calling the political shots but still, I think adding the "Diplomacy" factor would add some depth for those into it. Ever play "Diplomacy"?  :)

Offline SKurj

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3630
An alternative to the base capture thingy...
« Reply #29 on: November 24, 2001, 04:27:00 PM »
Good to see this one brought up once more +)

I am not so sure about bringing politics into it +)  I just envision more flamewars   :rolleyes:

+)
I have been playing Silent Hunter 2 alot, shipping routes with convoy's and spawn points for subs near the routes would rock AH too +)

SKurj