Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: hitech on November 29, 2006, 10:33:04 AM
-
We are testing out a new field capture system
in the LW Orange today.
This system should allow us to use large maps
with lower populations.
The new system only allows fields to be captured in
A certain order. Fields that are currently capturable
by your country are shown as larger icons.
To display the field capture order, right click on map
and click Field Order.
-
Interesting. Hope it works.
-
Always good to see HTC is on the job :aok
-
Sounds like a good way to create... "Target Rich Enviroments" Should be a blast....
I know your only testing but if this works, have you thought about making a perked version of the C-47 with "SAS" type troops so you can capture a rear base....
You could always make it that bases that captured behind NME lines dont get resupped by strat...
Yeah early days yet just sorta popped into my head when I read your post....
-
Gonna be up all day, or does that depend on how smoothly things go?
-
Originally posted by hitech
We are testing out a new field capture system
in the LW Orange today.
This system should allow us to use large maps
with lower populations.
The new system only allows fields to be captured in
A certain order. Fields that are currently capturable
by your country are shown as larger icons.
To display the field capture order, right click on map
and click Field Order.
What is the "order" based on?
-
Originally posted by mussie
Sounds like a good way to create... "Target Rich Enviroments" Should be a blast....
Agreed. Glad to see things evolve in a way that encourages players to fight each other. Hope it works as expected, been impressed with the gamerz ability to game the system before.
-
Originally posted by Donzo
What is the "order" based on?
Just an assumption here but I would think that it would be front line bases first... Again just an assumption....
-
Very kewl! tnx HT!:aok
-
Might not be a bad idea to have Skuzzy "trip over the cord" for LWBlue. Only a handful in Orange, with the other 180 in Blue.
-
Also appears to be one bug in system. Some boarders are not capturerable that should be.
-
blue is still stuck in bishnits vs rooks for ownership of reset corner .... been that way all week .
-
Originally posted by hitech
Also appears to be one bug in system. Some boarders are not capturerable that should be.
can someone translate... like they do in those insurance commercials...
-
bigger maps == good idea
capturing bases in certain order only===the furballers finally got their way
guess i,ll reserve judgment until i see this in action.
optimisticly,
Boner
public relations officer for Boner
-
heh. someone had to do it. :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by KG45
heh. someone had to do it. :rolleyes:
LMAO Spot on KG45 . :aok :rofl :aok
Bronk
-
Originally posted by soda72
can someone translate... like they do in those insurance commercials...
Knights couldn't capture any territory. No one noticed. Arena being reset as we speak. HiTech puts on tangerine lipgloss, and answers the door.
-
Bug is fixed. Also have some captureable fields not in the list.
New system can be setup or changed for other ways to make fields capaturable or not.
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
Knights couldn't capture any territory. No one noticed.
Well thats to be expected (my fellow knights not noticing that is, not the bug)
I dont get the lippy remark must be an american thing :P
-
Originally posted by 1Boner
bigger maps == good idea
capturing bases in certain order only===the furballers finally got their way
guess i,ll reserve judgment until i see this in action.
optimisticly,
Boner
public relations officer for Boner
LOL, interesting reserving of judgement, with the comment made just prior to saying it :)
Gotta get off the Furball v Toolshed stereotypes.
If HTC is promoting players playing against players, how can that be bad. No one is taking away base capture. If anything it's going to put the ACM guys in the mix of helping to take bases. Integrating the different styles of play is what it should be about.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
If HTC is promoting players playing against players, how can that be bad. No one is taking away base capture. If anything it's going to put the ACM guys in the mix of helping to take bases. Integrating the different styles of play is what it should be about.
[SIZE=16]DAM STRAIGHT !!!!
[/SIZE]
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
LOL, interesting reserving of judgement, with the comment made just prior to saying it :)
Gotta get off the Furball v Toolshed stereotypes.
If HTC is promoting players playing against players, how can that be bad. No one is taking away base capture. If anything it's going to put the ACM guys in the mix of helping to take bases. Integrating the different styles of play is what it should be about.
Boner may be upset cause with this capture system you probably cant find an undefended base to sneak
-
This idea sounds very Cool!!!!!!
-
capturing bases in certain order only===the furballers finally got their way
Well maybe it means now everyone online is fighting each other.
Don't you get it. AI could turn on and off certain fields thus affecting the war/game play in directions no online game has been taken before. Prior to AI getting written, it could be Generaled by human intervention.
Lets face it, the "Action" in the arenas is living and breathing and functioning solely on chance and a simple rule set. By controlling the fight from a global scope HTC or Scenario Staff can affect the flow of the overall fight, hopefully creating what Guppy et-al have been wishing for... A system that pitts the Air War resources against that of the other countries to the fuition of all out battles where every player is engaged in some sort of action.
Sounds like some thing that could be used by some game they may be working on, don't ya think.
Change is good in a game, thank goodness HT and the Gang are back, there was drought of improvements for a while, while they were so focused on CT.
Thanks HTC for trying to keep the arenas a fun place to engage in Air Combat Warfare.
-
Originally posted by Airscrew
Boner may be upset cause with this capture system you probably cant find an undefended base to sneak
Yes ... milk-runners will abhor this system.
-
Havn't been on to try it yet, sounds interesting but I have to say there is a certain fun element to sneaking past the NME lines and grabbing a rear base... I think what some people disliked the most about the sneak tactic was when you had a broad front and the attackers would shift from this side to that side sweeping back and forth like window wipers instead of making a deep strike....
I think having some rear bases capturable a couple sectors back could be good fun and if captures like these work they tend to make for some of the biggest furballs I have ever seen. Funny thing how much an NME country hates loseing a rear base. :)
-
Originally posted by Flayed1
Havn't been on to try it yet, sounds interesting but I have to say there is a certain fun element to sneaking past the NME lines and grabbing a rear base... I think what some people disliked the most about the sneak tactic was when you had a broad front and the attackers would shift from this side to that side sweeping back and forth like window wipers instead of making a deep strike....
I think having some rear bases capturable a couple sectors back could be good fun and if captures like these work they tend to make for some of the biggest furballs I have ever seen. Funny thing how much an NME country hates loseing a rear base. :)
That was pretty much my first thought Flayed :).
I like the idea of perked troops that can take rear bases (perhaps with the new perk-ord system?).
Other then that, ill hold my opinion untill i see the system in action.
-
Or, like last night in the MWA, the rooks had 60% of the entire map, but that wasn't enough, so they ran 3 sectors in and took the one V-base that had a spawn point to knit HQ, and then killed the HQ with GVs. Didn't bother to take the fields between their front line and the v-base.
I think taking rear bases is unrealistic to the extreme. Milk runners and griefers do this more than folks using legitimate tactics.
I'm definitely going to try logging in today to try this out.
Hitech: Can you let this run for a week, at least, so we can get an overall idea on how it works?
-
S!
cant wait to try it!
large maps :aok
hitech for president :aok
S!
-
Originally posted by DadRabit
hitech for president :aok
S!
Like he would want that job. It's a step down from god of a virtual world. :)
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
LOL, interesting reserving of judgement, with the comment made just prior to saying it :)
Gotta get off the Furball v Toolshed stereotypes.
If HTC is promoting players playing against players, how can that be bad. No one is taking away base capture. If anything it's going to put the ACM guys in the mix of helping to take bases. Integrating the different styles of play is what it should be about.
players playing against players = End to milk running and bomber/attack score padding.
That's why some don't like it.
ack-ack
-
S!
i'll vote ht for santa claus as long as we get different/bigger maps :D
S!
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Or, like last night in the MWA, the rooks had 60% of the entire map, but that wasn't enough, so they ran 3 sectors in and took the one V-base that had a spawn point to knit HQ, and then killed the HQ with GVs. Didn't bother to take the fields between their front line and the v-base.
I think taking rear bases is unrealistic to the extreme. Milk runners and griefers do this more than folks using legitimate tactics.
I'm definitely going to try logging in today to try this out.
Hitech: Can you let this run for a week, at least, so we can get an overall idea on how it works?
what in your mind are legitmate tactics?
-
milk runners simply take an undefended field because they can't deal with taking one that's defended. The second even one defender shows up they scatter, run, and go to the next farthest-withdrawn field they can get to and try again there.
If, however, there is a very large horde-on-horde clash going on in one sector over one field, and a group of folks set up a mission to take a field 2 sectors down, but still on the front line, they will draw a large number of that horde off.
Basically griefers and milk runners don't help anybody but themselves. Like the folks that launch missions to go 5 sectors behind enemy lines to take the 163 base in sneak attacks, and the like (and yes, I remember at least one time when folks tried to do this mission, but I think they failed).
I'm willing to give the new base capture a shot, if it reduces that aspect of AH gameplay.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
milk runners simply take an undefended field because they can't deal with taking one that's defended. The second even one defender shows up they scatter, run, and go to the next farthest-withdrawn field they can get to and try again there.
If, however, there is a very large horde-on-horde clash going on in one sector over one field, and a group of folks set up a mission to take a field 2 sectors down, but still on the front line, they will draw a large number of that horde off.
Basically griefers and milk runners don't help anybody but themselves. Like the folks that launch missions to go 5 sectors behind enemy lines to take the 163 base in sneak attacks, and the like (and yes, I remember at least one time when folks tried to do this mission, but I think they failed).
I'm willing to give the new base capture a shot, if it reduces that aspect of AH gameplay.
so your saying that if a group of guys does an NOE raid to a base behind enemy lines and capture it that is illlegitmate?
-
Originally posted by Schatzi
That was pretty much my first thought Flayed :).
I like the idea of perked troops that can take rear bases (perhaps with the new perk-ord system?).
Other then that, ill hold my opinion untill i see the system in action.
Or... an increased number of troops required to capture. Rear base = 3x drunks. I guess I'll have to check out a late war arena for the first time... La7s, SpitXVIs...
-
I understand defining a milkrunner is a matter of semantics but...I didn't see too much actual capture of rear bases, yeah it happened some, but not what I'd call rampant.
What I did see a lot of was score-padding milkruns of strats or bases where there was no crowd around. THAT to me fits the description of a milkrunner...someone who wants to bomb buildings away from the crowd, without fear of being intercepted.
FWIW, I don't see this change affecting the ability of a true milkrunner to pad their bomber/attack/GV scores, in fact if it forces the strat-guys and the ACM-gius into the same areas for once...the milkrunners might just have it easier.
-
i agree with you edbert sneaking a bases via an noe raid where no one is at isnt milkrunning
-
I was thinking it was more punishment for acm ppl than milk runners ...
next step should be to tone down bomber lasers to more realistic accuracy/damage
-
Originally posted by Edbert
I understand defining a milkrunner is a matter of semantics but...I didn't see too much actual capture of rear bases, yeah it happened some, but not what I'd call rampant.
What I did see a lot of was score-padding milkruns of strats or bases where there was no crowd around. THAT to me fits the description of a milkrunner...someone who wants to bomb buildings away from the crowd, without fear of being intercepted.
FWIW, I don't see this change affecting the ability of a true milkrunner to pad their bomber/attack/GV scores, in fact if it forces the strat-guys and the ACM-gius into the same areas for once...the milkrunners might just have it easier.
Me and the other lads from JG44 did an NOE raid DEEP into NME territory once..... It was great fun, I dont even think we captured the field but it was a good blast and I enjoyed flying NOE for three or four sectors with the squad...
-
Originally posted by Airscrew
Boner may be upset cause with this capture system you probably cant find an undefended base to sneak
upset? :huh
-
Originally posted by 1Boner
upset? :huh
"the furballers finally got their way" <-- I think thats what they are refering to...
-
Originally posted by 1Boner
upset? :huh
yes upset. tell me how does
"capturing bases in certain order only" equal "the furballers finally got their way"
-
I like the idea.
Actually turns the battle over the map as one being fought over front lines, with less worry about a sneak in the rear areas, which, realistically (and often in game), would just create an untennable position anyway.
And if it gets us into larger and (more importantly) different maps.... hooray!!!!
Can't see where this is a furballer victory.... if you are into buff driving and land grabbing.... it may put a little more emphasis on teamwork to manage a capture is all. No, or few, uncontested captures maybe. This game would benefit from a serious dose of teamwork anyway from my experiences the past couple months.
New version, now new capture system, talk about a perkd ord system (with no details, shudder, now here is an issue that could potentially become a furballer victory against buff drivers depending on details)..... things just may be looking up here abouts.
Now if populations would just grow in Early and Mid to make for a good fight.... or start alternating early and mid arenas to concentrate their numbers.....
-
Hell I am a Furballing Toolsheader, I sometimes get confused and find myself dogfighting in a B-26... (quite fun actually)
As far as I am concered the more combat the better..
Its not like I am trying to get my mining or leather working skills up to level 300 alla WOW...
You will never here "Oh look a +4 hispano of LA slaying" thank god :P
-
S! krusty
i disagree with you on that krusty. sounds like great fun to put together a sneak attack like that even if it fails. that aspect of gameplay, IMHO, is a blast even if it is my country that is being attacked. you look at map an all of a sudden a huge dar pops up, the calls go out to defend.......what a blast!
even if they did go away it's still a rush. instant action :)
my 2 cents
S!
-
Originally posted by Airscrew
yes upset. tell me how does
"capturing bases in certain order only" equal "the furballers finally got their way"
never said that furballers getting their way upset me.
however until i see what happens over time, i,m going to assume that there will be larger maps with 3 big furballs going on. how else will you take a base? gvs? well maybe. why bother making bigger maps if the bulk of the players will banging heads in a very small area?
and as far as being upset? go start a fight somewhere else, this base is heavily defended.:cool:
your buddy,
Boner
public relations officer for Boner
-
It is capturable condition correct @V110? Neither of the other sides have one that deep.
(http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d64/fuzeman/V110status.jpg)
-
only complaint so far is the dang Icon's are HUGE!
Somewhat annoying.
Can we use a diff. visual que? Possibly code it so the field is a diff. color?
Zoom the map out, and the capturable field takes up 1/2 the sector it's in. (edit:more like the whole sector)
-
Don't know enough about the new system to comment on it, but I do notice its significance, in that it is a very rare incident for HT to stand up and actually do something to the strat system. As a matter of fact, it's a change in the strat since ages, when AH eliminated the depot structures and replaced it with a town system way back god knows when.
I think it might mean that HT is rethinking the previous "invisible hand" theory of MA gameplay.
'Just let anyone up, fly, and fight in whatever they want, wherever they want, however they want' - used to be the MA motto. Unfortunately, it has been proven time again, that such unlimited freedom ultimately includes "the freedom of the players to wreck destroy their own gameplay". Finally, the problem seems to have been realized, and HT took steps to attempt a change in all that by actually limiting players and their actions to mold and shift the MA tendency into something different.
I hope it is a precursor to better things to come. I am not so sure if such a change will mean anything more than a temporary relief to the MA, but it should mean that the basic strat is now also a part of something susceptible to change in the days to come.
ps) Ofcourse, we all know how much HT hates it when someone says they know what he thinks, so if he may be offended by it, many apologies to HT in advance.
-
It's certainly got potential, and it will be interesting to see if/how tactics change, or if people simply do log off and look for better odds. I like that fights seem to continue for a while, as the more popular "let's go where they aren't" tactic don't really work at the moment. Hopefully base defense will increase as people realize it's not completely fruitless now. Time will tell.
-
Originally posted by 1Boner
and as far as being upset? go start a fight somewhere else, this base is heavily defended.:cool:
your buddy, Boner
Are you a female? just wondering, this sounds like something my wife would say. :cool:
-
Went in there to see. The Knights and Bish are already whining about it on 200.
-
what are they saying mash?
-
I just logged into LW orange to look at the new system and i don't like it as is because:
1. It looks like each side only has one base on each front to capture. This means as a knight we only have 1 rook base or one bish base that is capturable.
2. This should definetely filter all the activity to those two bases (1 rook & 1 bish), but IMHO it will make capturing the base too long and drawn out. I could see several hours or days go by without the map changing much. First 6 hours rooks capture 3 knight bases and push into knight territory, next 7 hours knights win those same 3 bases back and we are back to where we started 15 hours later.
3. I think this could work but not taken to this much of an extreem. Instead of giving us only one capturable base on each frot, maybe 3 or 4 options per front.
This will still funnel the action to certain spots on the map but there will be some options to the strategic part of the game as to which of the 3 or 4 bases you want to put more effort into capturing. And the map fronts have more of a chance of changing over time.
-
Originally posted by Airscrew
Are you a female? just wondering, this sounds like something my wife would say. :cool:
do you have anything to say about this thread? i mean everything else you're saying is fasinating and all. but i thought this was about the new test arena?:confused:
-
1rst chance to see the map setup and i believe richard has a good point. with only a small number of bases that can be captured, it seems pointless to have a big map (from a base capture point of view).
map ideal would be even better if more fields are available for capture. (this map was a great map for noe's).
my 2 cents
S!
-
Originally posted by 1Boner
bigger maps == good idea
capturing bases in certain order only===the furballers finally got their way
guess i,ll reserve judgment until i see this in action.
optimisticly,
Boner
public relations officer for Boner
Not true. HT has anabled base capturing on off line mode. Now you can capture all you want without anyone fighting back. BUT WAIT!!!! there is more!!!! HT anabled capturing of friendly bases. Now you dont have to deack or destroy any buildings before a capture.
Woowoooo see you all off line
-
Originally posted by 1Boner
do you have anything to say about this thread? i mean everything else you're saying is fasinating and all. but i thought this was about the new test arena?:confused:
And it is, I'm sorry I hurt your feelings. (thats usually what I say to my wife anyway, it seems to make her feel better)
I just think its funny that the first thing you say is "the furballers finally got their way"
Have you considered this, You want to capture a base, I want to shoot down planes, kill tanks, whatever. You attempting to capture a base with this test setup should have a defensive response by the enemy to stop the capture. I on the other hand will be looking for enemys to shoot down and I would probably head in any direction there is a dar bar or a flashing base and I could also be at the base you are trying to capture. We and others will be at the same general location and while you are blowing up buildings and running troops I am killing those that are trying to prevent the capture. The reverse would also apply defending.
I on the other hand will be slightly fustrated cause I have bowling tonight and wont have a chance to play until tomorrow evening
Bugs are funny :lol
-
Interesting idea..... Don't know about "furballers finally got their way".
Sure, the fight will grow stronger but so will the HANGER BANGING
It may mean more than 1 field being hanger banged. It may mean bombers may need some Altitude. It may mean some fighters getting alt also. IT will mean ya furballers getting pissed when hangers get bombed BUT then again you'd think they'd expect that at a capturable field......right? ;)
-
Okay, I just tried the new map.
And although I state above that I like the idea, I'm not too fond of the implimentation. Guess I figured that would would have to capture adjacent bases, any adjacent base, with no leapfrogging or taking bases in rear areas. Sort of defeats island hopping situations, but I could live with that for two definative front lines to fight along.
What I found was more akin to following a rat maze. That's the image I got when I looked at that blue line on the test map. Each base has to be taken in order, from HQ for team #1 to HQ of Team #2 or 3 from point to point. That blue line showing which bases can be captured runs all over the map. No deviation from the path. No alternate paths to follow.
No strategic options open to players or squads.
No feights to draw off enemy forces prior to a real attack.
No flanking attacks. No pushes along one side of the map vs others.
No multiple fronts vs one country or another. Two "static" fronts that will press back and forth as one country or another has the numbers. WWI trench warfare.
No need for intelligence or communication or even coordination if you don't want it. Follow thy Blue Rat Line. You Will Fight Here. Period.
I know this was a test arena. So I tested.... and this is my conclusion.
The idea still has a lot of merit..... and there are a lot of calls for new maps.... I just don't think putting in something this simplistic on a *strategic scale* is the solution.
Any thought given to "cropping" existing medium and large maps, or editing huge swaths of bases out of existing large maps to be put into the rotation? I'd even go for senerio maps to be included..... most of them already set up for three nations now..... who cares if they are completely balanced?.... It will be different, last no more than a week, and can always be pulled if there is pressure to pull them.
Thank you HT for the effort though.
-
Well if we don't like it, we can't say anything here or we'll get our post deleted.
-
I dont know why a large map would be needed for this new system. The fights now occur in those 3 predefined areas. A small map would serve the purpose much better when there is no longer any reason to head towards other bases than the large icon ones. Capturing a base is also much more difficult and can be made almost impossible with some mediocre organized defence.
The deep VH with large icon for the Knights is likely a bug.
IMHO, the number of capturable bases could be 4 or 6 per country instead of just 2. That would allow some fluctuation in the action.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
:noid
-
Deleted
-
Last edited by Hiteck on 29-11-06 at 10:15PM[/i]
-
Originally posted by Ball
See Rule #4.
Last edited by Hiteck on 29-11-06 at 10:18PM[/i]
-
ebb n flow ebb n flow..... dang clock moving slow..... I want to try the new SETUP :cry
Hitech
-
Okay, I'd imagine at LEAST all of the front line bases would allow capture, just not the ones behind them.
That should probably be increased from 1 base per team.
-
Originally posted by 1Boner
bigger maps == good idea
capturing bases in certain order only===the furballers finally got their way
dont see how you figure
Looks like a win win situation to me.
Furballers who hate the war aspect can furball to their hearts content
at the non captureable bases until the war reaches them.
then they can either participate
Or move on to the next set of uncaptureable bases.
The only ones that get hurt in this are the milkrun hoardwarriors.
Who would rather milkrun and capture a feild with no opposition particularly on the large maps then actually try and earn the capture.
I dont share this moronic distain that one side has for the other Furballers Vrs toolshedders.
I enjoy every aspect of the game depending on what Im in the mood to do.
The only distain I have is for the horde that goes base to base milkrunning and as soon as anyone puts up a defence. Rather then fight for it they run and look for another undefended base to go after Patting themselves and each other on the backs with WTGs as if they had accomplished some great feat of arms
-
Originally posted by Ball
See Rule #4.
Last edited by Hiteck on 29-11-06 at 10:18PM[/i]
:lol
-
You have to actually fight for a base, and you have to have some sort of organization, and you've also got to defend, lest you lose one base while working on the next. You can still horde, but you've got to horde the base that the other horde is probably operating out of, so the huge war that everyone but furballers love is more alive than ever.
I guess I don't see how anything but milkrunning is effected.
-
this will be interesting. believe this may be one of the better whine generator's ever produced.
you will have to have no kidding teamwork and coordination to take a base now... me likes. sure, there is gonna be lots of actio....ur buffs and fighters at those bases...but there will also be resistance there to meet them. will have to pork/cap nearby bases...ohhh good times.
-
I'm kinda surprised the anti horde crowd hasn't been more vocal.
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
so the huge war that everyone but furballers love is more alive than ever.
i dont see how a furballer wouldnt like this since when a horde meets a horde it eventually turns into a furball on the deck especially if theres a stalemate..
-
hell no - there will be no greater whine than "9/13... the great arena change" :rofl
-
Originally posted by rabbidrabbit
I'm kinda surprised the anti hoard crowd hasn't been more vocal.
That's because the anti-horde crowd dislikes the horde only beacuse it avoids the enemy horde... in this setup the two will collide. That's all we ever asked for. Action on a grand scale.
:aok
-
Originally posted by TW9
i dont see how a furballer wouldnt like this since when a horde meets a horde it eventually turns into a furball on the deck especially if theres a stalemate..
Shhhhhhh! ;)
-
Originally posted by richard_rd
I just logged into LW orange to look at the new system and i don't like it as is because:
1. It looks like each side only has one base on each front to capture. This means as a knight we only have 1 rook base or one bish base that is capturable.
2. This should definetely filter all the activity to those two bases (1 rook & 1 bish), but IMHO it will make capturing the base too long and drawn out. I could see several hours or days go by without the map changing much. First 6 hours rooks capture 3 knight bases and push into knight territory, next 7 hours knights win those same 3 bases back and we are back to where we started 15 hours later.
3. I think this could work but not taken to this much of an extreem. Instead of giving us only one capturable base on each frot, maybe 3 or 4 options per front.
This will still funnel the action to certain spots on the map but there will be some options to the strategic part of the game as to which of the 3 or 4 bases you want to put more effort into capturing. And the map fronts have more of a chance of changing over time.
Havent been there yet but if what you say is true. Its a good thing.
Now instead of simply steamrolling a base maybe people will be forced to use some imagination which is severly lacking in most basecapture "missuns" and develop a strategy for basetaking.
I already have a few ideas on how to do it.
I dont see it as a problem
-
I played it a few hours..was weak at first with every country hording the others one capturable base..than it got interesting....the base they captured was now the one capturable base for the other side :rofl
thus they were forced to defend and the steamroller halted very quickly. After that it looked like a stalemate..was great to see hi alt porkers and groups of buffs otw to nuke each others hangars and field...the interesting part was the porkers droppin their ord and going after easier pray (low buffs). It was a free for all in the end :aok
Sad to say the gamers will find a way around it but so far so good :)
-
open up that test arena cap to 450 for a few days....give it a work out!:rofl
-
Originally posted by jaxxo
I played it a few hours..was weak at first with every country hording the others one capturable base..than it got interesting....the base they captured was now the one capturable base for the other side :rofl
thus they were forced to defend and the steamroller halted very quickly. After that it looked like a stalemate..was great to see hi alt porkers and groups of buffs otw to nuke each others hangars and field...the interesting part was the porkers droppin their ord and going after easier pray (low buffs). It was a free for all in the end :aok
Sad to say the gamers will find a way around it but so far so good :)
LOL perfect. reminds me of the days of old, where people took bases because it was the best one to take or because they had just lost it, rather than going for the undefended one.
-
Originally posted by BlauK
. Capturing a base is also much more difficult and can be made almost impossible with some mediocre organized defence.
Nonsense.
read my last post.
Maybe more difficult because now basecapture missions will require real planning, and execution
Which IMO is a few hundred steps up from. "Lets take 100 people. Blow the crap out of everything and rush troops in. Preferably where there arent many if any defenders."
Which is how about 99% of missions are planned
Which takes alll the tactical skill of using an entire can of raid to kill one ant
;)
-
Originally posted by rabbidrabbit
I'm kinda surprised the anti hoard crowd hasn't been more vocal.
No its the horde warrior crowd thats gonna do the most whining on this one
You know. the ones that prefer to have a billion to one advantage LOL
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Which IMO is a few hundred steps up from. "Lets take 100 people. Blow the crap out of everything and rush troops in. Preferably where there arent many if any defenders."
Which is how about 99% of missions are planned
Which takes alll the tactical skill of using an entire can of raid to kill one ant
;)
:rofl its true though, and its been going on for so long that most dont know any better or different. :rofl
-
No strategic options open to players or squads.
No feights to draw off enemy forces prior to a real attack.
No flanking attacks. No pushes along one side of the map vs others.
No multiple fronts vs one country or another. Two "static" fronts that will press back and forth as one country or another has the numbers. WWI trench warfare.
No need for intelligence or communication or even coordination if you don't want it. Follow thy Blue Rat Line. You Will Fight Here. Period.
All of above applies only when we assume that such things existed before the change. However, over the years I have realized that no group of people in any of the three countries are that intelligent. The only such effort I've ever experienced on any kind of reliable scale was the late RJO - the days when multiple Rook squadrons actually flew under a single chain of command. All the rest were just mingling around with little Napolean's sending out orders which noone ever listened to anyway. :D
* There was no strategic option in the first place. It was always horde or be horded.
* There was no feight. It was always 'go milkrun undefended bases and say that you were feinting, when really all you were doing was just avoiding enemy opposition altogether'
* There was no such thing as flanking attack. People will attack anywhere, everywhere, as long as there weren't any defenders.
* There was no "front". There was always a certain part where the enemy horde drove in like a shaft, and another part where our horde drives into the enemy lands like a shaft. It was a contest of who drives in deeper unopposed, until one side finally crumbles under pressure and decides to finally defend something.
* Don't even get me started with 'intelligent communication'. The only sign of intelligence I could measure was how funny the jokes were.
My 2cents.
-
problem I see is that from one captured field to the next.....you know where the fights moving, and in what order.
Maybe have a 'spider web' of possible next captures...keeps some element of surprise in the game.
And for the earlier comment about capturing rear bases unrealistic...ever hear of "market garden"?
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
All of above applies only when we assume that such things existed before the change. However, over the years I have realized that no group of people in any of the three countries are that intelligent. The only such effort I've ever experienced on any kind of reliable scale was the late RJO - the days when multiple Rook squadrons actually flew under a single chain of command. All the rest were just mingling around with little Napolean's sending out orders which noone ever listened to anyway. :D
* There was no strategic option in the first place. It was always horde or be horded.
* There was no feight. It was always 'go milkrun undefended bases and say that you were feinting, when really all you were doing was just avoiding enemy opposition altogether'
* There was no such thing as flanking attack. People will attack anywhere, everywhere, as long as there weren't any defenders.
* There was no "front". There was always a certain part where the enemy horde drove in like a shaft, and another part where our horde drives into the enemy lands like a shaft. It was a contest of who drives in deeper unopposed, until one side finally crumbles under pressure and decides to finally defend something.
* Don't even get me started with 'intelligent communication'. The only sign of intelligence I could measure was how funny the jokes were.
My 2cents.
Well said.
-
I think it sounds like a good idea because it will "encourage" the Hordes to meet and do battle.
maybee I missed something but isn't still possible for the 2 bigger sides to roll the weak side? but now they gotta take turns?(one side may have to defend the weak side to prevent capture.. that would be funny)
you can still NOE and tactically take out vhs and FHS or troopers of adjoining bases(or any base) you just can't capture them until they come up in the queue right?
sounds like everything is kinda still there but it encourages the idea of aircombat
because of the current captureable target effect...
shame they have to resort to this to encourage aircombat in a game called "Aces High" but if everybody wanted a good hard fought battle there wouldn't be all those games with cheatcodes.. (wth is the point of spending 50 bux for a game and then typing some command so you cant loose?)
I can't wait to see it ..I think it sounds like a good idea
to the HT guys for working on stuff ... maybee theres some growing pains
..but you never know what to expect when you get home..lol
as long as we still get guns, explosions, and airplanes I'M IN!
-
If it stays, I can see the furballing purist not liking it at all. Sooner or later the war winners are going to realize that 16k buff missions to close the neighborhood is the way to take a base. A perfect situation for the high alt pickers, all kinds of targets inbound below you. But what furballer will climb to 16k to keep a field open, leave alone fly 1.5 sectors to continue the fight?
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
I guess I don't see how anything but milkrunning is effected.
It's effected in that, with this system in place, the GiMT (Guys in Milk Trucks) won't be heros by capturing undefended fields. They can blow up all the buildings they want....but, no more perkies for field captures.
-
Got me wondering if there was a way to put into place a system that would stop the war between two small numbers country when the third country gets too big in numbers?
Trying to imagine one of those nights lately with 110 of one country and 40 and 40 of another.
Once one country crosses a certain percentage of players the other two countries are unable to capture bases from each other. Defacto alliance until the numbers drop to reasonable fairness. The numbers crew then is stuck with a two front war with the other two focused on the numbers crowd as there is no point in attacking each other's bases.
Just thinking out loud, but since we're moving towards people actually fighting, it can't hurt to throw it out there :)
-
Corky...
That just might be more structure than the MA game needs.
-
Originally posted by JimBeam
so your saying that if a group of guys does an NOE raid to a base behind enemy lines and capture it that is illlegitmate?
I would argue that it depends on what they do after they capture the base.
If they defend the base in order to keep it then I would say it's good.
If they leave it undefended then I say milkrunner.
YMMV.
-
I spent time testing this out today. It was better than hanging out in the TA.
Yes, I'm kidding. It was good IM dweebyO and enjoyed it.
I see a few mentions of only one capturable base on each front and that isn't the case. At times there was only one but I definately recall two bases on the Bishop front were enlarged and capturable at one time. Not sure what changed it but there can be more than one capturable base on a front.
-
I gonna go hang myself now : (
-
It has potential, however, I think that a rolling front might be more workable with the large maps... like 3 or 4 bases per front along that front being vulnerable to taking instead of just one. With more than 200 ppl on, I imagine 2 bases per country will start to get a little crowded...
Don't forget that you can still drop hangars and stuff at any field, you just can't take it.
-
Hmm,
A couple of hours slugging away really without choice of what to hit because it is so limited. - Nope I did not like it at all
Whilst the furballs were quite good fun it really started to get too boring after a while. Just more and more of the same!
I prefer leaving it to the players to decide on what to capture.
I reallly don't thiink I would like it even if more bases to capture were introduced.
I hope I haven't overlooked what is on offer, it is just that I did not enjoy the game play anywhere near so much. - I appreciate it is a test, but these last few weeks I have played more than years. If when I get home from work it is still on test I won't bother with it. Really simple - just not my cup of tea if you know this Brit expression!
Top marks for being brave enough to try it!
-
Originally posted by scottydawg
Don't forget that you can still drop hangars and stuff at any field, you just can't take it.
Who will be the first country to 'Daisy Chain' bases? Kill town in next base up and nab it as soon as it opens.. Plenty of fun for milkrunners too!
-
If we could get people to use missions as a primary way to fly it would work. It funnels alot of people in one small area so base capture is very difficult. That and frame rates suffer a bit. I think it will be a battle between bases, seeing who can keep the others hangars down the most, so the fight is at the enemy's base to furball, not your own.
-
I'll second what Stang said about what Kweassa said!
Westy
(Fients, second front, flanks, secret strategery... lol. Cute werds for milk runnin)
-
It is an interesting concept. But why bother putting it on a big map? It seems that this system has channeled the vast majority of players to 6 bases. Nobody is upping form a base more than 2 sectors away from the ones that can be captured.
-
How is it for carriers in the new system? Is there always a capturable base on the water's edge somewhere, or is there a capturable base on the water only every once in a while?
-
I will never understand any of these ideas.if you don't like bases to be captured then eliminate towns,or bombs or maybe troops. this will make it impossible (or near) it to capture. uless the numbers are lopsided. the horde will gain here.
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
Shhhhhhh! ;)
??? Oh haha!! Ya! this is perposterous!! we must return the circle jerk!!
-
Originally posted by Brooke
Is there always a capturable base on the water's edge somewhere
Depends on map. On current map: No.
For example on current map the first 4-5 capturable bases are along the coast. When the "road of advance" turns away from coastline, carriers have to wait until it gets back to coast another 4-5 bases later.
-
soo 100 people fighting 100 people for 1 base?
maybe this needs tweaking so as numbers increase, more bases can be captured.
right now knits can capture 2 bish bases but only 1 rook base.
is it linked to numbers? for instance, bish and rooks out number knits, so are there more bases between THOSE two that are capturable? this would slightly reduce ganging
the new map looks great though...
-
Originally posted by Overlag
the new map looks great though...
It´s not a new map, it was already in rotation before the arena changes. And it was a great one, with it´s huge armored drives along the VBases...
-
Originally posted by Westy
I'll second what Stang said about what Kweassa said!
Westy
(Fients, second front, flanks, secret strategery... lol. Cute werds for milk runnin)
I concur with Westy's second of what Stang said about what Kweassa said.
-
Originally posted by Lusche
It´s not a new map, it was already in rotation before the arena changes. And it was a great one, with it´s huge armored drives along the VBases...
i had 12 months off while drinking more alcohol than i could afford... i came back and only had 1month of good old AH before it went off into some strange world....
this needs to be tweaked so at least 4-5 bases can be captured.... or the planes need to be changed to WWI planes... because this is how "armies" worked in WWI... pound 1 target constantly for a few months, gaining no ground at all...fun! :(
i dont understand the point of using big maps, if only 2 bases per side are captureable.... why not just create a 3 base map? on a 64x64 grid and be done with it?
this system will do away with random attacks, and the creations of second fronts.... I used to LOVE stealing (milking) a base miles away from the front line on trinity, then try and keep the foothold on the beach alive, and FIGHT for the other bases. Sure, the first base was often a milkrun, but its the fights that occurred AFTER that happened that was some of the greatest ever...gaining a foot hold somewhere else on the large maps created new opportunities for fights. Now there's 3 massive hordes, and Now there's going to be 3 sectors of action, and 400ish of nothing..
why?
-
This new system is FUBAR. Please don't go forward with it. I don't want to spend another 15 minutes flying to recapture a base just to have it suddenly uncapturable.
-
Sounds like a Big Dueling Arena to me. Now everyone knows exactly where everyone else is. Going to put a stop to Awarded Perky points beacuse No side will bother to capture a base, just simply meet in the middle and furball. How you going to get a C-47 past 30 LA7s and 25 Spit 16s. I'll reserved total judgement till I play the map a bit more. Seems useless to map a large map for this, unless you have change that after a week map resets. Cause it might take Months for a Country to Reset a Map. Just some thoughts to ponder, <
>
-
I got over the new arena setup.. I don't like it but, I got over it. I was Ok with the super bases (acks).
But all I can say about this new base capture system is.... it sucks.:(
Cavalry
-
loving it. thanks.:aok
-
Originally posted by Bode
Sounds like a Big Dueling Arena to me. Now everyone knows exactly where everyone else is. Going to put a stop to Awarded Perky points beacuse No side will bother to capture a base, just simply meet in the middle and furball. How you going to get a C-47 past 30 LA7s and 25 Spit 16s. I'll reserved total judgement till I play the map a bit more. Seems useless to map a large map for this, unless you have change that after a week map resets. Cause it might take Months for a Country to Reset a Map. Just some thoughts to ponder, <>
just might need air superiority?:aok
-
Greetings,
Interesting concept. If I may make a recommendation, instead of a single line of advance, allow the fields to become capturable (is that a word?) within a certain radius of distance from a friendly base. I would need to check each map, but with the correct distance it would create the line of advance you are looking for, but add branches and sequels that players could choose to follow or broaden the axis of advance - while still maintaining the focus of engagement you seem to be looking for.
Regards,
-
I like it... however it appears that no matter what, those who prefer the path of least resistance will simply adjust. Never saw so many Lala's, Spitty's and Niki's as I did tonight.
So, IMHO.. this experiment is a good thing in that it's forced a few to truly work at capturing a base. At least some organization and cooperation required, in other words. The advantage, at the very least is a lesson learned for all and for a few... the comforting knowledge that at some players now have a clue to what the others do regularly, I'm sure there will be at least a few converts. I don't enjoy the idea of spending 98% of my time chasing a bunch of HOing, stick-stirring, up-die-rinse-repeat Quake types about, but I do believe this experiment should not, and probably will not hold... but it's going to lead to much better things in the future for everyone.
I have to send a big thanks to HTC for running this trial. Sends a message to the community that there's ~real~ interest in improving game play for all (at risk of irritating a growing percentage of the game base).
Now... WHERE the heck is CT??? :)
Tumor
-
I do my fair share of furballing and base capturing and here's my thought's on it...
I love it from a furballing end... cruising over a base at 25k and seeing 10+ targets to choose from is nice :)
BUT, I don't always feel like cherrypicking or furballing and want to get something done (taking a base and helping win a map). This new system is set up for the horde and furballers. There are people that just solely furball or cherrypick and props to them for playing the game the way they like. This change is great for them. The strategy minded people have taken a serious blow on this.
What a lot of people call "milkrunning", when done in a well populated arena, I call strategy. Attacking strat targets (factories, etc...) is strategic. Capturing a behind the lines base IS strategic. "Divide and conquer" is a well known philosophy. That is what attacking multiple at the same time does to the enemy.
You think our real world enemies knew what base/strat target we were going to hit? NO. Would the 262's and other uber aircraft been waiting high above the target for the attack? YES. Would the allies have put that target on the back-burner and attacked something else til the former cooled down? HECK YA (unfortunately the new system doesn't allow for such discretion). For a great example of "divide and conquer" check out all the prep work done for D-day, which caused the enemy to divide its' forces.
So... overall i don't like it... For now I have a choice to just play in the Blue arena along with the others that don't like it. I'll live with the ENY issue I have at the moment in the blue arena so that I can play strategically (my fancy at the moment).
See you all in the arena's.
-
Originally posted by FBplmmr
just might need air superiority?:aok
hordes? i thought thats something no one wanted?
small maps = fights at every base
bigmaps with this setup = fights at 2 bases
why not just make a 64x64 map with 3 bases. im 90% sure that only 10-20 players would fly at that arena......and the rest will be fighting the war game they joined.
-
Milk runners, so what? grabbing a base while no one is looking, so what? blah blah! Why cry about people doing it, does it effect you that much? There is Way Too many Generals. Some people just cant stand it when, others are not on the same agenda as them. "the ol, "if you aint thinking like me, you aint thinking right". boyeeeeee
As we stand back and look at the situation, we all see it in different light and thats fine, thats life. But, if it was a real "tryout" type thing then see what people really want.
Leave it like it is, but make ONE ARENA "RED" like the Old MA 5-6- 700+ players and no base capture bs, have the dweeb planes and all, See where the numbers go, if they end up in the orange or blue or EW or MW well then the old ma system was at least givin a chance.
And if it did show that the people want the "limited number" arena and new base capture system, I would never say another word about this ever ever again.
Id be like a robot,,, yes master, i will play AH like you want me too.. beep! I will not B&Z , i will not HO, i will not extend more then 3 times, i will not vulch, i will not fly any dweeb planes, i will not milkrun, i will not attack a undefended base, i will not bug out when bingo ammo must get shot down to go to tower, i will bail if a collision is probable, if im on someones 6 i will broadcast on chan 200 to make sure its ok with them if i shoot them down just incase they are bingo ammo or have kills to land or just dont want to die. I will do more "control" programing later because im sure i missed something.
well thats all folks,,,,, for now . have a nice day :) be nice!
-
Interesting that with all the whining going on, that it was a bunch of 'furballers' who along with others took the first base. Stang of all people set up the mishun.
The only issue I see with it is numbers. Rooks got a lot of people very fast after this and had 40 more then Knits and 30 more then Bish when I and some others bounced to Knits.
Interesting that most of the whining seemed to be about folks essentially not wanting to fight.
I like it so far.
-
This seems to have good and bad sides.
The good side is HTC found a way to get the "toolshedders" and "furballers" together and work in one area. Lots of things to be done in one confined area.
The bad side is, what happens when 8 sets of Lancs come in and kill the hangars, fun is over, and we're right back to square one.
So here is my question.. what is the difference between confining the fights to one area on a big map, or just having smaller maps and let people do what they want?
-
Greetings,
In addition, the CVs are mobile bases - this would provide a way to end run a static front line - or establish a 'beachead' behind enemy lines.
As I look at the maps, a capture approved distance or 35 miles would drive axis of advance and many 'choke' points.
Regards,
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Interesting that with all the whining going on, that it was a bunch of 'furballers' who along with others took the first base. Stang of all people set up the mishun.
The only issue I see with it is numbers. Rooks got a lot of people very fast after this and had 40 more then Knits and 30 more then Bish when I and some others bounced to Knits.
Interesting that most of the whining seemed to be about folks essentially not wanting to fight.
I like it so far.
Agreed on all points. At 11:45, it's roughly 45 bish, 70 knits, and 100 rooks. HT, it's really time to do something about numbers. If you're going to keep this system in place (which seemed to work pretty well while numbers were balanced), then you need to address what is arguably one of the biggest recurring issues in the game. That's my only concern at this point.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Interesting that with all the whining going on.......
i dont see whining i just see loads of questions on what this is trying to solve?
what is the issue this is trying to fix?
why is it on a small map you can fight for 20bases but on a large only 2?
yes, it might need tweaking, but to be fair i hope it never happens again.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Stang of all people set up the mishun.
Stang r teh 1337 mishun planna!
-
Just logged off.
And to be fair to each side.
I can see where it want to be tweaked a bit.
Not alot. but just a bit
Overall I like the concept though.
-
Originally posted by Overlag
i dont see whining i just see loads of questions on what this is trying to solve?
what is the issue this is trying to fix?
why is it on a small map you can fight for 20bases but on a large only 2?
yes, it might need tweaking, but to be fair i hope it never happens again.
What it solves is that players are now in a position where they have to interact with other players. Base takers can do their thing and ACM guys are right there too.
As mentioned it was one of the 'furball' types who set up the first capture. The fights were intense, people were focused on the 'mishun' and got it done.
The guys who lose out are the milk runners and the attack the undefended base guys. Now they also have to fight.
So the furball guys showed they could take bases, and the toolshedders had to fight to get in. Yeah there were a lot of LA7s and all kinds of HO'ing going on, but everyone was fighting, which is the point I think
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
Agreed on all points. At 11:45, it's roughly 45 bish, 70 knits, and 100 rooks. HT, it's really time to do something about numbers. If you're going to keep this system in place (which seemed to work pretty well while numbers were balanced), then you need to address what is arguably one of the biggest recurring issues in the game. That's my only concern at this point.
hitech fixed this issue ages ago.... its only the mini-MA's that have caused it to come back the ENY limitor was "good" it did work after time..... however it needs to be changed to a server balancer
if knits have too many players in blue, they can ONLY join orange.
50% country per LW arena (-/+5%?)
why cant we have just 1 LW arena with big maps, and the EW and MW with small maps (to match the numbers)
-
Flew in Orange from 12:00PM to 10:00PM and gave it a good try... I was kinda bored really nothing really happened alllllll day untill rooks got a #'s advantage and they were still rolling the small #'s side (BISH) when I left.
There is no thinking involved with this system, I'm not saying there was a ton with the other way either but more than this allows for..
This looks like a very simplistic version of the idea I posted here.. Just that in my version some bases let you only capture 1 other base and others would let you have a chance to capture multiple bases and thus they would be more valuable to have, though the bases that only let you go 1 at a time might eventually lead to a base deaper in NME territory. This would go along with your current theme but allow for a bit more of a stratigic side to game play with advantagius bases and bottle necks.
On another issue, I decided to try helping my country by doing what I do best and making deep strike bombing runs on Rook City, AAA, and grunt training...
Usually I go in at 20K or higher because normally a few guys will see me coming in and try to stop me or at least try to shoot me down on the way out. With this new set up we about died of boredom. Everybody was so focused on those few bases they didn't even see us going for the city that was 4 sectors into their territory. We flew in bombed it down to 13% and flew back out without a scrach. We then took KI-67's to the AAA factory that was much closer to the furball and got it down to 50% and flew out.
By this point we were wondering why we were going to 20K so the next flight we took B-17's in at 10K and at least 2 sectors into NME territory, flew our 3 flights right over an NME base and dropped troop training to 9%. 1 spit 16 did come up on the return flight directly over that same base, I shot him down and he never came back.
With the old system some people would be looking around for people possibly trying to sneak a base or what ever but now the focus is so narrow that the rest of the big map is wasted in my opinion.
Over all I think this system has possibilities but really needs some tweaking and a bit more thought put into it. :)
Oh and BTW I went offline and the map I am working on now has a spider web of blue capture order lines alllll over it.. If you do end op with some type of system like this, would the map creators have controll over the placement of the capturable base lines? Might be able to come up with some interesting ways of implemnting this.
EDIT: something like this? I just quickly put some lines on this but you get the idea, if I this system were implemented I would put a bit more thought into placement much like Vehicle spawns. You would still have a fairly good idea what to expect and keep people togeather but losens the iron grip a bit :) Just a thought.
(http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n259/Flaydone/Newcap.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Overlag
hitech fixed this issue ages ago.... its only the mini-MA's that have caused it to come back the ENY limitor was "good" it did work after time..... however it needs to be changed to a server balancer
if knits have too many players in blue, they can ONLY join orange.
50% country per LW arena (-/+5%?)
why cant we have just 1 LW arena with big maps, and the EW and MW with small maps (to match the numbers)
I've never seen numbers "fixed". There's been balance in the separate MAs on some nights, so I have to disagree with blaming the mini MAs. HT's reluctance to do anything about numbers is, IMO, a bigger factor than the smaller arena setup, but it's still mostly about people who refuse to play the game without some sort of advantage.
There's plenty of action even on a smaller map in a smaller arena if people want it. The big maps, from the very first to the very last, have only served to benefit those who don't actually want to fight other people. There is no reason for them, and the current setup illustrates that point as well as anything.
-
IMHO Dont like it 2 Thumbs down!
-
I think CV's should be the exception to the capture rule - make it so they can take any base at any time otherwise they are useless. I think ports should be able to be taken at any time too.
-
Its a war of attrition.
I have no time for it.
This presently concludes my donated time to game and healthy enviroment development.
Disclaimer:
The opinion above was expressed souly by the poster and not those of the bbs hen house.
-
I kept finding myself bringing up the map while in flight,,,and scanning our front line bases (A habit ive had since warbirds 8 years ago)
watching for base flashing without darbar for possible NOE raids against us, It's a blast if you can sniff one out before they arrive and scramble a squad of defenders to stop em,,,,,,then I kept remembering I didnt need to do that anymore
I also enjoy capturing a field using NOE Bf110s, etc. etc or with a CV using Cruiser and LVTs, or our Rat Patrol Mission taking a town down with M16s and M3's,,,,cant do those either anymore
CV's are actualy useless pretty much now?
Will take hours to get to the Capture base, and once you get it close,,,it will be sunk quickly (well i supose thats how it was before too) ;)
Lets say my squad wants to do a large Bomber run, if we hit an uncapturable field,,,,,its kinda pointless
If we hit the Hangers on the capturable field we will be called the greifers
for messin up the furball,,
I respect the idea of trying to force the battles,,,and get the sides to have to fight for the base they want, but i think there needs to be at least a few
more capturble bases along the front lines that you have to keep an eye on
Somtimes you have to re-arange the furniture in your house a few times before you get it so the whole family likes it, So I realize this is just a test.
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
You have to actually fight for a base, and you have to have some sort of organization, and you've also got to defend, lest you lose one base while working on the next. You can still horde, but you've got to horde the base that the other horde is probably operating out of, so the huge war that everyone but furballers love is more alive than ever.
I guess I don't see how anything but milkrunning is effected.
First off (speaking for myself and my squad) I don't mind a good fight or an NOE sneak. However, if what you're saying plays out then one is too expect a rather large group (horde as their called) to show up at said field if their intension is to capture.
From what I gather just about everyone and thier brother has been on the BBS whinning about "hordes" and how they "hurt" gameplay. Maybe they do, maybe they don't. I will tell you this, if you get 2-3 groups willing to work together you will have one hell of a "horde" on your hands.
Hell, I don't know how many time my squad has shown up at a base with just 8-10 of us, only to be bashed from one end of ch200 to the other for bringing the "horde" to the base. I don't think it's gonna be pretty.
my 2 cents
-
Why again was this implemented?......
-
Tryed the new system dont like the new system. it eather needs to be tweeked or even better if it aint broke dont fix it.
Growler 1
-
"It" is broken and definelly need to fix.
New system is excellent, keep up your good work HTC :aok
May need some tuning though.
-
I have not been playing AH for very long and alot of the changes that have been made I understand and they have been good for gameplay, for all players, they have yet to force someone to try and play the way someone wants them to... and it is not a balancing act that is an easy one im sure... Ive read these BBS and no matter what HTC does it will not please all players all of the time....
I feel this change is going to limit any real choice for players as to what they feel like doing and how they wish to play the game... But this is my opinion which I know is not shared by all..I've yet to have my night ruined while playing because some guys attacked and captured an undefended base not on the "front line". Frankly, I just dont care that much. I just enjoy playing the game (yes it is a game).
If Hitech wants to really know how the player base feels about this implementation, instead of possibly listening to those that make the most noise on the BBS( if in fact they do at all) a simple test may be in order..
For one week make ONLY the map with limited base captures available. The next week use the same map and disable the limiter... The third week make both available in separate arenas and see where the player base goes to play...
Obviously the call remains with Hitech as they will always do what they feel is in the best interest of the game but the player base opinion and what they like best will certainly tell you if these changes are liked or disliked by the playing majority or the vocal minority.
my $.02 (if its worth that)
<<>>
-
I'm willing to try anything that creates more fights between the countries. Alot of people are saying that this hurts the milkrunners....I'm curious how that is. As long as they still get points for hitting bases that aren't capturable then they will have an even easier time since the majority of players will be between the capturable bases.
I don't see them having to fight anymore than before unless they really want to take bases, which the majority of milkers don't care about anyway, they just want the stats and perks from dropping stuff.
just might need air superiority?
So a horde will be needed to take a base? I thought HTC was trying to limit those. The system would definately need some tweaking, funneling everyone into one area will create even more unbalance to the side with less numbers.
-
I like it. People and been whining about the same maps over and over-- this gives an opportunity to use the large maps, while pretty-much forcing people to congregate in a very few areas (if they wanna take bases) Also ends the mega-squad-noe-capture-the-empty-bases-missions.:aok
-
DaPup,
The first half of your post I agree with, in fact you seem to paraphrase my point from earlier that this new arrangement will make it far easier for the score-potato-milkrunner-types.
But the last half I disagree with somewhat. After a very limited time in LW-O last night I noticed that it seems whichever base is "next in line" for one country is essentially the same for each front. Meaning that while there may still be a congestion of players, that we will NOT have the old horde mentality where two hordes are avoiding each other, which I beleive was the problem before. There may be still be hordes but they have to meet and fight each other for a change, the problem was not congested airspace (hordes) but lack of aircombat.
It was a very dynamic front beween rooks and bish, one V-base changed hands about 5 times in half an hour. Every time it was taken the bold-base moved. The bish were very close to taking the nearby A-base a couple of times. They had the AAA down, the FHs down and were vulching the IL2s that were lifting (I'm sure the trrops were OTW too) then the V-base was taken suddenly making the base uncapturable. Should have heard the whines on ch200, it was glorious!
I don't think this will equal the MA-breakup event for BBS whines and threats of quitting by the big-skwad guys and score-potatos (LOL @ those who threaten to quit), but for ch200 it is close.
Originally posted by Grits
Stang r teh 1337 mishun planna!
I'll just say that last night Stang was a HUB of "1337 mishun planna" activity ;-)
ETA:
Originally posted by KryptoniteXP
I do my fair share of furballing
-SNIP-
I love it from a furballing end... cruising over a base at 25k and seeing 10+ targets to choose from is nice :)
I submit that if you've EVER been to 25K you are not a furballer. Don't confuse cherrypicking with furballing my friend.
-
"No strategic options open to players or squads.
No feights to draw off enemy forces prior to a real attack.
No flanking attacks. No pushes along one side of the map vs others.
No multiple fronts vs one country or another. Two "static" fronts that will press back and forth as one country or another has the numbers. WWI trench warfare.
No need for intelligence or communication or even coordination if you don't want it. Follow thy Blue Rat Line. You Will Fight Here. Period."
Good Deal.... I dont even have to think of what to do !
Its all done for me .
SUCKS
-
Edbert,
I was on for a couple hours last night and had a good time (as usual). I do feel that the guys who want to find an advantage always will regardless of how many changes HTC makes.
I like the idea of limiting the bases that can be taken and think it just needs some tweaking. I also agree that the hordes never collided often enough in the old setup and it was stagnating the game. If this pushes more people into a specific area and forces more fights then I'm all for it.
-
Originally posted by MOIL
From what I gather just about everyone and thier brother has been on the BBS whinning about "hordes" and how they "hurt" gameplay. Maybe they do, maybe they don't. I will tell you this, if you get 2-3 groups willing to work together you will have one hell of a "horde" on your hands.
Need you ask?
-
Originally posted by DaPup
Edbert,
I was on for a couple hours last night and had a good time (as usual). I do feel that the guys who want to find an advantage always will regardless of how many changes HTC makes.
That's the sole nature of ANY game. If it's not there, you neither win or lose. Is that what some want HTC to make the MA's into?
<---------ducks!:noid
-
This is good why?
It creates more fights? Ok, I'll buy that.
But what else doe it create? Let's see:
1) Big furball forms between two capturable bases.
2) Furball rages for hours (furballers nirvina)
3) The win the war guys see that they have no choice but to "team up" and attack in force in order to take the base. (a.k.a "Hording" by the furballers)
4) There are two options for doing this: 1) Bomb the FH's to supress the opposition (a.k.a. griefing by the furballers) 2) Get enough people to push the furball back to the enemy field then supress them by not letting them take off (a.k.a. vulvhing by all)
So......the win the war guys are forced to do things that are not looked at as being healthy for the arena....they are slumming.
What does this accomplish? Seems like it accomplishes exactly the opposite of what was trying to be accomplished in the first place.
-
The new system takes away freedom of maneuver. Example, CVs can no longer be used to flank enemy or go deep. Enemy will know which way you are coming and just wait for you. Tactics are lost. Everyone will be fighting in one spot causing a huge furball. With this system why have a large map, it will only take longer to capture bases thus take longer to win.
IF IT AIN"T BROKE DON"T FIX IT
-
Originally posted by bj229r
Also ends the mega-squad-noe-capture-the-empty-bases-missions.:aok
Yes. And it effectiveley ends noe-capture missions in general. How is that a good thing? Just because you don´t like it? Many people enjoyed it. I never took part in such missions, but I had much fun in trying to detect & bust such enemy missions. It was a part of the game I enjoyed as much as the resulting aerial combat. I think, only one capturable base at a time makes this game much less dynamic and more predictable.
As somebody pointed out, milkrunners will continue to milkrun, perhaps with even less resistance - after all, they are no "threat".
Yesterday when the new arena came up, I was first on the rook side. Some bish started and gv attack on a Vehicle Field.For some time a nice brawl emerged from this, with the usual Lancs trying to shut down our VH. A nice fight (with never more than about perticipants guys total) until somebody finally told these guys that they can never capture that base (hell, nobody seems ever to read readme´s or arena messages!) . And the fun was over...
Later on there were the occasional base alarms and air cons, but nobody really cared about.
After some time, I went back to blue arena for a while, where I frantically jumped from base to base in the futile attempt to defend the last few bases left to us.
I was always fond of the many aspects and possibilites the game offered us. Some people just like to furball, some people just want to blow up things, other want capture and "win teh war!" as fast as possible. That´s fine for me, everybody shof them should have fun. And I found it always disgusting when people belittled or attacked other players just for not percieving and playing AH the way they did themselves. But I think if implemented the way we did see it yesterday, we limit the options available to us players.
I have no doubt many people had much fun in LW Orange. But being neither true furballer nor real toolshedder who used to decide from day to day which way to have fun with, I´d like to see rather more otions than more limitations.
-
See Rules #4, #7
-
Originally posted by bj229r
I like it. People and been whining about the same maps over and over-- this gives an opportunity to use the large maps, while pretty-much forcing people to congregate in a very few areas (if they wanna take bases) Also ends the mega-squad-noe-capture-the-empty-bases-missions.:aok
1) What's the purpose of having a large map if all the action is being forced in small areas?
2) What's your problem with the NOE captures? And why do you find the need to throw in the "mega-squad" reference?
-
So, does this make taking out strat objects to affect 'pop' times more or less important? Seems to me it would make them more important. What do you think?
-
Originally posted by bj229r
forcing people to congregate in a very few areas
SLUM.
-
Originally posted by scottydawg
So, does this make taking out strat objects to affect 'pop' times more or less important? Seems to me it would make them more important. What do you think?
Important ro hit yes but BORING AS HE11 to hit... If you go back and read my earlier post it will explane. Then again maybe they are not so important if you follow the rook example last night you just get a crap load of bombers, blast base take base and repeat. WOOOO FUN...:rolleyes:
EDIT: another thought for a possible modification to the system... How about having a base here and there along the line that could be capturable at any time. Then you can capture on up or down the line. Same as now but would allow for the opening of some other fronts and maybe people would keep an eye out for those sneaky takes. Also might help with the boring factory runs, while they keep an eye out for the sneak on those few other bases they might see those fat bombers flying in to hit the strat. ;)
-
maybe if strat targets had damage more bases should be captureable.
ie
100% up only 2 bases
80% up 4 bases
60% up 6 bases
etc
and it needs to be tweaked by numbers. If there is 80 people per side, then more than 4 bases should be captureable. If theres only 20 per side then yes, 2 bases is fine.
still hate the idea though, because i we havnt been told what its trying to solve. I cant remember any issues with what we had.
the 1st change was put in to get rid of the "slum" and hordes etc.
the 2nd change was put in because the players kept "slumming" in the LW arena (because they wanted to and found it fun)
and the 3rd change brings us straight back into hordeing and "griefers". because us "griefers" are going to have to take out hangers...and since its the only base people are flying at the furballers are going to go nuts.
-
Originally posted by thndregg
That's the sole nature of ANY game. If it's not there, you neither win or lose. Is that what some want HTC to make the MA's into?
<---------ducks!:noid
I know it's early and I've only had one cup of coffee but what exactly was your point? :)
-
Originally posted by DaPup
I know it's early and I've only had one cup of coffee but what exactly was your point? :)
without any "winning" what is the point?
anyone notice that last night was probably the lowest numbers ive ever seen since the split?
-
OK, I didn't have time to read everyone elses posts but I logged onto this map last night and we had 3 bases that were capturable. One on the front line of each enemy country and one deep in one of the other backfields. Almost everyone was flying among six bases with a few, what I can only assume to be milk-runners, attacking bases far from those that were capturable. Those milk-runners were facing no opposition because there was no reason to defend what could'nt be taken.
I wanted the big maps back more than anyone, but mostly to avoid furballs and be able to find nice one-on-ones. If this is the implementation that we get then forget the big maps and stick to the small ones. In fact, if this is the implementation you could make your lives a lot easier at HiTech by just making all maps 3 bases.
-
Originally posted by Overlag
maybe if strat targets had damage more bases should be captureable.
ie
100% up only 2 bases
80% up 4 bases
60% up 6 bases
etc
and it needs to be tweaked by numbers. If there is 80 people per side, then more than 4 bases should be captureable. If theres only 20 per side then yes, 2 bases is fine.
still hate the idea though, because i we havnt been told what its trying to solve. I cant remember any issues with what we had.
the 1st change was put in to get rid of the "slum" and hordes etc.
the 2nd change was put in because the players kept "slumming" in the LW arena (because they wanted to and found it fun)
and the 3rd change brings us straight back into hordeing and "griefers". because us "griefers" are going to have to take out hangers...and since its the only base people are flying at the furballers are going to go nuts.
Interesting idea...
HT said he was trying this so that we could use the large maps with the small # of people that we now have in the arenas. I think that was almost exactly what he said in Orange yesterday morning.
-
Sigh...what we have here is failure to communicate.
1.) The problem was never the fact that hordes existed, it was the fact that they tended to appear at places where the defenders were not. While I admit there are elements of military strategerie in that, for the AH-MA it became commonplace that if defenders began upping there, the horde moved to another undefended base, if defenders went there the horde moved yet again. The fact that so many players wanted to blow up sheds and take bases for their perkies without opposition is what needed to be addressed, and from this thread we can clearly see who many of them are.
2.) If folks are carrying eggs and hitting targets; or the fight is over a base; or guys are coming in at 20K; or their are multiple waves of buffs...it is by definition NOT a furball, it is a fight for a field. A "real" furball takes place in no-man's land between guys who only want A2A action
3.) Base capture is possible without destroying the FHs, or porking all nearby bases. There was a time when FHs were not destroyable at all. Think teamwork and scalpel vesus scorepadding and sledgehammer.
4.) The "point" is the fight, not the win. I'd rather have a good and fair fight and be "killed" than get a kill of a guy that cannot defend himself.
-
OMG this is crazy
furrballs & nothing but? thats all that this has accomplished! its not working... atleast not for me!
hitech whould large maps be more formadable with new ack alone?
this cant work! open more bases for capture or something, no NOEs or any other covert missions this way!
sorry for threat but i will quit before i fly this way!
-
Why didn't Hitler 'capture' Great Britain? He failed to achieve local air superiority...Achieving local air superiority over a contested region is now and has always been the first and foremost purpose of air power in warfare, real or imaginary. With maps with more fields than people the natural human compulsion to take the path of least resistance compelled folks to assure they had and could maintain local air superiority by attacking un-defended targets, of which there was a guarenteed abundance.
In my opinion, articificially focussing fights into specific areas is a unique and interesting way to counter-act the human compulsion to avoid conflict when a path of least resistance exists. So, now we can have an Epic sized map, but have the concentration of force previously only possible on the small un-Epic maps that would typically get reset within 24 hrs. By removing the reset carrot as a nightly achievement the fair weather flyers and the band-wagonners will see the futility and pointlessness of huddling into the country with the best chance to perform the reset.
Now, captures and ultimately resets will be based on achieving a logical sequence of periods, sufficient to capture a base, of local air superiority in the face of heavy resistance. What that means in a nutshell is a sequence of FIGHTS. Those that don't play for air to air combat will undoubtedly be shattered, but those of us who do will be in hog heaven. I don't believe that this game was meant to be a 'Build an Empire' game, it is first and foremost an air combat game. Anything that promotes air combat over conflict-free empire building via milkrunning is a good thing IMHO...
Zazen
-
Originally posted by Edbert
Sigh...what we have here is failure to communicate.
1.) The problem was never the fact that hordes existed, it was the fact that they tended to appear at places where the defenders were not. While I admit there are elements of military strategerie in that, for the AH-MA it became commonplace that if defenders began upping there, the horde moved to another undefended base, if defenders went there the horde moved yet again. The fact that so many players wanted to blow up sheds and take bases for their perkies without opposition is what needed to be addressed, and from this thread we can clearly see who many of them are.
So? the fights move around the maps. If the attackers can change targets, then the defenders can to.
Originally posted by Edbert
2.) If folks are carrying eggs and hitting targets; or the fight is over a base; or guys are coming in at 20K; or their are multiple waves of buffs...it is by definition NOT a furball, it is a fight for a field. A "real" furball takes place in no-man's land between guys who only want A2A action
yes...... so there are no furballs now? since the only active bases are the ones that can be captured???
Originally posted by Edbert
3.) Base capture is possible without destroying the FHs, or porking all nearby bases. There was a time when FHs were not destroyable at all. Think teamwork and scalpel vesus scorepadding and sledgehammer.
Well you would need vulchers then.
Originally posted by Edbert
4.) The "point" is the fight, not the win. I'd rather have a good and fair fight and be "killed" than get a kill of a guy that cannot defend himself.
all games the point is to win and have fun. Some see like winning on the small scale of shooting 2 planes down... good for them. they had fun. Some see winning as beating a whole country to reset.
i came here 2002 for a war game, im starting to think this is not what HTC wants anymore, so im starting to think i need to look at WWIIOL, which has absolutely no aircombat which i would miss greatly..... but at least it has a war going on.
-
Originally posted by tactic
Milk runners, so what? grabbing a base while no one is looking, so what? blah blah! Why cry about people doing it, does it effect you that much? There is Way Too many Generals. Some people just cant stand it when, others are not on the same agenda as them. "the ol, "if you aint thinking like me, you aint thinking right". boyeeeeee
As we stand back and look at the situation, we all see it in different light and thats fine, thats life. But, if it was a real "tryout" type thing then see what people really want.
Leave it like it is, but make ONE ARENA "RED" like the Old MA 5-6- 700+ players and no base capture bs, have the dweeb planes and all, See where the numbers go, if they end up in the orange or blue or EW or MW well then the old ma system was at least givin a chance.
And if it did show that the people want the "limited number" arena and new base capture system, I would never say another word about this ever ever again.
Id be like a robot,,, yes master, i will play AH like you want me too.. beep! I will not B&Z , i will not HO, i will not extend more then 3 times, i will not vulch, i will not fly any dweeb planes, i will not milkrun, i will not attack a undefended base, i will not bug out when bingo ammo must get shot down to go to tower, i will bail if a collision is probable, if im on someones 6 i will broadcast on chan 200 to make sure its ok with them if i shoot them down just incase they are bingo ammo or have kills to land or just dont want to die. I will do more "control" programing later because im sure i missed something.
well thats all folks,,,,, for now . have a nice day :) be nice!
very well put :aok
-
Originally posted by Zazen13
Why didn't Hitler 'capture' Great Britain? He failed to achieve local air superiority...Achieving local air superiority over a contested region is now and has always been the first and foremost purpose of air power in warfare, real or imaginary.
Zazen
wow, it was that simple?
hitler didnt "capture" Britain for a number of reasons
1: some lone bomber "dumped" his ord on london by mistake, causing retaliation from BOTH sides, causing the shift from RAF fields, to the cities... this gave the RAF a rest, and allowed them to "win" BOB. this was, however a VERY VERY narrow win. a week more of tactical bombing on SE RAF bases would have caused the RAF to retreat to middle England. However.....
2: Hitler didnt have a navy worth anything. and Dunkirk proved that the LW was terrible at sinking ships, so who was going to fight the Royal Navy? magic pixes? Sure, they might have been able to land a few 1000 troops on British soil, but its SUPPLYS, and the constant train of troops that needs to be kept up. And of course with the RAF pulled back and recovering up in North England, the south of england could still be protected.
but i fail to see your point. AH has always been about air power. However now all 100 players are spread between 2 bases... its rather odd.
the new arenas only needed number balance brought back and new maps.... other than that it was fine..... the issue was, Hitech said only 512maps could be made, then made some weird changes and said 256maps could only be made....so we had no 256maps made for a few years, and now that's all we could fight on.
-
HT PLEASE ! JUST PUT A GUN TO MY HEAD AND GET IT OVER WITH!!!!!!!!!
-
Originally posted by Zazen13
Achieving local air superiority over a contested region is now and has always been the first and foremost purpose of air power in warfare, real or imaginary.
Doesn't this promote taking out fighter hangers or "surpressing" then enemy by vulching?
Would you consider these "fair" tactics given this new setup?
-
Just to add my final comment on this. If this is it, after 10 years, I'm outta here.
-
I flew in Orange a couple hours last night. Some good, some bad.
1. The concept of only being able to capture certain bases is a good idea. The way it was in the test, though, you could only capture two per team (at the intersections of the countries). Thus, EVERYBODY was at those three points on the map. It takes the idea of strategizing, smaller groups doing missions, etc. away from the game play...it is "Might Wins"...whoever has the most and best takes the field. The Rooks (was one last night) just started a bulldozing drive (wooohooo) and took base after base down the line...it took the creativity and looking-over-your-shoulder out of the whole thing.
2. It makes the game play linear, like playing a game with levels... win level 1 and you can go to level 2, etc. (not very good idea)
I think the focus concept would work very well, getting more players into combat on large maps, and also be more realistic, if you could capture only bases within XX distance from the borders of the countries or the nearest base. Thus, you still concentrate on only a few enemy bases (but not just one) because they are the only bases close enough to take.
Then from THAT newly won base, you can take the next bases that are close enough (within the distance range). That would be more like what occurs in a real war.
It also leaves the actual strategies up to the members flying, not the administration of the game. If the team wants to take two of the three and leave one alone, they can. If they want to spread out, they can. If they want to take one base with vehicles and one with planes, they can. It would leave more open to the players, while still focusing the play to a few bases (as I'm understand the goal was).
vizwhiz
-
S! tactic
very well said sir. i S! you.
bring back the large maps with no restrictions. cant go wrong.
my 2 cents.
-
Boy is this sytem great . Buffs can take out near by Feilds to delay fighter opps and VH from recapturing the base you just took.
It all means more team work and making a plan of war . getting tactical targets and strat targets like in WWII . one flight of bombers take out fuel or a factory some enmy bombers /fighters/ GV's find it harder to fight.
Proper escort and close support needs to be co-ordinated.
All good by me . :) :aok
-
HT has said over and over that this not war, it is a game, in my opinion it is getting gamier.
no liky follow the blue line.
the MA is really just a training arena for the real game --scenarios.
44MAG
-
and the 3rd change brings us straight back into hordeing and "griefers". because us "griefers" are going to have to take out hangers...and since its the only base people are flying at the furballers are going to go nuts.
It won't be that bad ... especially if bases are 3/4 of a sector away. Also, if they wack the base, one will have a good idea where the NEXT attack will take place and they can up from there. This results in a moving furball and not a stagnant furball ... which is acceptable.
I still have some reservations about the initial implementation of this idea. I think that it definitely needs some tweaking so that the fight is not so focused.
Total elimination of sneaking of bases behind the lines needs to be addressed. Sometimes the sneaking of a base behind enemy lines takes the pressure off heavily attacked areas and that is a good thing. I loved participating in these NOE sneak attacks ... the anticipation would make my hands sweat.
Some people in this thread are bringing forth tweak ideas and thats a good thing, and I think that is what HT wants to see in this thread ... rather than whining.
-
I couldn't get the map to load. Just kept CTDing after preloading textures.
-
Seems to be a very viable method of focussing conflict.................
I assume the blue line zigzags down one half of your territory and back up the other?(suppose I should wait to play it tonight)
I think if the focus is only over one field at each border then it will be come a bombing war to deny the opposition access to the area of combat.
The impact of this could be lessened if the blue lines only connected airfields such that vehicle fields and ports were open to free capture.
This may make fleets more viable also.
-
WOW this cracks me up.
So the only complaints are:
1) We cant take bases NOE and sneak them without a fight.
2) We have to take the base where everyone is at, we have no choice to go where no one is at. - kinda like number one.
3) It creates Hordes. - LOL this one is the funniest, since two hordes fighting each other were never a problem. It was you guys that took your hordes to undefended fields that was the problem and the reason we have this system in the first place.
4) We can't use strategery. - As if there were any tactics to old MA. Most tactics of old MA were and until this change still are - 1) Up for undefended base 2) If base becomes defened, go back to number 1.
The only problem with this change is furballers taking bases, Stang is ghey. LOLH
-
When I flew it yesterday, there was a sustained fight between two fields across the channel, occasionally broken by a CV group or two...But for the most part, the front was static. I logged, went into LW Blue for the next 5 hrs., then popped back into orange. The fight had moved, and there had been a base capture, but I think it was because fewer Bish were on. I know there had been some grumbling about numbers on the country channel. Anyway, was going to say that the fights weren't too bad, But I realized that 1 big mission that was properly organized could ruin everything at any given time. I'm just waiting for a bunch of people to come up with a method to blow this out of the water, And I think it will be soon.
-
wow, we was working on taking back a V base today.... it was big.....
dropped troops..... no capture.....ah the base is small now.....
WTG!!!!!! :noid
-
In england we dont waste our time trying to fix things that arent broken.
Really cannont see the piont in this setup, just starts 3 large furballs... and 50 loud ppl may like this, but what about the not so loud other hundreds??
sadly i see the game drifting down infamiliar paths and game is really starting to lose my interest. This new 'test' wich i hope wont just stick around is another twist of the knife for me....
**IF** this setup stays or is put into use then, surely LW player number. caps should be lifted so that people can CHOOSE what setup they want to fly in? Its unfair if you Dont like something to have fly with it because your fun is full due an enforced cap.
AGAIN notice the 'IF' before i get char grilled :)
Is this possible HT. Think it would be for the best. and it might give an actual reason for having 2 LW's
<>S<>;)
-
In england we dont waste our time trying to fix things that arent broken.
:rofl ... yeah right.
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
In england we dont waste our time trying to fix things that arent broken.
:rofl ... yeah right.
we dont even fix things once they break...... :lol :(
(http://www.adamjwebb.aquiss.com/Pictures/Aces_High/trinity_the_oldway.jpg)
is anyone else going to miss these sort of 2nd fronts?
-
Originally posted by Quah!
WOW this cracks me up.
So the only complaints are:
1) We cant take bases NOE and sneak them without a fight.
2) We have to take the base where everyone is at, we have no choice to go where no one is at. - kinda like number one.
3) It creates Hordes. - LOL this one is the funniest, since two hordes fighting each other were never a problem. It was you guys that took your hordes to undefended fields that was the problem and the reason we have this system in the first place.
4) We can't use strategery. - As if there were any tactics to old MA. Most tactics of old MA were and until this change still are - 1) Up for undefended base 2) If base becomes defened, go back to number 1.
The only problem with this change is furballers taking bases, Stang is ghey. LOLH
Well well well,
1] firstly NOE missions are fun to some ppl, thye add an interesting, exciting twist to gameplay, what makes the game a game rather than just a flight sim with guns.
2]Wheres the choice and diversity in only being able to take 1 base wich is crawling with cherry pickers and furballers. only way to take base is bomb all hangers, or hope enemy have low numbers.... WOAH how fun. i can sit in a bombsight and drop green eggs on a lil silver thingie
3]:rofl, wasnt the lufftwaffe's attacks on britain a horde..... thats what my grandfather told me(RAF officer) in WW2. and i thought this was a team game.. not guys sitting in corners not talking , cherry picking slow planes...
4]you didnt see strategy because you were too busy with balck dots around you, ignorance, not lack of strategy. i know there was strategy becuase my squad played a big part in startegic moves... and btw, an NOE capture is strategic as it usally behind enemy lines and of great benefit to country. If you wernt so busy furballing and kept your eye on whole map instead of FT, you would see bases flashing. and be able to defend. and if it starts being defended, then mission objective of an un-noticed capture is gone, hence mission termination.
-
Anyone else notice how many of those who threaten to quit over this are registered in 2006?
Anyone else notice how many of those who threaten to quit don't?
:rofl
-
Originally posted by Edbert
Anyone else notice how many of those who threaten to quit over this are registered in 2006?
Anyone else notice how many of those who threaten to quit don't?
:rofl
sure, they may have registerd on the FORUM but could have been playing the game for years.
some players dont even know about thie forum.... instead use ch200 to vent.......
-
4]you didnt see strategy because you were too busy with balck dots around you, ignorance, not lack of strategy. i know there was strategy becuase my squad played a big part in startegic moves... and btw, an NOE capture is strategic as it usally behind enemy lines and of great benefit to country. If you wernt so busy furballing and kept your eye on whole map instead of FT, you would see bases flashing. and be able to defend. and if it starts being defended, then mission objective of an un-noticed capture is gone, hence mission termination.
OK Laurie, since you know nothing about me, but you seem to pontificate as if you do.
Please do share what forms of strategery there were?? I love how all the you guys talk about strategery but none can site concrete examples other than NOE missions that are nothing more than hitting undefended bases after flying sectors on sectors 200 feet off the deck, only to be squashed by two planes defending. I have broken up more of these NOE boon dogles than you have flown I would wager.
2]Wheres the choice and diversity in only being able to take 1 base wich is crawling with cherry pickers and furballers. only way to take base is bomb all hangers, or hope enemy have low numbers.... WOAH how fun. i can sit in a bombsight and drop green eggs on a lil silver thingie
Hmm When only strat guys are on in EW and MW and LW/Old MA it is no different. Its the same dam thing except you have the choice to go take undefended bases. Under this change yes you are forced to fight. What a shame, down with this game. LOL cmon honestly what is missing other than hitting undefended bases.
Yes you have to fight other people. In this case you call em cherry pickers and furballers. Well now maybe your new strategery should be learning how to escort your bombers and goons.
-
Originally posted by Edbert
Anyone else notice how many of those who threaten to quit over this are registered in 2006?
Anyone else notice how many of those who threaten to quit don't?
:rofl
I've been playing since the beginning of Aces High and in Air Warrior 3, Air Warrior 2 and Air Warrior since 1996 when it was hosted by AOL. Not sure when it say's I registered but I never had a use for these boards until the day I did. Even then I didn't come back until recently when all these changes started to happen because I felt it important to voice my opinion. Today I did threaten to quit but I haven't quit yet because this "test" isn't settled yet.
So what's your point? If you play the game but don't register for the boards your opinion doesn't count? If you say you don't like something and don't quit that minute you're not serious? I don't get the point of your comment.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
...other than NOE missions that are nothing more than hitting undefended bases after flying sectors on sectors 200 feet off the deck, only to be squashed by two planes defending. I have broken up more of these NOE boon dogles than you have flown I would wager.
Then what's the problem with NOE missions?
-
Change is a good thing. HTC is making changes and testing new ideas to improve gameplay and yes....some people will find these changes unacceptable and some will love them. Will these changes stay the course of time...maybe...maybe not, but with our input (not whining or saying I QUIT) just because the change dosen't suit your gameplay "for now" dosen't help.
I for one am intrigued by this idea of large aerial battles situated around a 1-2 sector area. Sure, there are areas that need to be tweaked, such as opening up a few more bases to be captured. I too felt as if I was following a maze instead of selecting a strategy that my squad wanted to follow. Did I have fun last night...HECK YA I did. And I will continue to fly in this arena till the testing is over. It's different...it's interesting and it's evolving. Lets see what comes next.....Manned Puffy Ack at fields or towns??? 20 troops needed to take a base??? Able to bail out of your plane or vehicle and man the ack or jump in another players vehicle????
Make some of the ack at fields .50cal....all that 37mm is scratching my planes paintjob.
Rob,
TwrATM
-
Originally posted by Edbert
Anyone else notice how many of those who threaten to quit over this are registered in 2006?
Anyone else ever think that may these people never had anything to say so they never registered on the BBS until now...when they have something to say? :rofl
-
I think what he was eluding to was,
How many of the furballers, and I have to assume he is a furballer camp because he is a BK, voiced their opinions but didn't threaten HT about quitting every time something changed or didnt change. They trusted in HT and his company to find a happy balance between gameplay and styles. Yeah some old vets dropped, but very few if any dropped in protest most dropped from boredom.
It's a big difference from todays, "I don't like it, fix it the way I like it or I quit." crowd :cry :cry
-
Then what's the problem with NOE missions?
I never said there was a problem with or without them. I just said they are not strategery. I could care less that they are gone, although HT has left rear bases capturable so I don't see why the NOE guys are getting upset.
-
I haven't experienced the changes yet. Sat down to last night, and a shelf promptly ripped itself off the wall... but I'm going to for lunch today.
However, I have been following the threads... and I think a distinction needs to be made...
The Furball - a group of guys in the middle of nowhere fighting amongst themselves. Prefer to be left alone unless you're coming with the "right attitude", 25% gas, and some healthy, digital aggression.
The Fight - the big cluster*&!# of runway bashers, HO'ers, suicide lemmings, low & hi-alt buffs, and the usual mixed bag of talented & untalented fighters.
IMHO, if you're at "The Furball" and drop hangars, you're a griefer and just want to make them mad. This will be very easy to tell apart now. Just look for moderately stationary green dots away from the capture line.
If you're at "The Fight", you *SHOULD* drop the hangars in an effort to make the base capture. It's not griefing, it's part of the The Fight. Defense can continue to up from nearby fields (usually only 3/4 - 1 sector apart). Anything and everything is fair game. People should already know this flying into it. The fight has & always will be a messy, brutal, white-knuckle (and sometimes frustrating) experience. Turning off ch200 helps.
The only difference between then & now in LW-O is that the fight avoiding hordes are funneled together and given a very specific, immediate objective. They lost their freedom of choice to take the path of least resistance.
Actually to me it's kinda sad that people would have to be forced into combat in an air combat sim. It's not like your draftees. You pay to experience the air combat.
-
Originally posted by Overlag
(http://www.adamjwebb.aquiss.com/Pictures/Aces_High/trinity_the_oldway.jpg)
is anyone else going to miss these sort of 2nd fronts?
Yes.
Let me tell you why.
Sometimes, when one country is rolling over another due to having more people and are not fighting the other country, it helps when you put together a mission to attack a base way behind enemy lines. Why? Well, by doing so you have diverted some of the attacking country's attention to prevent themselves from being "back-doored". Once the pressure is relieved at the main attack point, the defending country has a chance to defend effectively.
This would most likely be accomplished via a NOE mission. Therefore I would classify this as "strategery".
-
Sometimes, when one country is rolling over another due to having more people and are not fighting the other country
Yeah but with the new change being tested one country has to take all it's numbers against the other country. The country with the numbers can no longer run from defenders and play the undefended base cat and mouse game.
So in the new system your issues doesn't exist.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
although HT has left rear bases capturable so I don't see why the NOE guys are getting upset.
Rear base captures are still possible with this new setup?
-
Yes he has left 1 or 2 rear bases capturable. At least thats what I can tell from the pics above. Lets face it. HT will tweak this the right way I am sure to allow for an end run option. Only now it may actually be strategic because he could program a successful end run to open up the front bases to capture. Give it time.
-
The only difference between then & now in LW-O is that the fight avoiding hordes are funneled together and given a very specific, immediate objective. They lost their freedom of choice to take the path of least resistance.
Bingo. Also for the furball crowd that does not want to be bothered there are now fields where you can fight that are less likely to be griefed.
Actually to me it's kinda sad that people would have to be forced into combat in an air combat sim. It's not like your draftees. You pay to experience the air combat.
No kidding. :aok
-
Originally posted by BaldEagl
So what's your point? If you play the game but don't register for the boards your opinion doesn't count? If you say you don't like something and don't quit that minute you're not serious? I don't get the point of your comment.
Only point should have been clear...it is a fact that MOST of the folks who come to this thread to complain...AND THEN THREATEN TO QUIT...have registered for the BBS relatively later than those who like to see HTC working to ensure that fights actually occur.
Nobody said anyone's opinion does not count, at least I never have. I've also never said a player should not complain about things they don't like. It is somewhat pointless though since Dale has said a million times he does not run his company or make game changes based upon and polling data or level of whining...but there is some benefit of being able to vent on the BBS among folks who are concerned about the game. What I DO think is pointless is this need some people have to go public with statements to the effect of a threat-to-quit. Either quit, or don't; doesn;t matter much either way really...but stop being such a whiney little baby with the "I'm taking my ball and going home if you don;t do it my way booo-hooo bullchit. Do it already and spare us the tears.
Regarding your statement about being here for ten years...interesting comment since this game went into public beta in late summer of 1999. I just looked for your activity back then...no sorties were flown by "BaldEagl" in beta-tour-1 through beta-tour-3, or tour-1 though tour-11 for that matter. Maybe you had a different handle back then, or are you going to admit that claiming to have "been here since the beginning" was a lie?
And as for QUAH, whoever you are...being a BK probably does put me into the furballer's camp but I have fun with base capture and defense too. I saw slapshot going heavy on a base capture sortie or two last night too. All I want from the game is a chance to fight a human opponent in A2A combat, I can think of no other reason to pay a monthly fee other than that chance. It is because this change makes it easier to find the fight and make it harder for my opponents to avoid the fight that I like it, it has nothing to do with pickers/ballers/milkers/generals or whatever label and "camp" you guys come up with.
-
you can only capture the next base on the blue line.
-
Originally posted by Grits
I concur with Westy's second of what Stang said about what Kweassa said.
I'll go with what Grits said, about what Stang said, on Kweassa's POV.
Whew!
-
Originally posted by john9001
you can only capture the next base on the blue line.
The source of the confusion is this quote...
Originally posted by hitech
Also have some captureable fields not in the list.
By "not in the list" one can ssume he means not on the blue line. Not sure how to know which these are but the implication that there are other capturable fields is clear.
-
Originally posted by Edbert
The source of the confusion is this quote...
By "not in the list" one can ssume he means not on the blue line. Not sure how to know which these are but the implication that there are other capturable fields is clear.
in that case i assume i are confused. :D
-
Originally posted by Edbert
Regarding your statement about being here for ten years...interesting comment since this game went into public beta in late summer of 1999. I just looked for your activity back then...no sorties were flown by "BaldEagl" in beta-tour-1 through beta-tour-3, or tour-1 though tour-11 for that matter. Maybe you had a different handle back then, or are you going to admit that claiming to have "been here since the beginning" was a lie?
I did say that that 10 years included Air Warrior 3, Air Warrior 2 and Air Warrior. As soon as AW3 closed down I migrated here along with everyone else. I don't know what beta tour they were on at that time so maybe "since the beginning" was the wrong term. I only assumed the same people involved in Air Warrior were involved in Aces High as the game, planes, gameplay, controls, etc. were all almost identical. Maybe that's a totally bad assumption and if so, then I appologize but I wasn't purposefully lying as you imply.
-
Funny part about the NOE bit. After Stang's mishun got 34. (Again a Furball type organized base capture) Karaya set up an NOE 110 mission to get 20 with more of us 'furball' types.
At the time the dar bar was huge at 34 as the baduns were attempting to retake it. Fights were going at 21 to try and stop reinforcements from coming to 34. Others were hitting 33 for the same reason.
Those of us in the 110s went on the deck from 252 (?), across the water a ways, popped up and got 20.
At the same time, there were guys running supplies to 34 to get it back to full strength.
There was a coordinated effort, lead by a bunch of folks, many who would be classified as 'furballers', just to show that this could work.
Seemed like 'strategy' to me. We had our "D-Day" where we had to get the base across the water. Then it was to resupply and reinforce that newly opened 'front'. Defend it and then expand it by attacking the bases where attacks where most likely to come from. At the same time expanding the front by taking the next objective.
Basically we crossed the Channel, hit Normandy, fought in the hedgrows for a while trying to 'breakout' (this was when 20 changed hands a couple times) and then started the drive towards Paris. (At that point the numbers were getting too off for me and I left Rooks for Knits as they were low numbers)
There was never any thought to taking Berlin until we'd taken Paris.
The irony of this to me, reading so many posts, is the guys doing the complaining are the 'strategy' types, grumbling that this is all for the 'furballers'.
I flew more 'mission' oriented stuff last night then I ever have, and it was fine because I knew that as part of the 'mishun', I was going to have to fight my way in and that appealed to me.
-
I would agree Dan,
There is more strategery in an NOE end run at the front then there ever was for one 5 sectors behind the lines.
-
Originally posted by Edbert
It is somewhat pointless though since Dale has said a million times he does not run his company or make game changes based upon and polling data or level of whining...
Interesting then that this is a test and a thread to get feedback on the test.
I'm interested on what Dale sees as the success factors for the test and how will he measure against those measures. I would suggest if you don't like the set up don't fly in that arena.
I haven't flow it yet so I cannot comment but I am happy that Hitech has put in a test run rather than wide scale changes.
How long is the test planned for before a decision is made?
-
I guess we are trying to eliminate the GV'ers by doing the base capture in this way. I was on for a while last night night, for a short time there was one Rook Airbase in our territory and our GV base that were the only available bases to capture.
We finally re-captured the airbase and that eliminated the GV action at the GV base as it now became a uncapturable base. Now the only bases that could be captured was a rook airbase and a knit airbase. Neither had GV spawns so it was strictly furballers haven.
Not at all impressed with the current changes being tested, I hope that isn't the way that it's going to be.
-
Again it limits what you pay to do........................all bad.
makes me think of George orwells book, 1984, dunno why though..:noid
-
Originally posted by 68Ripper
I guess we are trying to eliminate the GV'ers by doing the base capture in this way. I was on for a while last night night, for a short time there was one Rook Airbase in our territory and our GV base that were the only available bases to capture.
We finally re-captured the airbase and that eliminated the GV action at the GV base as it now became a uncapturable base. Now the only bases that could be captured was a rook airbase and a knit airbase. Neither had GV spawns so it was strictly furballers haven.
Not at all impressed with the current changes being tested, I hope that isn't the way that it's going to be.
Again this doesn't make sense to me as the GV guys played a big part in what I was involved with last night. 20 changed hands a few times after 34 was taken. 20 was the Vbase and it was tankers in action there. Rook tankers were working 33 as well while we did the NOE to get 20. GV types were responsible for the capture of 34 after the goon couldn't make it in. LVTs took the town.(I remember 4-5 rolling across 34 towards the town. I was bellied in with my 38 on 34 after flak damage and watched them)
-
Originally posted by Solar10
Interesting then that this is a test and a thread to get feedback on the test.
I'm interested on what Dale sees as the success factors for the test and how will he measure against those measures. I would suggest if you don't like the set up don't fly in that arena.
I haven't flow it yet so I cannot comment but I am happy that Hitech has put in a test run rather than wide scale changes.
How long is the test planned for before a decision is made?
I believe that this change is here to stay ... the test is to see what adjustments/tweaks need to be made to make the "base" concept better ... on the same lines as ENY.
With that, Dale has ALWAYS been open to ideas ... it's the whines that he ignores IMO ... so rather than complain in this thread ... think of ways that he can adjust/tweak this concept to make it better.
I am still not convinced on the "linear" aspect of available captures ... I think that the "linear" notion provides too much focus in just one area.
Someone (can't remember who) mentioned a "spider" effect to captures and I think that needs some more looking into to spread the focus a little bit.
-
Originally posted by Edbert
The source of the confusion is this quote...
By "not in the list" one can ssume he means not on the blue line. Not sure how to know which these are but the implication that there are other capturable fields is clear.
Right-click on the clipboard map, select "Country Status", and it will show all the fields that can be captured for each country.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
I would agree Dan,
There is more strategery in an NOE end run at the front then there ever was for one 5 sectors behind the lines.
So sneaking a base 5 sectors back has no affect on the country that it was taken from? I beg to differ.
It's a common occurance on the bases that have large area's of water surrounding the mainland that one country will sneak an outlying enemy base. Once this happens there is a massive effort to take that base back. This in turn removes players from the front line. Less players on the front line means less resistance on the front line.
If the take is successfully and well coordinated, the attacking country will then quickly take bases around the primary base and pork troops in the area. This quickly becomes a thorn in the country's side and a lot of resources are spent trying to get the bases back.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Again this doesn't make sense to me as the GV guys played a big part in what I was involved with last night. 20 changed hands a few times after 34 was taken. 20 was the Vbase and it was tankers in action there. Rook tankers were working 33 as well while we did the NOE to get 20. GV types were responsible for the capture of 34 after the goon couldn't make it in. LVTs (I remember 4-5 rolling across 34 towards the town. I was bellied in with my 38 on 34 after flak damage and watched them)
I have to agree here.
We took V20 and GVs rolled for the next base A33. In the meantime, V20 was taken back. The 110 NOE raid then leveled and re-took V20 ... which took our V34 off the capture list ... very important move.
I then lifted off our CV that was off A33 coast and when I arrived at the town ... there were at least 10 GVs surrounding the town ... mind you these guys launched when we originally took V20 and maintained their attack after we lost V20 and then took it back.
I helped take out the ack at A33 town with my HellCat rockets and then the GVs really went to work on it ... with multiple M3s waiting in the woods.
After we took A33 ... V20 was still on the capture list so I went back to check on it ... there were at least 6 guys there still protecting V20 ... something that would have never happened with the old system. As long as we controlled V20 ... A34 was not captureable ... that was the incentive to keep V20.
So as far as GVs being taken out of the action ... I think not ... I think that they just got a new life in AH. Without GVs ... those captures would not have been possible IMO.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Right-click on the clipboard map, select "Country Status", and it will show all the fields that can be captured for each country.
I'm sure there was some design doc written or something sketched out as to what the desired outcome of this new concept is. Would it be possible to let us in on what dictates which bases are capturable? What's the logic?
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Right-click on the clipboard map, select "Country Status", and it will show all the fields that can be captured for each country.
Hmmmm .... I thought it was "Field order".
-
Originally posted by Donzo
So sneaking a base 5 sectors back has no affect on the country that it was taken from? I beg to differ.
It's a common occurance on the bases that have large area's of water surrounding the mainland that one country will sneak an outlying enemy base. Once this happens there is a massive effort to take that base back. This in turn removes players from the front line. Less players on the front line means less resistance on the front line.
If the take is successfully and well coordinated, the attacking country will then quickly take bases around the primary base and pork troops in the area. This quickly becomes a thorn in the country's side and a lot of resources are spent trying to get the bases back.
I'll buy that argument, but conditionally. If numbers are relatively equal in all three countries, for someone to pull off a hail mary like that is something. But generally it's being done from the high numbers country when the other guy isn't in a position to defend everywhere with the numbers he has.
The trend had become race to reset with numbers always being off and the steamroller taking all the undefended bases as fast and easy as possible just to get the 'so and so has won the war' message.
Even last night the Rooks got overwhelming numbers at one point and were rolling. But knowing that they had to work a certain direction at least lets the low numbers folks concentrate those numbers to try and defend.
To me the bottom line is it's all about the fight. Anything that puts the players in a position to fight other players is a good thing. There is little point to flying an online sim against other players if you are only trying to avoid them.
-
Whew.
Not gonna whine, point fingers and gnash teeth. Here are my observations and suggestions.
1. First off, props to HTC for trying something different. It was/is interesting to say the least.
2. I thought it was fun to try something new. I willingly chose to log into LW Orange and try the new system. There were 3 other arenas for me to try, but I wanted to "stress" the new system.
3. A linear capture sequence forces big fights. This is not bad in itself. I do not buy that any style of play is being hurt. Flying as a bish last night, I found myself getting bombed by buff dudes, shot down by furballers, and plinked by gv dudes. I was a target to a variety of players.
4. The new linear capture system does NOTHING for what I view as the fundamental problem:
Players on the big #'s team like their advantages and will not change sides to balance.
5. ENY alone does not solve #4 problem. When outnumbered 2:1, it doesn't matter if they are only flying P40s and 110Gs...you will still get your head kicked in and steamrolled.
I would humbly suggest that something be done to get players out of their safe #'s mentality.
My suggestions (radical, but no less radical than a linear capture sequence):
- Country with overwhelming #'s has name changed to "The Queens"
- The Queens are given pink icons instead of green or red.
- The country with the least #'s gets name changed to "Pawns" or "Pwns"
- The Pawns get 163s enabled along the frontlines.
- Linear capture goes away or is allowed at 2 bases per front (total of 4 per country)
These changes are linked to ENY, and can be reversed simply by changing sides.
Yay Queens!
(http://www.amroholidays.com/images/australia/mardi_gras_drag.jpg)
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
I have to agree here.
We took V20 and GVs rolled for the next base A33. In the meantime, V20 was taken back. The 110 NOE raid then leveled and re-took V20 ... which took our V34 off the capture list ... very important move.
I then lifted off our CV that was off A33 coast and when I arrived at the town ... there were at least 10 GVs surrounding the town ... mind you these guys launched when we originally took V20 and maintained their attack after we lost V20 and then took it back.
I helped take out the ack at A33 town with my HellCat rockets and then the GVs really went to work on it ... with multiple M3s waiting in the woods.
After we took A33 ... V20 was still on the capture list so I went back to check on it ... there were at least 6 guys there still protecting V20 ... something that would have never happened with the old system. As long as we controlled V20 ... A34 was not captureable ... that was the incentive to keep V20.
So as far as GVs being taken out of the action ... I think not ... I think that they just got a new life in AH. Without GVs ... those captures would not have been possible IMO.
Think about that. Talk about combined operations :)
Land, sea and air all working towards the same end. Isn't that what the strategy types enjoy?
-
Originally posted by kamilyun
My suggestions (radical, but no less radical than a linear capture sequence):
- Country with overwhelming #'s has name changed to "The Queens"
- The Queens are given pink icons instead of green or red.
- The country with the least #'s gets name changed to "Pawns" or "Pwns"
- The Pawns get 163s enabled along the frontlines.
- Linear capture goes away or is allowed at 2 bases per front (total of 4 per country)
These changes are linked to ENY, and can be reversed simply by changing sides.
Yay Queens!
(http://www.amroholidays.com/images/australia/mardi_gras_drag.jpg)
:lol :rofl :rofl kamilyun winz teh thread!
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
Hmmmm .... I thought it was "Field order".
Nope, the list is all the fields that can currently be captured by the country.
-
Originally posted by kamilyun
Whew.
Not gonna whine, point fingers and gnash teeth. Here are my observations and suggestions.
1. First off, props to HTC for trying something different. It was/is interesting to say the least.
2. I thought it was fun to try something new. I willingly chose to log into LW Orange and try the new system. There were 3 other arenas for me to try, but I wanted to "stress" the new system.
3. A linear capture sequence forces big fights. This is not bad in itself. I do not buy that any style of play is being hurt. Flying as a bish last night, I found myself getting bombed by buff dudes, shot down by furballers, and plinked by gv dudes. I was a target to a variety of players.
4. The new linear capture system does NOTHING for what I view as the fundamental problem:
Players on the big #'s team like their advantages and will not change sides to balance.
5. ENY alone does not solve #4 problem. When outnumbered 2:1, it doesn't matter if they are only flying P40s and 110Gs...you will still get your head kicked in and steamrolled.
I would humbly suggest that something be done to get players out of their safe #'s mentality.
My suggestions (radical, but no less radical than a linear capture sequence):
- Country with overwhelming #'s has name changed to "The Queens"
- The Queens are given pink icons instead of green or red.
- The country with the least #'s gets name changed to "Pawns" or "Pwns"
- The Pawns get 163s enabled along the frontlines.
- Linear capture goes away or is allowed at 2 bases per front (total of 4 per country)
These changes are linked to ENY, and can be reversed simply by changing sides.
Yay Queens!
(http://www.amroholidays.com/images/australia/mardi_gras_drag.jpg)
And, their icon on the maps is a pink triangle.
-
I'll buy that argument, but conditionally. If numbers are relatively equal in all three countries, for someone to pull off a hail mary like that is something. But generally it's being done from the high numbers country when the other guy isn't in a position to defend everywhere with the numbers he has.
The trend had become race to reset with numbers always being off and the steamroller taking all the undefended bases as fast and easy as possible just to get the 'so and so has won the war' message.
Even last night the Rooks got overwhelming numbers at one point and were rolling. But knowing that they had to work a certain direction at least lets the low numbers folks concentrate those numbers to try and defend.
To me the bottom line is it's all about the fight. Anything that puts the players in a position to fight other players is a good thing. There is little point to flying an online sim against other players if you are only trying to avoid them.
I concur.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
OK Laurie, since you know nothing about me, but you seem to pontificate as if you do.
Please do share what forms of strategery there were?? I love how all the you guys talk about strategery but none can site concrete examples other than NOE missions that are nothing more than hitting undefended bases after flying sectors on sectors 200 feet off the deck, only to be squashed by two planes defending. I have broken up more of these NOE boon dogles than you have flown I would wager.
Hmm When only strat guys are on in EW and MW and LW/Old MA it is no different. Its the same dam thing except you have the choice to go take undefended bases. Under this change yes you are forced to fight. What a shame, down with this game. LOL cmon honestly what is missing other than hitting undefended bases.
Yes you have to fight other people. In this case you call em cherry pickers and furballers. Well now maybe your new strategery should be learning how to escort your bombers and goons.
Bombing the HQ, Bombing the city is a tactic, bombing a troops factory, dar facotry e.t.c, also porking, an osit raid, i could go on.
and yes i do fight other people, but not make it my sole purpose in the game, if i want to fly planes round in circles ill use Micrsoft flight sim. i do join in fruballs now and then, but not slum in them all day.
being restriceted to one base is no fun.
-
I've read from several people that the idea is to get people to fight eachother more.... How do you know this? Was this announced somewhere and I missed it? Are you part of the planning stage? If that's the official reason for this, please let us know.
What I think is the reason for this test is....
1. Making maps is time consuming
2. People want more maps
3. HT has plenty of larger maps that could make the people happy
4. HT want's us to not be spread out and bored during the off-peak times, like 4am EST (18 bishops, 13 knits, 19 rooks).
HT does want us to be happy. They have put a heck of a lot of work into this game for all of us and continue to do so. On top of it all, we are the paying the customers and every business wants to keep it's customers happy.
I've seen some suggestion for modifications on here I like and others that I don't.
If this system is to stay, but is open to "tweeking", then the one modification I would like to see is (forgive me, I forget who wrote it)...
The bases a country could capture could be based upon their distance from the enemies base. An example would be anything within 1 1/2 sectors from an enemy base could be captured. This is a real world approach. It keeps with the idea of supply convoys and supporting a base. It establishes the coveted "front line".
It would be the happy medium as well. It would concentrate the fighting more (than 'old' system) and would also give the player more choices on where and what he/she was going to do.
-
Deleted
-
Deleted
-
Originally posted by KryptoniteXP
I've read from several people that the idea is to get people to fight eachother more.... How do you know this? Was this announced somewhere and I missed it? Are you part of the planning stage? If that's the official reason for this, please let us know.
What I think is the reason for this test is....
1. Making maps is time consuming
2. People want more maps
3. HT has plenty of larger maps that could make the people happy
4. HT want's us to not be spread out and bored during the off-peak times, like 4am EST (18 bishops, 13 knits, 19 rooks).
HT does want us to be happy. They have put a heck of a lot of work into this game for all of us and continue to do so. On top of it all, we are the paying the customers and every business wants to keep it's customers happy.
I've seen some suggestion for modifications on here I like and others that I don't.
If this system is to stay, but is open to "tweeking", then the one modification I would like to see is (forgive me, I forget who wrote it)...
The bases a country could capture could be based upon their distance from the enemies base. An example would be anything within 1 1/2 sectors from an enemy base could be captured. This is a real world approach. It keeps with the idea of supply convoys and supporting a base. It establishes the coveted "front line".
It would be the happy medium as well. It would concentrate the fighting more (than 'old' system) and would also give the player more choices on where and what he/she was going to do.
comical thing is some guys are paying to play on their own maps.:rofl surely they deserve an incentive. this would increase map development if HTC want it off their hands.<< not a criticism.
ALSO
qauah:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but with the new change being tested one country has to take all it's numbers against the other country. The country with the numbers can no longer run from defenders and play the undefended base cat and mouse game.
So in the new system your issues doesn't exist.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So you admit the fact the game will now be 1 up 1 down field capture affair. and making it practically impossible to in a war.
-
Deleted
-
What astonished me was that the moaners were crying in LW blue as
well. The apocalypse is nigh, for now I have to expend effort to "win"
-
Originally posted by Laurie
Bombing the HQ, Bombing the city is a tactic, bombing a troops factory, dar facotry e.t.c, also porking, an osit raid, i could go on.
and yes i do fight other people, but not make it my sole purpose in the game, if i want to fly planes round in circles ill use Micrsoft flight sim. i do join in fruballs now and then, but not slum in them all day.
being restriceted to one base is no fun.
A limited selection of capturable bases in no way effects your ability to choose a strat as a target. It may influence which strat you attack, but the zone of the front line was best before, and is still obviously the best choice.
-
Originally posted by Rino
What astonished me was that the moaners were crying in LW blue as
well.
Moaning? Crying? This is the kind of mature feedback you guys base the opinions of the player community on. :aok
No Wonder...
-
Bombing the HQ, Bombing the city is a tactic, bombing a troops factory, dar facotry e.t.c, also porking, an osit raid, i could go on.
OK so bombing stuff is strategic. I'll give you that, but many strategery folks have said it wasn't very strategic so what gives. Can you cite any strategery that does not have to do with bombing strat and has more to do with the topic and base capture?
and yes i do fight other people, but not make it my sole purpose in the game, if i want to fly planes round in circles ill use Micrsoft flight sim. i do join in fruballs now and then, but not slum in them all day.
Umm first off your view of furballing is quite narrow and I guess with such a view I wouldn't enjoy them either. And if your sole purpose in an online combat flight game is not to engage in Air to Air Warfare then why or what is the point of even getting online? Chat room?
being restriceted to one base is no fun.
Why, what fun has it stomped out for you? Is it a control thing where you have to be the one that selects what base you take. Or again are you just wishing you still had the option to take undefended bases??
-
Originally posted by john9001
HT has said over and over that this not war, it is a game, in my opinion it is getting gamier.
no liky follow the blue line.
the MA is really just a training arena for the real game --scenarios.
44MAG
Wrong. "Gamier" were the mass captures of undefended bases, by people whose only purpose was to pad scores, hit only one country, and wanting the "Free Perkies". What they DIDN'T want to do, was FIGHT.
Now, I have noticed that the ones who "oppose" this system, are the "said people". Their too "in with themselves" to realize they don't always need to be "in numbers", at 23k in an La7 and run away when 1 on 1.
Again, the FIGHT is what finally came back yesterday. I COMMEND HTC on this change as now, I can find a damn fight.
-
You take this attitude yourself towards NOE missions, you all moaned and groaned your little socks off. and now you have your way your moaning has stopped, but not your boot licking.
WTHell are you talking about?? I have never moaned and groaned about NOE missions, unless I was in one LOLHAY.
Nothing funnier than a p51 or 110 NOE mission. Those are such great low alt fighters hahaha.
You have no idea who I am or what I am about, but you have no problem making ASS-U-mtions and being wrong.
Actually I don't know any who groaned and moaned about NOE missions.
And prey tell what is my way?? Do share?
All I am doing is asking you simple questions. Take a pill, will ya. :rolleyes:
-
Put yourself in the other shoe for a minute, what if the new change was something like there couldn't be more than five planes in a sector at a time and you were forced to take down towns before you could get kills, would you be happy with something like that? The reason you're so thrilled with this is because it suits YOUR preferences, some of us aren't too tickled with being forced into furballing at the same bases all night and day long. It's a mindless numbing game killer for the base taker crowd.
-
Originally posted by Edbert
Think teamwork and scalpel vesus scorepadding and sledgehammer.
When the scapel gets dull cutting a brick wall, I break out the sledgehammer.
-
Originally posted by Donzo
So sneaking a base 5 sectors back has no affect on the country that it was taken from? I beg to differ.
It's a common occurance on the bases that have large area's of water surrounding the mainland that one country will sneak an outlying enemy base. Once this happens there is a massive effort to take that base back. This in turn removes players from the front line. Less players on the front line means less resistance on the front line.
If the take is successfully and well coordinated, the attacking country will then quickly take bases around the primary base and pork troops in the area. This quickly becomes a thorn in the country's side and a lot of resources are spent trying to get the bases back.
Of course, the "strategists" are avoiding a FIGHT. The "outlying" base was usually undefended. Wait, I bet you already knew that. Word it anyway you want Donzo, just accept it for what you were doing. You aren't or never have fooled anyone.
-
So you admit the fact the game will now be 1 up 1 down field capture affair. and making it practically impossible to in a war.
Nowhere did I admit or say that.
What I said was the new system under test will pit the majority of a countries resources against the other countries.
This will force each country to use skill, efficiency and control of their Air Resources against their opponents to win bases thus allowing the better fighting team to win rather than the team with the most numbers using their l33t skillz against undefended bases.
HT will refine this as he has done with all his tweaks and you as well as the rest will see it is going to make better game play for everyone.
Take a breath and give it time. Trust HTC.
-
Dude if a base is undefended, then it should be taken. You don't change a major game concept because your furballing butt is too lazy or too score driven to get over there and defend a base. Wasn't the ack enough for you guys?
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Put yourself in the other shoe for a minute, what if the new change was something like there couldn't be more than five planes in a sector at a time and you were forced to take down towns before you could get kills, would you be happy with something like that? The reason you're so thrilled with this is because it suits YOUR preferences, some of us aren't too tickled with being forced into furballing at the same bases all night and day long. It's a mindless numbing game killer for the base taker crowd.
Wrong place to get sympathy for people that actively avoid fights.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Put yourself in the other shoe for a minute, what if the new change was something like there couldn't be more than five planes in a sector at a time and you were forced to take down towns before you could get kills, would you be happy with something like that? The reason you're so thrilled with this is because it suits YOUR preferences, some of us aren't too tickled with being forced into furballing at the same bases all night and day long. It's a mindless numbing game killer for the base taker crowd.
I'd be happy with getting into a damn fight! It's about time a system was implemented to get this game back to the way it WAS in AH1. The "Playstation Mentality" is all but finished. I was tired of chasing the usual players down to get a fight going.
To be honest, I'll be paying for this game as long as Dale and Co. are in business. The reason I'm for it, it forces those toolshedders to FIGHT. That has ALWAYS been my argument, which was always the LACK of one. Sorry to torpedo your "infinite wisdom".
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Funny part about the NOE bit. After Stang's mishun got 34. (Again a Furball type organized base capture) Karaya set up an NOE 110 mission to get 20 with more of us 'furball' types.
At the time the dar bar was huge at 34 as the baduns were attempting to retake it. Fights were going at 21 to try and stop reinforcements from coming to 34. Others were hitting 33 for the same reason.
Those of us in the 110s went on the deck from 252 (?), across the water a ways, popped up and got 20.
At the same time, there were guys running supplies to 34 to get it back to full strength.
There was a coordinated effort, lead by a bunch of folks, many who would be classified as 'furballers', just to show that this could work.
Seemed like 'strategy' to me. We had our "D-Day" where we had to get the base across the water. Then it was to resupply and reinforce that newly opened 'front'. Defend it and then expand it by attacking the bases where attacks where most likely to come from. At the same time expanding the front by taking the next objective.
Basically we crossed the Channel, hit Normandy, fought in the hedgrows for a while trying to 'breakout' (this was when 20 changed hands a couple times) and then started the drive towards Paris. (At that point the numbers were getting too off for me and I left Rooks for Knits as they were low numbers)
There was never any thought to taking Berlin until we'd taken Paris.
The irony of this to me, reading so many posts, is the guys doing the complaining are the 'strategy' types, grumbling that this is all for the 'furballers'.
I flew more 'mission' oriented stuff last night then I ever have, and it was fine because I knew that as part of the 'mishun', I was going to have to fight my way in and that appealed to me.
Chris got his Kidney BACK!!!!!! Nevar forget t3h Candy Mountain!!!!!! <> Cork, it's always "edgy" on vox with some of you on it, and for that I thank you.
-
Originally posted by indy007
Wrong place to get sympathy for people that actively avoid fights.
Sympathy? Avoid Fights? I'm afraid you have me mixed up with somebody else. I'm the CO of Pigs On The Wing, and we take bases, and have been taking bases for about six years, fight or not.
-
Deleted
-
Put yourself in the other shoe for a minute, what if the new change was something like there couldn't be more than five planes in a sector at a time and you were forced to take down towns before you could get kills, would you be happy with something like that? The reason you're so thrilled with this is because it suits YOUR preferences, some of us aren't too tickled with being forced into furballing at the same bases all night and day long. It's a mindless numbing game killer for the base taker crowd.
Sorry Twitchy no matter how many times I put myself in the shoes of those that want to avoid fighting it out, not talking about you, I don't get why they are playing an Onling Combat Flight Sim where you are supposed to fight other people.
I like to fight for bases, I like a good furball. I don't like taking bases where there is no resistance. What is the fun in that. Being able to say you took a base.
If you get bored furballing, how is killing undefended buildings over and over not boring rinse and repeat?
Guppy, slapshot et-al have shown that skilled individuals can conquer bases and take territory and change the dynamic of the front line.
I think the idea of one base where the fight is and that it will be never changing hands just shows a lack of vision of what is possible in this new system.
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
May be i miss something, but what about CVs? They are always vulnerable, no matter of capture order.
I think CV must be able to capture any field or they becomes useless.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Nope, the list is all the fields that can currently be captured by the country.
this is the opening thread by HTC...
The new system only allows fields to be captured in A certain order. Fields that are currently capturable by your country are shown as larger icons.
by your country are shown as larger icons.
The thin blue only have 1....... "LARGER ICONS"
Come on chaps get it together. Which is it ??
1 base at a time as with large Icon
or
any base on the blue thread
-
Originally posted by Quah!
Nowhere did I admit or say that.
This will force each country to use skill, efficiency and control of their Air Resources against their opponents to win bases thus allowing the better fighting team to win rather than the team with the most numbers using their l33t skillz against undefended bases.
.
The above IS a strategy. a strategy is a gamepaln or thinking baout how you play and where you attack.
-
Nobody is avoiding anything, what you call toolshedding, we call trying to win the war. When the Chinese built the great wall to keep the mongols out, the mongols didn't sit there day after day slamming themselves against the wall in pointless mindless combat, they rode around the damned thing and hit weaker points. Obviously the idea of defending bases outside of the furball is something you find equally pointless, but why should the game cater to your style of play and debauch mine? What the hell is the point of even having airfields if all you want is a furball, then go to the DA and fight your heart out and take all your furballing friends with you, plenty of fights then. I think you will find alot of us enjoy taking bases, we enjoy winning some kind of objective, strategy, flanking the enemy. Hell man, why have bombers, why have m3's and strats at all, what's the point of having a war to win? What if I don't want to turn around and engage you, what if I prefer to take my ords to your town, bomb it and take your field, that make you better than me somehow?
-
Who said we avoid fights. we just like taking bases ASWELL as fighting. if we avoid fights our gv and fighte rank would be 0.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Put yourself in the other shoe for a minute, what if the new change was something like there couldn't be more than five planes in a sector at a time and you were forced to take down towns before you could get kills, would you be happy with something like that? The reason you're so thrilled with this is because it suits YOUR preferences, some of us aren't too tickled with being forced into furballing at the same bases all night and day long. It's a mindless numbing game killer for the base taker crowd.
Hold the phone.
Are you suggesting that any aircombat in the area of an airbase you are trying to take is a 'furball'?
It sounds as if you are saying you don't expect to fight your way in to a target.
I was escorting a goon for one of my trips last night. I broke away to fight over the town to try and clear his entrance to it. Was that a furball? There were all kinds of planes fighting trying to clear the air over the base. Was that a furball?
On the 110 NOE we flew, as part of a larger effort to control the area around 34, I didn't shoot anything down. We had baduns in the area and again we were placing ourselves in a position to fight them to to protect Karaya in the goon. We had to make sure the field was set first too.
Had we fought, would it have been a furball?
Define furball please.
It still sounds an awful lot like you are disappointed that you can't attack an undefended base to me.
-
Again I thought I made it clear I like taking objectives where I have to fight for them.
we enjoy winning some kind of objective, strategy, flanking the enemy. Hell man, why have bombers, why have m3's and strats at all, what's the point of having a war to win? What if I don't want to turn around and engage you, what if I prefer to take my ords to your town, bomb it and take your field, that make you better than me somehow?
How has this stopped you from winning an ojective. It just stopped the guys that are taking undefended bases. I would think a squad like yours would be up for the challenge and want more of a fight. Guess not? :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Hold the phone.
Are you suggesting that any aircombat in the area of an airbase you are trying to take is a 'furball'?
No. I'm saying that being constrained to 6 airfields on the entire map with no option to hit undefended bases is crap.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Nobody is avoiding anything, what you call toolshedding, we call trying to win the war. When the Chinese built the great wall to keep the mongols out, the mongols didn't sit there day after day slamming themselves against the wall in pointless mindless combat, they rode around the damned thing and hit weaker points. Obviously the idea of defending bases outside of the furball is something you find equally pointless, but why should the game cater to your style of play and debauch mine? What the hell is the point of even having airfields if all you want is a furball, then go to the DA and fight your heart out and take all your furballing friends with you, plenty of fights then. I think you will find alot of us enjoy taking bases, we enjoy winning some kind of objective, strategy, flanking the enemy. Hell man, why have bombers, why have m3's and strats at all, what's the point of having a war to win? What if I don't want to turn around and engage you, what if I prefer to take my ords to your town, bomb it and take your field, that make you better than me somehow?
So since you are a 'war winner'. You figure taking Berlin before Paris is a reasonable strategy?
Jeez, read my post further up describing the actual 'strategy' that went into taking 34 and 20 last night. It was a combined effort by land, air and sea. How much more strategy do you need.
Quit masking this desire to take undefended bases and rolling the map against no opposition, behind the argument of strategy and tactics.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Dude if a base is undefended, then it should be taken. You don't change a major game concept because your furballing butt is too lazy or too score driven to get over there and defend a base. Wasn't the ack enough for you guys?
Well... we want to kill you all, but you all kept flying away.
Now you have to fight. :t
(http://www.trdparts.com/AH/asdf/bus1.jpg)
-
with no option to hit undefended bases is crap
Why do you need an option to hit undefended bases. What is the point in that??
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
Of course, the "strategists" are avoiding a FIGHT. The "outlying" base was usually undefended. Wait, I bet you already knew that. Word it anyway you want Donzo, just accept it for what you were doing. You aren't or never have fooled anyone.
Please enlighten me oh great one...what, exactly, in your words was I doing?
Are you saying that my explanation as to why taking that outlying is a benefit is wrong? It's unjustified? It serves no purpose?
What? What is wrong with it as I have stated it?
-
Dude, if your base is undefended, then that's your bad, not mine. If nobody defends a base under attack, then it gets taken. There's some real basic concepts of warfare/gaming here you're not grasping.
-
Originally posted by Laurie
Who said we avoid fights. we just like taking bases ASWELL as fighting. if we avoid fights our gv and fighte rank would be 0.
Vulching doesn't count. Nice try. Quit it already, you aren't "fooling" anyone.
This is why I've said "Rank means squat". Especially those who now look at "K/D ratio". Manipulate the argument in your favor all you want, it isn't going to work.
Same concept with spawn(http://www.smiley-channel.de/grafiken/smiley/camping/smiley-channel.de_camping001.gif)
-
Originally posted by twitchy
No. I'm saying that being constrained to 6 airfields on the entire map with no option to hit undefended bases is crap.
Seems to me that's how a war works, since you guys keep talking about winning it. Build up resources. Across the Channel to Normandy. Years of bombing prior to that with all kinds of losses and no movement. Establish the beach head. Consolidate and expand. Fight off the counter attack. Took quite a while for the breakout. Finally get Caen, Falaise Gap. On to Paris. Oops, setback time Arnhem was a Bridge too far. Stalemate for a bit. Counterattack and pushed back at the Bulge. Struggle to get to Berlin etc etc.
They didn't get to just skip the fight. Go ahead and hit all the bases you want. Deny them resources. But you have to fight your way down the path with resistance.
-
Dude, if your base is undefended, then that's your bad, not mine. If nobody defends a base under attack, then it gets taken. There's some real basic concepts of warfare/gaming here you're not grasping.
OK there are some basics that you are not grasping. I.E. this is not real! I was not drafted, I am not paid to fight a war 24/7. The majority all have lives outside of the game and can not be on fighter defense on every field on a map 24/7.
Most enter this game to play and combat each other. So what you are saying is you really don't like the idea of earning the base you just want to be able to walk up and take it.
With the new change, now with the relative numbers, the bases can be defended and you don't like that.
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
I have to agree here.
We took V20 and GVs rolled for the next base A33. In the meantime, V20 was taken back. The 110 NOE raid then leveled and re-took V20 ... which took our V34 off the capture list ... very important move.
I then lifted off our CV that was off A33 coast and when I arrived at the town ... there were at least 10 GVs surrounding the town ... mind you these guys launched when we originally took V20 and maintained their attack after we lost V20 and then took it back.
I helped take out the ack at A33 town with my HellCat rockets and then the GVs really went to work on it ... with multiple M3s waiting in the woods.
After we took A33 ... V20 was still on the capture list so I went back to check on it ... there were at least 6 guys there still protecting V20 ... something that would have never happened with the old system. As long as we controlled V20 ... A34 was not captureable ... that was the incentive to keep V20.
So as far as GVs being taken out of the action ... I think not ... I think that they just got a new life in AH. Without GVs ... those captures would not have been possible IMO.
Maybe that worked at the time you were on and the situation was different, but when both countries only have one airfield available to capture with no GV spawns to it (in this case the rooks base was across the water) and the same situation on the Bish / knit front. then there is nothing for the GV'er to do except up an OSti and sit on the field for hours
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Dude, if your base is undefended, then that's your bad, not mine. If nobody defends a base under attack, then it gets taken. There's some real basic concepts of warfare/gaming here you're not grasping.
Thats a load of bull. All that speaks to in this game is overwhelming numbers.
Preach it from flying low numbers Twitchy. Go watch it from the other end. When you don't have the players to defend against 2 to 1 or greater odds, there is nothing you can do. Too many times in the last month have I seen the low numbers guys put up a fight at one base and boom the crowd leaves and races to another base.
Are you willing to live with a numbers limit on a country? That's about the only other solution.
-
You keep citing WWII examples... Did Hitler draw ridiculous little blue lines on maps to show the Allies where they could attack? Normandy would have been a slaughter. No they snuck right into an loosely defended area and surprised the enemy instead of going through the blue lines drawn through North Africa and Italy.
-
Originally posted by Donzo
Please enlighten me oh great one...what, exactly, in your words was I doing?
Are you saying that my explanation as to why taking that outlying is a benefit is wrong? It's unjustified? It serves no purpose?
What? What is wrong with it as I have stated it?
Serves no purpose. You can say all you want until your hearts content Donzo. Thumping your chest over grabbing a base that had little to opposition seems like a "challenge" to someone of your caliber. I mean really, is this your sole reason for playing this game? Log on, play the "I'm not switchin' card", and roll a country, attack one country and avoid the other, milkrun undefended bases. When you encounter opposition, probe for another undefended base." Wake up, you canot deny that this was the "preferred tactic for going on almost a year."
Bottom line. You know what you DID, participated in, milked the cow, ran the well dry, etc. Now, the "strategy" has changed and some of you would rather whine about the "free perks" being harder to attain, rather than ADAPT.
Read my first post in this thread. So far, that is GOSPEL.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Are you willing to live with a numbers limit on a country? That's about the only other solution.
The solution to what? Getting your bases taken out from under you while you furball mindlessly somewhere else? LOL
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
It still sounds an awful lot like you are disappointed that you can't attack an undefended base to me.
Close Dan, but not quite. There is only one conceivable reason folks object to this that I can think of. The change takes away their ability to CAPTURE a base without opposition. Undefended bases can still be attacked, they can be porked, milkrunned or "stratted" into oblivion...they just cannot be captured.
I just cannot figure out why it is worth $15/month to blow up stuff without having to fight against a human opponent. There's dozens of boxed sims that allow this, even AH allows you to make a H2H room and attack undefended bases right? Why pay for that?
-
Originally posted by twitchy
You keep citing WWII examples... Did Hitler draw ridiculous little blue lines on maps to show the Allies where they could attack? Normandy would have been a slaughter. No they snuck right into an loosely defended area and surprised the enemy instead of going through the blue lines drawn through North Africa and Italy.
They FAUGHT, you don't.
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
They FAUGHT, you don't.
Like hell I don't.
-
Originally posted by Edbert
I just cannot figure out why it is worth $15/month to blow up stuff without having to fight against a human opponent. There's dozens of boxed sims that allow this, even AH allows you to make a H2H room and attack undefended bases right? Why pay for that?
I've been trying to answer this one as well Ed. I think they'd rather "boast" about how "great they are". The whole "Name in lights thing".
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Seems to me that's how a war works, since you guys keep talking about winning it. Build up resources. Across the Channel to Normandy. Years of bombing prior to that with all kinds of losses and no movement. Establish the beach head. Consolidate and expand. Fight off the counter attack. Took quite a while for the breakout. Finally get Caen, Falaise Gap. On to Paris. Oops, setback time Arnhem was a Bridge too far. Stalemate for a bit. Counterattack and pushed back at the Bulge. Struggle to get to Berlin etc etc.
They didn't get to just skip the fight. Go ahead and hit all the bases you want. Deny them resources. But you have to fight your way down the path with resistance.
Flawed analogy... Imagine if the phillipines had been bypassed and those resources put towards more vital locations... the ija in the phillipines would have been left much like our army was at the beginning of the war and we would have done more to actually win the war. (Yes, we allllllllll know Enola Gay and Bocks Car" drove in the final nails)
making an unexpected leap to capture a rear base, while a huge risk could change the intensity or complexion of a battle elsewhere on the map.
-
how can you say you know i vultch.
this BB is just a playground for all the arsse lickers who feel they are superior to all others and feel they know it all.your only arguemnt now is that NOE raiders are vulchers. which i will say is true sometimes. doesnt me that's all of their kills thouugh.
where as you guys will not give an inch.
you are so oblivious to the rest of gamers that you support a change like this, and don't accpet any arguement against it.
You cannot say this trial doesn't prevent players who enjoy things other than large unrealistic suicidal furballs. know teams are TOLD what they can and cant attack.. yet last time i checked i pay 15$ to play a game how i like, not have it dictated to suit a few. this setup being trialed is biased towards one part of the communtiy.
god forbid oit is put into other arenas. who knows if it will , we'll only findo out on the day with supirse, because nearly everything comes unexpected,
SURLEY if this is a 'trial' then there should be someway to poll what you think of it. not this silly little playground wich has becoem like a gentlemen's club.
-
You keep citing WWII examples... Did Hitler draw ridiculous little blue lines on maps to show the Allies where they could attack? Normandy would have been a slaughter. No they snuck right into an loosely defended area and surprised the enemy instead of going through the blue lines drawn through North Africa and Italy.
Dude this is not real life. They really died so yes in real life you take path of least resistance.
This is a game, most log in to fight other people, we don't die. Most want a path of some resistance.
-
GOODBYE spontinaity.
Goodbye creativity.
Goodbye Variety.
Hello huge furballs :)
No more worrying about toolshedders :)
Bombers pukes eliminated from the game as players :) :)
WTG HTC finally a change that will make the game worth playing.
I hate flying 10 minutes to fight.. now we can up and fly 2 minutes on any map and furball :)
-
how can you say you know i vultch.
this BB is just a playground for all the arsse lickers who feel they are superior to all others and feel they know it all.your only arguemnt now is that NOE raiders are vulchers. which i will say is true sometimes. doesnt me that's all of their kills thouugh.
where as you guys will not give an inch.
you are so oblivious to the rest of gamers that you support a change like this, and don't accpet any arguement against it.
You cannot say this trial doesn't prevent players who enjoy things other than large unrealistic suicidal furballs. know teams are TOLD what they can and cant attack.. yet last time i checked i pay 15$ to play a game how i like, not have it dictated to suit a few. this setup being trialed is biased towards one part of the communtiy.
god forbid oit is put into other arenas. who knows if it will , we'll only findo out on the day with supirse, because nearly everything comes unexpected,
SURLEY
Oh boy someone poped a gasket....
Step away from keyboard you seem to be the only one calling anyone names and acting superior. So people dont agree with you. Do you have to reduce to this level??
-
Originally posted by Mr No Name
Flawed analogy... Imagine if the phillipines had been bypassed and those resources put towards more vital locations... the ija in the phillipines would have been left much like our army was at the beginning of the war and we would have done more to actually win the war. (Yes, we allllllllll know Enola Gay and Bocks Car" drove in the final nails)
making an unexpected leap to capture a rear base, while a huge risk could change the intensity or complexion of a battle elsewhere on the map.
Within the framework of AH, it isn't a huge risk, and is generally if not always done by the side with overwhelming numbers.
And needless to say they didn't bypass the Phillipines. They had to fight.
The other factor here is no one is really dying, so there is no risk. Why is there such desperation to avoid fighting, since there is no risk.
I can't believe 'attaboys' for taking an undefended field, and the sheer thrill of resetting a map are that big a drug for you guys.
I'll be more then happy to fly cover for your buffs, or fly ground support for your rolling GVs. Lets just fight it out since we can and aren't really gonna die anyway.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
Dude this is not real life. They really died so yes in real life you take path of least resistance.
This is a game, most log in to fight other people, we don't die. Most want a path of some resistance.
Last advertisement i saw said ' Realistic combat' or something along those lines.
if you just take a step back a second.
YOU realise how much of a split in the once existent community all the changes are causing. this is far worse than ch.200 ever, ever was.
-
GOODBYE spontinaity.
Goodbye creativity.
Goodbye Variety.
Hello huge furballs
No more worrying about toolshedders
Bombers pukes eliminated from the game as players
WTG HTC finally a change that will make the game worth playing.
I hate flying 10 minutes to fight.. now we can up and fly 2 minutes on any map and furball
So all the examples posted contrary to what you are saying were missed by you. Go read guppies posts again maybe it will sink in this time. :rolleyes:
The good thing is we are finding out who all the fighters against the undefended are...
-
You're too lazy or too hung up on your score to defend a base, and that's my bad? If all you want to do is dogfight, then hell, whats wrong with filling up the DA with your arcade or why not have two arenas, one where we can have our game back, the other where these arcade furballers can have their perpetual dogfight? The rest of us are trying to win a war here. Winning a war means taking bases, taking bases is often the path of least resistance. How realistic is it to have all your players crammed into six airfields on a map? Just because you want to dogfight, we are going to eliminate a basic strategy here? Get over yourself, some of us don't like mindless arcade furballing.
-
YOU realise how much of a split in the once existent community all the changes are causing. this is far worse than ch.200 ever, ever was.
Actually I see a regrouping of an already split community rather than a splitting happening. As was stated above, you have furballers now participating in the base capture game. How is that splitting anything.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Moaning? Crying? This is the kind of mature feedback you guys base the opinions of the player community on. :aok
No Wonder...
Any your feedback was "mature" ... on what level ?
-
Originally posted by twitchy
You're too lazy or too hung up on your score to defend a base, and that's my bad? If all you want to do is dogfight, then hell, whats wrong with filling up the DA with your arcade or why not have two arenas, one where we can have our game back, the other where these arcade furballers can have their perpetual dogfight? The rest of us are trying to win a war here. Winning a war means taking bases, taking bases is often the path of least resistance. How realistic is it to have all your players crammed into six airfields on a map? Just because you want to dogfight, we are going to eliminate a basic strategy here? Get over yourself, some of us don't like mindless arcade furballing.
I've NEVER had an ego, however, this isn't WAR. It is a game. I'm sorry you have to hide in numbers at an undefended base, and then get a pat on the back for capturing it, you HERO!!!!!!
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
Serves no purpose. You can say all you want until your hearts content Donzo. Thumping your chest over grabbing a base that had little to opposition seems like a "challenge" to someone of your caliber. I mean really, is this your sole reason for playing this game? Log on, play the "I'm not switchin' card", and roll a country, attack one country and avoid the other, milkrun undefended bases. When you encounter opposition, probe for another undefended base." Wake up, you canot deny that this was the "preferred tactic for going on almost a year."
Bottom line. You know what you DID, participated in, milked the cow, ran the well dry, etc. Now, the "strategy" has changed and some of you would rather whine about the "free perks" being harder to attain, rather than ADAPT.
Read my first post in this thread. So far, that is GOSPEL.
First of all I never was never "thumping my chest" over anything.
All of things you piss and moan about are things that ALL of us have had to deal with. The undefended base sneaks, imbalanced numbers, etc. But the difference between you and I is that I just took them for what they were. Did having one of my rear bases stolen in a sneak piss me off? Yes it did because I knew that it threw my country off and we would now have to deal with getting that base back. Did being out numbered piss me off? Yep. And this is something people like you do not understand. You seem to think that there is one country and only one country that is always out numbered. Well, all of the countries suffer that fate from time to time. And guess what, the fact that I choose not to switch countries means that I get hit with overwhelming numbers from time to time. So what? I live with it. Just as I live with all of the other things that don't sit right with me sometimes. If it's too much to handle I don't play. Otherwise I find ways of making the best of it. People attacking and trying to sneak one of my rear bases? I watch the map and look for that and try and prevent it if it happens. Being outnumbered? So what? It makes for some good fights as well as prompting me to look for something to throw the country with numbers off.
You have no idea what I do or have done in this game when I play. So why is it that you find the need to assume you know exactly what I am all about?
-
You're too lazy or too hung up on your score to defend a base, and that's my bad? If all you want to do is dogfight, then hell, whats wrong with filling up the DA with your arcade or why not have two arenas, one where we can have our game back, the other where these arcade furballers can have their perpetual dogfight? The rest of us are trying to win a war here. Winning a war means taking bases, taking bases is often the path of least resistance. How realistic is it to have all your players crammed into six airfields on a map? Just because you want to dogfight, we are going to eliminate a basic strategy here? Get over yourself, some of us don't like mindless arcade furballing.
OK so how many times do I have to tell you I like to fight for a base. That is not furballing is it?
You said above Nobody is avoiding anything,
but when we boil it down you want the path of least resistance, i.e. taking undefended bases.
So your right for you and your squad this change affects you most. Now you have to fight. That is a shame. :rolleyes: Carry on.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
And if your sole purpose in an online combat flight game is not to engage in Air to Air Warfare then why or what is the point of even getting online? Chat room?
Besides Air to Air combat I also like to fly bombing missions, do vehicle missions both offensive and defensive, gun a ship either in defense or attacking a base, try a field capture by either air or ground plus whatever other options are available to me. I think they built all of these into the game so that ther would be more to do than just air to air combat and I, for one, like it.
This isn't meant to critisize your comment but I think it was a little short-sighted.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
You're too lazy or too hung up on your score to defend a base, and that's my bad?
I think that is the bottom line folks.
-
How about having an arena for those guys who enjoy working as a team and taking a base together. It could be called the TW Arena (Team Work Arena) and have only one playable country, the rest would just be bases defended by AI ack?
-
I DON'T like the idea.
We can't capture the base of our choosing - say a port, or a field inside the enemy country. Taking a zone base by leap-frogging the front bases now seems to be impossible.
We've lost the ability to be a little more 'creative' with what we can target.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
You're too lazy or too hung up on your score to defend a base, and that's my bad? If all you want to do is dogfight, then hell, whats wrong with filling up the DA with your arcade or why not have two arenas, one where we can have our game back, the other where these arcade furballers can have their perpetual dogfight? The rest of us are trying to win a war here. Winning a war means taking bases, taking bases is often the path of least resistance. How realistic is it to have all your players crammed into six airfields on a map? Just because you want to dogfight, we are going to eliminate a basic strategy here? Get over yourself, some of us don't like mindless arcade furballing.
And you continue to try and mask your desire not to fight under any circumstances by labeling the folks who want to fight as mindless furballers worried about their score.
I don't look at my score and could care less. As I posted previously, I was very involved in the base capture part of things last night in the new set up. It gave me a reason to be, as there was a fight to be had.
It was not a desire for a perpetual furball. It was the desire to be a part of the fight, in whatever form as I knew the bad guys would be there too.
You continue to try and deflect away from your desire to avoid the fight by trying to typecast those of us who want the game to involve all aspects with a fight as something we're not.
My desire in the game is to see all types of gameplay integrated. Yours is clearly to get the 'furballers' as you call them, to go to the DA and leave you alone.
You want a split in the community. I want it to operate together.
It isn't working Twitchy. Try another tactic.
-
Originally posted by Donzo
First of all I never was never "thumping my chest" over anything.
All of things you piss and moan about are things that ALL of us have had to deal with. The undefended base sneaks, imbalanced numbers, etc. But the difference between you and I is that I just took them for what they were. Did having one of my rear bases stolen in a sneak piss me off? Yes it did because I knew that it threw my country off and we would now have to deal with getting that base back. Did being out numbered piss me off? Yep. And this is something people like you do not understand. You seem to think that there is one country and only one country that is always out numbered. Well, all of the countries suffer that fate from time to time. And guess what, the fact that I choose not to switch countries means that I get hit with overwhelming numbers from time to time. So what? I live with it. Just as I live with all of the other things that don't sit right with me sometimes. If it's too much to handle I don't play. Otherwise I find ways of making the best of it. People attacking and trying to sneak one of my rear bases? I watch the map and look for that and try and prevent it if it happens. Being outnumbered? So what? It makes for some good fights as well as prompting me to look for something to throw the country with numbers off.
You have no idea what I do or have done in this game when I play. So why is it that you find the need to assume you know exactly what I am all about?
You were good at dodgeball, I can tell. Ok, since you delibertly dodging the obvious.
I DO know the majority of folks play. I'm sorry God gave me a photographic memory which allows to pretty much "know who I'm fighting" as soon as I encounter them.
The "lone base" 5 sectors away is the least of my issues. What has ended is 50-60 cons attacking an undefended base (regardless of how far away).
Find me a thread on this BBS where I have EVER WHINED about being on the "short stack" more often as a Rook than any other country. I'll answer it for you. I HAVEN'T.
Now, again my first post explains what is happening right now.
-
Besides Air to Air combat I also like to fly bombing missions, do vehicle missions both offensive and defensive, gun a ship either in defense or attacking a base, try a field capture by either air or ground plus whatever other options are available to me. I think they built all of these into the game so that ther would be more to do than just air to air combat and I, for one, like it.
I though Air to Air Warfare included all of that stuff. If I only meant Air to Air Combat then that is what I would have typed. Your the one saying only Air to Air combat.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
OK so how many times do I have to tell you I like to fight for a base. That is not furballing is it?
You said above but when we boil it down you want the path of least resistance, i.e. taking undefended bases.
So your right for you and your squad this change affects you most. Now you have to fight. That is a shame. :rolleyes: Carry on.
Do you take transport to work, or do you walk.
if youre so for paths of restiance walk to work, but i bet you drive to work.
Its human logic to take least path of resistance, human nature doesnt change when you switch on a pc,
some ppl mock the horde mentality, that also is human instinct and nature
-
Originally posted by twitchy
You're too lazy or too hung up on your score to defend a base, and that's my bad?
Originally posted by twitchy
I think that is the bottom line folks.
I think it's more along the lines of ...
You're too lazy or too hung up on your score to capture a defended base.
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
I'm sorry God gave me a photographic memory which allows to pretty much "know who I'm fighting" as soon as I encounter them.
So you know me?
hmmmm...what was that dot command again for knowing who you are up against again? I myself have to wait until after I shoot the other guys down before I know who he is? Do your icons show enemy names or something?
-
Originally posted by twitchy
I think that is the bottom line folks.
Anytime you want to go to the DA and "prove your point". Let me know. I can careless about my Score. But the fact remains, your "argument" was deep 6'd and you are resorting to "feints" like your gameplay. THAT is the bottom line of the BOTTOM LINE.
-
Originally posted by Laurie
Do you take transport to work, or do you walk.
if youre so for paths of restiance walk to work, but i bet you drive to work.
Its human logic to take least path of resistance, human nature doesnt change when you switch on a pc,
some ppl mock the horde mentality, that also is human instinct and nature
In a game where no one really dies?
Why play against other people if you don't want to deal with them?
No one has anything to lose by fighting in this game. NOTHING, NO ONE DIES. Why play if you don't want to compete against the other folks out there?
All those years as a kid when I'd look at the models of 17s, Spits, 109s hanging from my ceiling. I'd imagine myself inside one, wishing there was a way I could 'fly' them. I never once thought about that and imagined myself flying them around a fight to avoid it. I imagined myself in flak filled skies with bad guys all around me.
Flight sims on the computer show up and I get the chance. Why would I change my thinking to how can I avoid flak filled skies, full of bad guys for the thrill of avoiding them?
-
Do you take transport to work, or do you walk.
if youre so for paths of restiance walk to work, but i bet you drive to work.
Its human logic to take least path of resistance, human nature doesnt change when you switch on a pc,
some ppl mock the horde mentality, that also is human instinct and nature
Are you serious?? Do you really think this logic suffices? This is game where hopefully people log in to fight each other. If you don't want to fight other people then you are right, this change is not for you and I can see why you are upset. Now you have to fight and you don't like it. I am sorry for you.
-
Originally posted by Donzo
So you know me?
hmmmm...what was that dot command again for knowing who you are up against again? I myself have to wait until after I shoot the other guys down before I know who he is? Do your icons show enemy names or something?
Donzo, I can pretty tell anyone on range who I am fighting, by "their style". It is because I FIGHT.
Anyone that plays this game will tell you "they know is in that other plane" as they have their own style. I'm sorry that I know when Shane, CptDeath, AKDogg, Pistol, Falcnwng, VegasX, MacMAW, BGBMAW, IceMAW, KillnU, and MANY others are in that plane behind me, or in front of me.
-
Originally posted by Laurie
some ppl mock the horde mentality, that also is human instinct and nature
As they should. It is pathetic to abide by in Real life, and in here. EVERY person should have some semblance of "individualism". If you want to discuss the Homo Sapiens abilities, please start an Anthropology thread in the O' Club.
-
nothing is worth having unless you fight for it. the idea that this change is directed to benefit furballers is just rubsish. if you think this idea is to allow for more fighting, which is what actually happened in war, then you are probably right. at any rate don't lose sight of the fact that this is HT's game, and he will do with it what he pleases....that said what pleases him most is probably making the general community happy, not the few that like to milk run undefended bases and congratulate everyone on a well none battle fought. sugar coat it all you want, but the majority of people play online games to be involved with the community, not to steam roll undefended bases because the other country has so few a numbers they can do nothing about it. the biggest flaw with self proclaimed "realistic" simmers is that at least here they think this war should be won, land should be taken with no battle at all, and then somehow claim that this is how all war is fought. ya, just like Normandy.:rolleyes: if you guys want to try to elevate an online game to something more, why not try to do so in a way that at least respects the efforts made by true war hero's. you guys want these wars to be won in a day or 2, then talk about being realistic, please spare us.
that said, it's a game. it should be a challenge and it should be fun for everyone. taking undefended fields because the enemy does not have enought numbers is certainly not a challenge, and generally not fun for most people. people give furballers a hard time, we just want to fight, that is all. it seems many strat guys want to take territory, but do not want to fight at all; okay, tell me where the gameplay is there. some of the more respected strat squads out there are always up for a fight. i never thought i would see the day where people are defending such a pathetic practice in "online gaming." but here you have it, the object to fight and interact as little as possible. go get em, you guys are truely and inspiration.
-
you miss the piont. im not saying we dont have indivdualism, but it is human isntinct to join the crowd.
they say nothing attracts a crowd, lika crowd:)
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
All those years as a kid when I'd look at the models of 17s, Spits, 109s hanging from my ceiling. I'd imagine myself inside one, wishing there was a way I could 'fly' them. I never once thought about that and imagined myself flying them around a fight to avoid it. I imagined myself in flak filled skies with bad guys all around me.
I think they made a mistake when developing the 'Ace' system back in WWI.
5 air to air victories is clearly wrong, it should have been 5 buildings, or "five bombs dropped and seen to hit the ground".
Then it would have been the bomber pilots idolised by the public as celebrities.
-
Originally posted by pluck
nothing is worth having unless you fight for it. the idea that this change is directed to benefit furballers is just rubsish. if you think this idea is to allow for more fighting, which is what actually happened in war, then you are probably right. at any rate don't lose sight of the fact that this is HT's game, and he will do with it what he pleases....that said what pleases him most is probably making the general community happy, not the few that like to milk run undefended bases and congratulate everyone on a well none battle fought. sugar coat it all you want, but the majority of people play online games to be involved with the community, not to steam roll undefended bases because the other country has so few a numbers they can do nothing about it. the biggest flaw with self proclaimed "realistic" simmers is that at least here they think this war should be won, land should be taken with no battle at all, and then somehow claim that this is how all war is fought. ya, just like Normandy.:rolleyes: if you guys want to try to elevate an online game to something more, why not try to do so in a way that at least respects the efforts made by true war hero's. you guys want these wars to be won in a day or 2, then talk about being realistic, please spare us.
that said, it's a game. it should be a challenge and it should be fun for everyone. taking undefended fields because the enemy does not have enought numbers is certainly not a challenge, and generally not fun for most people. people give furballers a hard time, we just want to fight, that is all. it seems many strat guys want to take territory, but do not want to fight at all; okay, tell me where the gameplay is there. some of the more respected strat squads out there are always up for a fight. i never thought i would see the day where people are defending such a pathetic practice in "online gaming." but here you have it, the object to fight and interact as little as possible. go get em, you guys are truely and inspiration.
taking 25% fule, not thinking of returning, flying liek bees round a hive all day long isnt realistic :)
quote, all we want to do is fight.
then go playon your own in a dark corner. some of us like complexities.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
Are you serious?? Do you really think this logic suffices? This is game where hopefully people log in to fight each other. If you don't want to fight other people then you are right, this change is not for you and I can see why you are upset. Now you have to fight and you don't like it. I am sorry for you.
flipping hell you miss the piont.
your obssesed with trying to take pitty on people,, wich Is sad.
you missed piont.
IT IS HUMAN NATURE TO BE LOGICAL.
sadly for you, you cant change human nature by posting in BB quah.
hence were not still in caves eating our own crap.
-
Originally posted by Laurie
you miss the piont. im not saying we dont have indivdualism, but it is human isntinct to join the crowd.
they say nothing attracts a crowd, lika crowd:)
Sorry, it isn't a human instinct. It is an Individual CHOICE. Again start an Anthropology thread in the O' Club. You're just stalling the inevitable, but hey, keep dodging the truth.
Also, I don't need to quote a lyric from "Soul Asylum's - Black Gold" to try and help me. :aok
This is my first post that has been proven to be true:
Originally posted by Masherbrum
Went in there to see. The Knights and Bish are already whining about it on 200.
It not only was prevalent on 200, it's being proven in here too.
-
Originally posted by Laurie
taking 25% fule, not thinking of returning, flying liek bees round a hive all day long isnt realistic :)
Combat planes were built for combat. If they aren't used for it, they have no point.
In terms of 'realisim' within a game, fighting with them is far more realistic then not fighting with them.
Should it ever reach the point where I really die if I get killed in AH, I'll change my style. Until then I want to fight.
There is nothing complex about attacking an undefended base in AH.
-
"Dude, if your base is undefended, then that's your bad, not mine. If nobody defends a base under attack, then it gets taken. There's some real basic concepts of warfare/gaming here you're not grasping."
I defend till i absolutely cant get any alt off the runway. Im one of the few who does..I do it simply because the status quo is I CANT FIND A FIGHT! Id rather die 20 times and actually get to fight a HUMAN then mindlessly roll fields with 50 plus players. Ive been with a few of those raids for lack of better things to do. I think the mentality is they want defense..just not enuff to get killed or stop them, only enuff to get some vulchin in while the goon is on the way.
I didnt see one organized attack at a base in Orange yesterday..I saw 1 set of buffs taking out hangars every half hour or so while 30 other cons vulched. Furballers have no problem with you taking bases as long as we get a fair chance to defend it. If you take it my hat's off to you!
-
Originally posted by Laurie
you missed piont.
IT IS HUMAN NATURE TO BE LOGICAL.
sadly for you, you cant change human nature by posting in BB quah.
hence were not still in caves eating our own crap.
If the human race turned round and fled adversity, we would still be living in said caves.
-
Originally posted by Laurie
taking 25% fule, not thinking of returning, flying liek bees round a hive all day long isnt realistic :)
quote, all we want to do is fight.
then go playon your own in a dark corner. some of us like complexities.
lol, are you kidding me. like i said spare us. complexities, lol. ya like grabbing ord with 25% fuel, pork and auger is like mastering the rubik's cube. i fail to see the challenge of dropping ord on a building. let's see. climb to 15k, dive, drop, weeeeee. reup, climb, dive, drop weeeeee. oh wait, defenders are upping. move to another field. up, climb, dive drop, weeeee. you think way to much in black and white, so i guess i will in return so as maybe you might get the point.
yes, i've done quite a bit of "strat" work in my day, as have many of these "furballers" you hate so much.
-
mammals hunt in packs because their intelligent, so do most animals.
We are animals, like it or not.
When something is programed into human nature no amount of posting on an interenet BB can stop it, whatever you believe. WW2 is an exmaple, men didnt run out on thier own with picthforks and torches chanting hitler, i want hitler.(picture angry mob lol)
Countries and people united, even if they wernt best of friends (russia+US is example) to stand up for a race of people and thier freedom.
obviously AH is nowhere near as serious BUT it proves people like and work best as groups,
soldiers fought in companys, as a team who looked out for each other.
planes flew in squadrons.
bombers flew in mass.
strangers untied to help one another.
and that deadly ally combination(yes thats right, they were a team) saved the world from being ruled from a obsesive freak with a come-over and gay moustache.
-
Originally posted by pluck
lol, are you kidding me. like i said spare us. complexities, lol. ya like grabbing ord with 25% fuel, pork and auger is like mastering the rubik's cube. i fail to see the challenge of dropping ord on a building. let's see. climb to 15k, dive, drop, weeeeee. reup, climb, dive, drop weeeeee. oh wait, defenders are upping. move to another field. up, climb, dive drop, weeeee. you think way to much in black and white, so i guess i will in return so as maybe you might get the point.
what about co-ordinating goon, picking the right target, sorting out a group of players into a sctructured attack. without these things AH would just be an air combat sim, a jacked up multiplayer flight sim.
-
Originally posted by Laurie
what about co-ordinating goon, picking the right target, sorting out a group of players into a sctructured attack. without these things AH would just be an air combat sim, a jacked up multiplayer flight sim.
hey you grab a goon. come in from the W, i'll drag to the E. apparently the right target is the base with no one defending. kill all fh's first, leave vh up for some unknown reason, also best to leave ack up as well just in case. i've seen plenty of somewhat structured attacks, generally there are very few in AH. if there were, many more bases would be taken much more quickly, go ahead ask slapshot or any of the maw or ak's, they had some of the best.
-
Originally posted by Laurie
mammals hunt in packs because their intelligent, so do most animals.
We are animals, like it or not.
When something is programed into human nature no amount of posting on an interenet BB can stop it, whatever you believe. WW2 is an exmaple, men didnt run out on thier own with picthforks and torches chanting hitler, i want hitler.(picture angry mob lol)
Countries and people united, even if they wernt best of friends (russia+US is example) to stand up for a race of people and thier freedom.
obviously AH is nowhere near as serious BUT it proves people like and work best as groups,
soldiers fought in companys, as a team who looked out for each other.
planes flew in squadrons.
bombers flew in mass.
strangers untied to help one another.
and that deadly ally combination(yes thats right, they were a team) saved the world from being ruled from a obsesive freak with a come-over and gay moustache.
Name a WWII battle where "an undefended" Island or Area was attacked. Sorry, there was always "opposition". Also, La7's if engaged probably had the sack to fight for their national pride in WWII and run like a Greyhound chasing the mechanical rabbit.
-
Originally posted by Laurie
what about co-ordinating goon, picking the right target, sorting out a group of players into a sctructured attack. without these things AH would just be an air combat sim, a jacked up multiplayer flight sim.
And you can do all that. But now you have to fight.
All that structure and coordination should make fighting a piece of cake for ya :)
-
Originally posted by pluck
the idea that this change is directed to benefit furballers is just rubsish.
It benefit ppl who want to fight against other ppl, not against buildings or ai acks. And it is brilliant because this is a main point of this game.
P.S. Doh. I must read better before post something :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Laurie
what about co-ordinating goon, picking the right target, sorting out a group of players into a sctructured attack. without these things AH would just be an air combat sim, a jacked up multiplayer flight sim.
Ok, this was already brought up by Corky. I put together a mishun to capture V20 last night. We took it, shortly after 33 was taken. My mission was comprised of "furballers". I was the goon. Anything else you wanna discuss? We aren't the ones that JACKED it up. But keep dodging the truth, maybe you'll realize it eventually, but I highly doubt it.
-
Originally posted by Oleg
No, it benefit ppl who want to fight against other ppl, not against buildings or ai acks. And it is brilliant because this is a main point of this game.
Amen to that :)
-
Originally posted by Oleg
No, it benefit ppl who want to fight against other ppl, not against buildings or ai acks. And it is brilliant because this is a main point of this game.
ya, that's what i meant:):aok
-
Originally posted by LYNX
this is the opening thread by HTC...
The new system only allows fields to be captured in A certain order. Fields that are currently capturable by your country are shown as larger icons.
by your country are shown as larger icons.
The thin blue only have 1....... "LARGER ICONS"
Come on chaps get it together. Which is it ??
1 base at a time as with large Icon
or
any base on the blue thread
That applies to all the bases chained together. They do not all have to be in the chain.
I took this screenshot yesterday (http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahgs/clipboard.html) and it shows all the fields a country can capture on that terrain.
The system is pretty flexible.
With the chained fields, you cannot proceed to the next field in the chain without first taking the one currently marked by the large ICON. However, any field not in the chain can be taken at any time.
To expedite finding those fields, the list is provided in the country status.
-
Originally posted by pluck
ya, that's what i meant:):aok
Yep, cannt change it quick enough :D
-
Originally posted by Oleg
It benefit ppl who want to fight against other ppl, not against buildings or ai acks. And it is brilliant because this is a main point of this game.
P.S. Doh. I must read better before post something :rolleyes:
I believe this is correct Oleg.
Без перевода. :D (Amen Oleg in Russian) also, look at my sig.
-
Originally posted by Laurie
mammals hunt in packs because their intelligent, so do most animals.
We are animals, like it or not.
Leopards, Cheetahs, Foxes, Polar Bears...I could name more. They do not hunt in packs.
I can think of another type of pack that more closely resembles the hordes in AH:
(http://www.virtualoceania.net/newzealand/photos/rural/sheep/094i.jpg)
-
Originally posted by kamilyun
(http://www.virtualoceania.net/newzealand/photos/rural/sheep/094i.jpg)
Not much wool to hold onto to see? :D Is this JOC's "Infamous Mobile Sheep Pen"?
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
I think it's more along the lines of ...
You're too lazy or too hung up on your score to capture a defended base.
Defended, Undefended, it doesn't matter. Base taking precludes all the nuances of fighting or not fighting. If you defend it, fine, I'll fight you, if you don't, then I will take your base. Why in the hell are we going to be forced into fighting at 6 bases on a map of dozens or hundreds? What kind of arcade crap is that? What a giant Furball does to my FPS aside, if you want to furball, hell man furball, find the usual ever-present furball on the map and swarm around all you like, but you sure in the hell don't have any justifications for manipulating, or generalizing my game play to suit YOUR preferences. I don't avoid fights, and I don't just go after undefended bases, but if you're ignorant enough to leave a base flashing for thirty minutes and not up to defend it, then how is that anything even like my bad? Are you so great that your way of playing is the only way? Is furballing each other so wonderful that we should all be FORCED into playing that way? What's the point of having ords, having troops, strats, ground vehicles, limited ammo, field ack, or anything but fighters? Hell let's play it your way and just spawn into mid air and get rid of all the silly bases and the entire concept of war, or even winning, and base taking. Would that please you? Probably. As for the rest of us, we're getting kind of sick of the game being manipulated to suit one style of game play. Screw Furballing, I love a good dog fight as much as the next guy, but furballing exclusively, thats what the friggin DA is there for. Use it for your arcade, leave the MA alone so the rest of us can play the way we like playing. If I want to dogfight, then I will up a fighter and dogfight, if I want to take a base, then I will up something heavy and hit the base, who the hell are you to tell me I have to engage dozens of cons to play the game?
-
Originally posted by Ball
How about having an arena for those guys who enjoy working as a team and taking a base together. It could be called the TW Arena (Team Work Arena) and have only one playable country, the rest would just be bases defended by AI ack?
Excellent Idea! We can call it Candyland, all the base can be in the shape of lil' lollypops. The "Team Work' guys can get lil' Gold stars on their score sheet for every base they take. ;)
Zazen
-
Twitchy, not to de-rail buddy, but did your 5th grade English teacher not explain to you the concept of paragraphs? Jesus, who the hell is going to read that wall of text even if they cared what you are saying?!?
Zazen
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
also, look at my sig.
You give too much honour to me, i dont deserve it http://foolstown.com/sm/shy.gif
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
That applies to all the bases chained together. They do not all have to be in the chain.
I took this screenshot yesterday (http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahgs/clipboard.html) and it shows all the fields a country can capture on that terrain.
The system is pretty flexible.
With the chained fields, you cannot proceed to the next field in the chain without first taking the one currently marked by the large ICON. However, any field not in the chain can be taken at any time.
To expedite finding those fields, the list is provided in the country status.
Whoa, did anyone else read this? Skuzz are you saying that any field listed in the "capturable" fields category under the "country status" list are takeable at any time? If so that would should silence all the crying from the mooks. Somehow I doubt it will though.
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
Name a WWII battle where "an undefended" Island or Area was attacked. Sorry, there was always "opposition". Also, La7's if engaged probably had the sack to fight for their national pride in WWII and run like a Greyhound chasing the mechanical rabbit.
allys attacked an almost undefended part of normandy, they tricked the gerry's with some useful radar tricks courtesy of RAF.
-
Originally posted by Oleg
You give too much honour to me, i dont deserve it (http://foolstown.com/sm/shy.gif)
Not enough honour Oleg. We strive for the same thing.
-
Ive only been playing a month or so, so I dont really have a strong opinion, so I am one of those figuring "if it's not broke, dont fix it". I don't see what the problem was before.
also, it just seems like an awful waste of space... why have the huge map with hundreds of bases, when you can only really fight at a few?
-
Originally posted by Zazen13
Twitchy, not to de-rail buddy, but did your 5th grade English teacher not explain to you the concept of paragraphs? Jesus, who the hell is going to read that wall of text even if they cared what you are saying?!?
Zazen
Actually, I'm an ex-literature major and a published author. If this were my master's thesis, I might have been more concerned with my grammar. I majored in 19th century British and American Literature, so long paragraphs are ok with me. I wrote it, I'm ok with it. Thanks for your decidedly unrelated take on the situation though. :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by kamilyun
Leopards, Cheetahs, Foxes, Polar Bears...I could name more. They do not hunt in packs.
I can think of another type of pack that more closely resembles the hordes in AH:
(http://www.virtualoceania.net/newzealand/photos/rural/sheep/094i.jpg)
what baout whales and dolphins, now realized to be some of the most intelligen creatures in the world.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Defended, Undefended, it doesn't matter. Base taking precludes all the nuances of fighting or not fighting. If you defend it, fine, I'll fight you, if you don't, then I will take your base. Why in the hell are we going to be forced into fighting at 6 bases on a map of dozens or hundreds? What kind of arcade crap is that? What a giant Furball does to my FPS aside, if you want to furball, hell man furball, find the usual ever-present furball on the map and swarm around all you like, but you sure in the hell don't have any justifications for manipulating, or generalizing my game play to suit YOUR preferences. I don't avoid fights, and I don't just go after undefended bases, but if you're ignorant enough to leave a base flashing for thirty minutes and not up to defend it, then how is that anything even like my bad? Are you so great that your way of playing is the only way? Is furballing each other so wonderful that we should all be FORCED into playing that way? What's the point of having ords, having troops, strats, ground vehicles, limited ammo, field ack, or anything but fighters? Hell let's play it your way and just spawn into mid air and get rid of all the silly bases and the entire concept of war, or even winning, and base taking. Would that please you? Probably. As for the rest of us, we're getting kind of sick of the game being manipulated to suit one style of game play. Screw Furballing, I love a good dog fight as much as the next guy, but furballing exclusively, thats what the friggin DA is there for. Use it for your arcade, leave the MA alone so the rest of us can play the way we like playing. If I want to dogfight, then I will up a fighter and dogfight, if I want to take a base, then I will up something heavy and hit the base, who the hell are you to tell me I have to engage dozens of cons to play the game?
Tell ya what ... go to the page link that Skuzzy posted and look at the screenshot he is talking about ... the come back here are tell us what you think.
There are FAR MORE than 6 fields that can be captured. I didn't see this last night and was new to me until just a couple of minutes ago ... I kept looking at the map and only saw a few captureable bases along the "blue line" but was willing to deal with.
Now that I see the list of available bases that are available for capture ... there is nothing to gripe about anymore as far as I am concerned.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
That applies to all the bases chained together. They do not all have to be in the chain.
I took this screenshot yesterday and it shows all the fields a country can capture on that terrain.
The system is pretty flexible.
With the chained fields, you cannot proceed to the next field in the chain without first taking the one currently marked by the large ICON. However, any field not in the chain can be taken at any time.
To expedite finding those fields, the list is provided in the country status.
nice list of fields but
don't you have to capture the ports to take the CV'S?
-
Calling Normandy "almost undefended" is the biggest understatement of the year.
-
Originally posted by Stang
Whoa, did anyone else read this? Skuzz are you saying that any field listed in the "capturable" fields category under the "country status" list are takeable at any time? If so that would should silence all the crying from the mooks. Somehow I doubt it will though.
That is correct. Any field listed in the capture list can be captured at any time.
-
Originally posted by Laurie
allys attacked an almost undefended part of normandy, they tricked the gerry's with some useful radar tricks courtesy of RAF.
Undefended? Which part of Normandy were you referring to? Those guys on Omaha Beach would seem to suggest it was defended. along with all those others who lost thier lives that day.
Any idea how many sorties were flown over those beaches? A rough count shows 102 allied planes down that day. Undefended?
-
Originally posted by Laurie
what baout whales and dolphins, now realized to be some of the most intelligen creatures in the world.
Whales and dolphins scare me. Too smart methinks. I don't trust ANYTHING they do.
-
Originally posted by kamilyun
Whales and dolphins scare me. Too smart methinks. I don't trust ANYTHING they do.
"So long, and thanks for all the fish!" :). See if anyone gets it.
Tango, XO
412th FS Braunco Mustangs
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
That is correct. Any field listed in the capture list can be captured at any time.
Haha, this whole whinefest has been about nothing then. If people could just read, all would be well. Thanks Skuzzball.
:D
Somehow I think the myths about this new setup will take weeks to get rid of though, as usual. lol.
-
Originally posted by Laurie
what baout whales and dolphins, now realized to be some of the most intelligen creatures in the world.
You keep digging yourself deeper into the Anthropologic hole ... stop already.
-
Originally posted by Laurie
allys attacked an almost undefended part of normandy, they tricked the gerry's with some useful radar tricks courtesy of RAF.
I suggest you read more on the subject of D-Day. Wow! (http://www.4wd.com/4wdforums/images/smilies/brick.gif)
-
i have a slight modification which i think will please more than currnet one,
make say supply chains, you have to work along this chain to supply bases you capture,
so , more bases/ chains to start on rather than 1 long snake,
make small islands immune to chains so CV[s can be useful again.
-
I haven't played in a while, so let me see if I understand this correctly:
When I decide to take a base with some other players, I no longer have to worry about not seeing an enemy in the process and becoming bored to tears.
When I up for base defense, I won't be playing whack-a-mole hoping the lemmings will attack somewhere near me if I don't up from a vulched field.
This could change my mind about waiting for TOD to start playing again. Thanks!
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
I suggest you read more on the subject of D-Day. Wow! (http://www.4wd.com/4wdforums/images/smilies/brick.gif)
Germasn belived ally's would hit further up the coast, so they sent they stronger units there., allys attacked a weak piont in defensive line.
-
HiTech
Im a bit torn about this idea. You do adress my biggest concerns about the game at the cost of the most appealing potential of the game. Is this the tradeoff that has to be payed? Maybe, maybe not.
You do adress the fact that people are avoiding fights in a game that is all about combat. You also create combat zones which is very good for EU hours when problem of people not wanting to fight is even bigger due to the small numbers.
But you do it at cost of "player driven strategy" basicly you paint a path that we have to walk. Well I cant blame you since we havent been utilizing the strategical element of the game at all we have just been hoarding and avoiding each other.
A negative side effect of your "path" system is that it generates quite few combat zones. I know Im contradicting the positiv thing this brings for the EU times. But when numbers rise we have huge fights in a few spots.
Once again good since we need fights in the game but for me personally I dont care much for the 20+ vs 20+ fights. They are too much about cherry pickin and too little about pilots going head to head pushing each others skill to the limmit.
Im the type of pilot who loves 5v5 sized fights. These are getting lost in the new system.
Im not sure that the path system is the "true solution to the problem".
As I see it the reason people avoid each other is that no one steps in the way of the other and that is because there is no incentive for defense.
Why defend a base when you can take 3 others in the same time? Heck yeah you trade 1 base for 3 bases.
Both teams start thinkin the same way and we have "the race". The race for who can take most bases in the least ammount of time. If you really wana pick em as fast as you can then you definatly wana avoid the enemy.
I mean if the incentive to defend was just as high if not higher then the incentive to attack then people would try to get into each others way.
For example if you wouldnt get ord, fuel and troops at a newly taken field util you have held it for say 2-3 hours.
Then you would have to defend it and just rushing on would steach your supply line and slow you down.
Would it be possible to accomplish what you are after by doing something like that instead?
Tex
-
Originally posted by dtango
"So long, and thanks for all the fish!" :). See if anyone gets it.
Tango, XO
412th FS Braunco Mustangs
It's the fourth book of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy series written by Douglas Adams. Its title is the message left by the dolphins when they departed Planet Earth just before it was demolished to make way for a hyperspatial express route.
-
Just to add my two (worthless) cents...
Speaking as someone who pretty much only flies after 10pm pacific time, I *LOVE* the new system. There's actually a reason to get up off the couch and turn off the TV at night.
The old system had combatants so spread out that finding a fight was a total crapshoot. Now I know where the fight is, and now I know where I should direct my base-capture efforts.
It seems to me that the new capture system should take into account the number of pilots sort of like this:
under 120 pilots online: 1 capturable base per country
121-190 pilots online: 2 capturable bases per country
over 191 pilots online: 3 capturable bases per country
In other words, a second or third front becomes a possibility only where there are enough pilots to make those battles self-supporting and worthwhile.
Three Cheers for HT!!!
-Llama
-
Originally posted by Stang
Haha, this whole whinefest has been about nothing then. If people could just read, all would be well. Thanks Skuzzball.
:D
Somehow I think the myths about this new setup will take weeks to get rid of though, as usual. lol.
only 4 or so fields are in capture list for each country though, 1/2 of these are v bases by the hq and unreachable.
-
Originally posted by VOR
I haven't played in a while, so let me see if I understand this correctly:
When I decide to take a base with some other players, I no longer have to worry about not seeing an enemy in the process and becoming bored to tears.
When I up for base defense, I won't be playing whack-a-mole hoping the lemmings will attack somewhere near me if I don't up from a vulched field.
This could change my mind about waiting for TOD to start playing again. Thanks!
Yup that's it in a nutshell, no more whack-a-mole chasing the guys who flee from any defenders. Only part you left out is the whining from the moles who realize might have to deal with your hammer now.
-
Originally posted by llama
Just to add my two (worthless) cents...
Speaking as someone who pretty much only flies after 10pm pacific time, I *LOVE* the new system. There's actually a reason to get up off the couch and turn off the TV at night.
The old system had combatants so spread out that finding a fight was a total crapshoot. Now I know where the fight is, and now I know where I should direct my base-capture efforts.
It seems to me that the new capture system should take into account the number of pilots sort of like this:
under 120 pilots online: 1 capturable base per country
121-190 pilots online: 2 capturable bases per country
over 191 pilots online: 3 capturable bases per country
In other words, a second or third front becomes a possibility only where there are enough pilots to make those battles self-supporting and worthwhile.
Three Cheers for HT!!!
-Llama
that seems like a promising and interesting idea :)
<>,
-
Originally posted by Stang
Haha, this whole whinefest has been about nothing then. If people could just read, all would be well.
About nothing? Jesus H. We don't want to hit predetermined bases, I can do that kind of stuff all day long on gametap in games like Frogger and Galaga. SCREW FORCED FURBALLING. That's not the game I enjoy, if that's the game you enjoy, then play it that way. That's the joy of the game, it offers both types of gameplay. Oh My God, You mean some people don't like playing your way? Those filthy toolshedders. You guys are rich.
-
Originally posted by Laurie
Germasn belived ally's would hit further up the coast, so they sent they stronger units there., allys attacked a weak piont in defensive line.
O/T: how old are you laurie and what part of the UK are you from?
-
Originally posted by Laurie
Germasn belived ally's would hit further up the coast, so they sent they stronger units there., allys attacked a weak piont in defensive line.
Almost undefended sure seems to imply it was a cakewalk. Weak being a relative term to how Normandy was defended vs the Pas De Calaise.
We're not talking about a completely undefended AH base that 5 guys can take by themselves are we.
-
Shhhh....let folks keep fighting over a few bases....lol
pay no attention to Skuzzy's post.
-
twitchy: Know where in any of your post did I happen to see you say I love just looking for people attacking and then go defend a base. In fact I do not believe I have seen anyone post "defending open bases is there favorite way of playing".
So you are telling people to do stuff that no one has said that they enjoy doing.
Hence why the test we are doing.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
twitchy: Know where in any of your post did I happen to see you say I love just looking for people attacking and then go defend a base. In fact I do not believe I have seen anyone post "defending open bases is there favorite way of playing".
So you are telling people to do stuff that no one has said that they enjoy doing.
Hence why the test we are doing.
HiTech
Oh no you don't. I defend the living crap out of bases. I'd say about half my game play is spent defending bases, I'd go so far to say I enjoy defending. I actually put some effort into it, and I don't go whinning on the BB when a base goes undefended and gets taken.
-
And I'm not telling anybody to do anything except leave us alone and let us play the way we want to play. If you like furballing, furball. If you like base taking, take bases. I don't see the problem here that needed fixing so bad except the furballers whinning because the rest of us don't want to be crammed into a few bases.
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
It's the fourth book of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy series written by Douglas Adams. Its title is the message left by the dolphins when they departed Planet Earth just before it was demolished to make way for a hyperspatial express route.
You know the best part is that all this time the dolphins were actually trying to warn earthlings of the impending doom with all their acrobatic antics. If I remember correctly they performed some last amazing stunt for humans as a final warning at which we just aww'ed and clapped.
Funny thing, maybe Adams is right. Judging by this thread we humans maybe are really that stupid :).
Tango, XO
412th FS Braunco Mustangs
-
To be perfectly honest, many of us enjoy hunting down milkrunners and basetaking hordes, so in telling us to leave you alone so you can milkrun in peace, you are telling us to do something we don't enjoy.
-
Originally posted by dtango
You know the best part is that all this time the dolphins were actually trying to warn earthlings of the impending doom with all their acrobatic antics. If I remember correctly they performed some last amazing stunt for humans as a final warning at which we just aww'ed and clapped.
Funny thing, maybe Adams is right. Judging by this thread we humans maybe are really that stupid :).
Tango, XO
412th FS Braunco Mustangs
maybe it was the dolphins and whales distracting the germans so that the "ally's" could land in normandy with no resistance?
-
Originally posted by Ball
maybe it was the dolphins and whales distracting the germans so that the "ally's" could land in normandy with no resistance?
HA! :D
Tango, XO
412th FS Braunco Mustangs
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Moaning? Crying? This is the kind of mature feedback you guys base the opinions of the player community on. :aok
No Wonder...
How am I supposed to describe the immature whining and name calling
I heard/saw last night? Like kindergarten night at the UN.
-
looking at the situation now in game
Bish 76 68 fields
knits 58 84 fields
rooks 73 103 fields
Bish can capture
A75 V43 C24 C30 C62 C82 A83 C87 V110 C119 C162 C171
C201 C242 C244 A67 V32
2 Airfields 3 Vbases 11 CV's (C82 is already Bish????? think it's a bug)
It's not really what i'd call Flexible
-
Originally posted by hitech
twitchy: Know where in any of your post did I happen to see you say I love just looking for people attacking and then go defend a base. In fact I do not believe I have seen anyone post "defending open bases is there favorite way of playing".
So you are telling people to do stuff that no one has said that they enjoy doing.
Hence why the test we are doing.
HiTech
Actually guys like Lazs and myself enjoyed last nights base defense. Lazs stuck around 34 longer that I did but he racked up a bunch of kills while 34 was still on the "takeable" list.
I think he liked the idea of guys having to come to him or try to get thru him and they couldn't give up coming back because they needed to take the base. Prior to this system, they would have given up and run to an undefended base.
-
One thing that seems to be overlooked is that both HT and Pyro have not only designed, but played these games for longer than 99 percent of the people here. I have played these since at least 1994, and I can tell you that the environment found in the recent previous MA is not the one they cut their teeth on by any means (at least it wasn't when I started). That changed in the AW gamestorm era in the late 1990s and recently here in AH, for much the same infrastructure, human nature, and numbers of new players influence. Huge maps, win the war, little structure to centralize the fight, path of least resistance gameplay, etc.
Oddly, the model they are putting in place here works to create that earlier environment -- where you could take bases and win the war, but where you have to fight your way in -- by and large. Now perhaps, just perhaps, this is no accident, or no pandering to "furballers" but a knowledge of how much fun the "fight" can be if it is encouraged. Where a "furballer" will actually support a "toolshedder" if there's action to be found.
The upside, is that it the old way, the fighting way, was a total blast. I may even start playing some notable hours again if it pans out, instead of waiting for the CT and grinding though Rome Total War. Have to see this weekend how the changes work out in play.
Charon
-
I wasn't too impressed for the three hours I was in Orange last night. No bases taken. Bombers passing over the base once in a while at 4K. Occasional field attempt. No where to take a GV. Didn't have to worry about jumping to defend other bases. Finally went to a different arena.
AirQuakers liked it I guess from all the Hootin' and Hollerin' they have been doing on the board. Gives them lots of baby seals in a concentrated area to kill I suppose....
-
Originally posted by Banzzai
looking at the situation now in game
Bish 76 68 fields
knits 58 84 fields
rooks 73 103 fields
Bish can capture
A75 V43 C24 C30 C62 C82 A83 C87 V110 C119 C162 C171
C201 C242 C244 A67 V32
2 Airfields 3 Vbases 11 CV's (C82 is already Bish????? think it's a bug)
It's not really what i'd call Flexible
I think what he meant was that the "system" has been defined to be flexible enough for them to change/tweak the list on a system level.
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
To be perfectly honest, many of us enjoy hunting down milkrunners and basetaking hordes, so in telling us to leave you alone so you can milkrun in peace, you are telling us to do something we don't enjoy.
No, I'm telling you to play the game the way you want to play it, and I'll play the game the way I want to play it. Why cater to either school of thought here when both are represented already? If you want to furball, there's a furball somewhere. If you want to take a base, there's plenty to be had.
Think of it like this. Hitech makes pizza, all kinds of pizza. But half of us like supreme, half of us like just pepperoni, as it is right now, you can order either. Everybody is served, everybody is happy. Anyway you like it, its already there. You start just selling just pepperoni, eventually the people that like supreme pizza are going to stop buying pizza there. It's pretty damned arrogant to tell me I have to eat pepperoni because thats what you like it otherwise I'm somehow your lesser.
Somwhere on the map in the Blue Arena, right now, is a furball. Somewhere also on the map in the blue arena is a couple guys trying to take a base. It's fine the way it is. It really is ok. You can take bases, OR you can furball. Why screw that up? Because some people on the BB like to furball? What about the rest of us?
-
They're still serving both kinds of pizza, you just have to eat in the cafeteria with everyone else now.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
And I'm not telling anybody to do anything except leave us alone and let us play the way we want to play. If you like furballing, furball. If you like base taking, take bases. I don't see the problem here that needed fixing so bad except the furballers whinning because the rest of us don't want to be crammed into a few bases.
Twitchy. Why are you so determined to make the two mutually exclusive of each other?
Leave me alone so i can take a base. Go furball somewhere else.
Fight for the flippen base will ya? They pretty much all look the same. Can't believe the undefended ones are that much different, other then no one is there to shoot at ya.
-
Could try it this way with large maps
The more Fields captured the more fields that country holds can be captured
40%of the fields in hand 40% open for capture (opens the back door)
10% of the fields in hand 10% open for capture ( gives country a chance to defend & more of a chance to attack somewhere else)
could try it with Numbers aswell
-
Unless I'm not understanding this new capture thing right, lets see, this mean anything? ... "element of surprise"?. not when you follow the blue line or look at what base is enlarged available for capture. So much for being able to capture a field in the middle and work your way out :p
Have you ever up from a cv or a field to go help capture a base, and flying 1/2 way there only to see "nits-bish-rook has captured field ## " your flying to? eh? well in the good ol days you would probley change course head to the next closest field or what ever field was on "your agenda".
Now it seems the {next field in line for capture} "might " be 2+- sectors away from where you are, and if your flying in say a slow zero its really depressing. So it looks like there are four choises: 1. you waste your time or die of bordom if you decide to fly to the next field in line for capture or 2. attack a base thats closer but not capturable, or 3. auger or 4. waste time flying to base just captured, tower, reup at the closest base :( ...
Happened to me last night {waaaaaa!} I'm 1/2 way to the base (in a zero because the "eny" was up i think. sigh..)(im thinking zero is for the mph they go, hehe) we are attacking, bam its captured, cool! i look and there is a nice juicy base just waiting for my bombs but its not the next in line so no one is heading there and to ask someone to head to that base to help you do what? sigh.........
Its like Hey fellas, (dont matter where your friends or squads at, screw them, come on rub shoulders with people you dont know or dont care to know com'on chum up, hold hands sing campfire songs) fly in the EW arena with 15 people in it , or fly in the MW arena with 24 people in it, or fly in the orange (limited base capture) LW arena with 100 people, Because other Blue LW arena is full with 120 people, but try back later because it will adjust for more players when the arena your in now gets few more people in it. Oh and capture the bases we allow you until theres a opening in the arena that dont have that! But while your "stuck" in a arena you dont want to be in, the other choice is quit a game you pay for because you have no choices . Try back later you might get lucky and get in where you want.
Your at a restaurant in town ..What would you like to drink sir, coke? we dont have that, pepsi, dont have that either, water? nope dont got that either but we do have a cow patty soda that "we" like and we think you should too, plus with the sand we serve your gunna need something to drink, besides you've paid your bill already theres no refunds. So choke to death or swollow what we offer, or dont let the cyber door hit you in the arse on your way out if you dont like it. sigh again......
thats my 2 cents and i still have 98 cents left to spend, I would burn the whole dollar but im getting depressed knowing ive already wasted 2 pennies on such BS that should not have occured. imo. :(
once again thats all for now folks, have a great day :) be nice!
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
They're still serving both kinds of pizza, you just have to eat in the cafeteria with everyone else now.
No they're not. Wasn't the ridiculous death star ack guns enough of a compromise for you guys? You have to have the whole game to suit your furballing? Can't you furball where the furball is without having to tell me I have to furball with you? Defend your bases, and presto, solution to your terrible problem.
Thank god it's an experiment, I salute you on at least that much hitech. I hate to say it but Forced Furballing would be a game killer for me.
-
I wouldn't look at as forced furballing...i'd look at it more as "if I want to take a base - i need to fight and organize to do it"
no more milkruns, or sneaking 40 planes noe to base....that has no chance of defense...
basically the pac-man land grab is being deferred...lol
-
Originally posted by twitchy
No they're not. Wasn't the ridiculous death star ack guns enough of a compromise for you guys? You have to have the whole game to suit your furballing? Can't you furball where the furball is without having to tell me I have to furball with you? Defend your bases, and presto, solution to your terrible problem.
Thank god it's an experiment, I salute you on at least that much hitech. I hate to say it but Forced Furballing would be a game killer for me.
No you don't have to furball Twitchy. You might have to fight your way in to the field though.
Chances are, some of us air to air types would be happy to cover you so you don't have to shoot at anything.
You can bomb buildings to your hearts content. We'll keep ya covered.
I can't believe you are that determined to attack em where they ain't all the time.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Actually, I'm an ex-literature major and a published author. If this were my master's thesis, I might have been more concerned with my grammar. I majored in 19th century British and American Literature, so long paragraphs are ok with me. I wrote it, I'm ok with it. Thanks for your decidedly unrelated take on the situation though. :rolleyes:
WoW, That's just a scary commentary on the education system today. In your published work do you have any paragraphs or is it one 200+ page paragraph?? :huh
Zazen
-
Originally posted by Waffle BAS
no more milkruns, or sneaking 40 planes noe to base....that has no chance of defense...
If I milkrun or if I sneak, what's YOUR problem with it? How does how I play have anything to do with you? If you don't like milkrunning, don't friggin milkrun, if you don't like sneaking bases, don't sneak into them. If I don't like furballing or hitting bases where I know there's going to be crappy FPS and hoardes, then why should I have to? It's mindless forced furballing, anyway you slice it.
-
Twitchy is reminiscent of a Captain flailing his sword in defiance on a sinking ship.
HiTech just served you a slice of "Your way doesn't work, it doesn't offer any stability to the arena", but yet you keep posting. You're spunky, that's for sure.
-
besides you've paid your bill already theres no refunds. So choke to death or swollow what we offer, or dont let the cyber door hit you in the arse on your way out if you dont like it. sigh again......
:rofl
thats about it right there.
I'll reserve the final judgment when I see how they implement this on large arenas.
So what we on now AHIII or AHIV:confused:
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
Twitchy is reminiscent of a Captain flailing his sword in defiance on a sinking ship.
And you remind me of one of those gimps you see in the BDSM genre that jump up and down in sheer excitement every time the master cracks his whip at somebody.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
And you remind me of one of those gimps you see in the BDSM genre that jump up and down in sheer excitement every time the master cracks his whip at somebody.
Hey! He's gotta joke!!! Hey, come on, How do you do that?!! What's up?!
Move along now.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
If I milkrun or if I sneak, what's YOUR problem with it? How does how I play have anything to do with you? If you don't like milkrunning, don't friggin milkrun, if you don't like sneaking bases, don't sneak into them. If I don't like furballing or hitting bases where I know there's going to be crappy FPS and hoardes, then why should I have to? It's mindless forced furballing, anyway you slice it.
A coordinated attack against a defended base is furballing?
Why do you play an online flight sim, if you don't want to play against the other players?
There have to be loads of offline games like that were you can strategize to your hearts content.
-
I've never known anyone to define "furballing" as the possibility of being fired upon.
-
:rolleyes:
I read some of this then got tired and with my BEER in hand went and looked at the new setup :eek:
U bish better get more ALT and the one cable jerking nube fu :mad:
lol 19 k and I was WAY over you . Lets figure 25 k to merge from now on guys :aok well I way just enought to get some nice fights with the ones that wanted to stay up there , or got lost in the "no see ground just below" me zone . hehe
===
That said , I don't give a fig either way u set the MA's up anymore , I GONNA have fun anyway doing something I like CAUSE .
If your BORED , you BOREING :O
I am not bored :) , bring it on matie :D
PS: Wat I really would like to find is Laz up at 20K plus :rofl
-
Originally posted by VOR
I've never known anyone to define "furballing" as the possibility of being fired upon.
:lol
-
Sorry double post :(
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
I took this screenshot yesterday (http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahgs/clipboard.html) and it shows all the fields a country can capture on that terrain.
Skuzzy,
On the clipboard html page, recommend you match the clipboard map with the Country Status flap. I have not tried the “capture path” arena yet and was using your html page to see how it works. Saw that A91 could be captured by both Bishops and Knights, so I assumed A91 was a Rook base but could not find it on the clipboard map shown on the page. This won’t be a problem in the actual arena; but if someone is actually trying to use this page to get a jump on the steep learning curve, it may confuse and discourage them.
You also might consider added a sentence on “Side Balancing” and “Min-Eny”.
Sorry if someone else has already pointed these things out, but there is no way I’m going to get through this post in one sitting.
MachNix
-
I don't think Twitchy is as big a fan of cartoon combat as he claims to be.
-
Wow...this is the 11th most "replied to" thread currently viewable in the General Discussion Forum.
Whatever happened to THE "Voss" thread? Linky anyone?
-
This seems HT is driving us together some...you must work together to take a base. Fighter escorts, goons, buffs up high... all that good stuff, in order to finally get air superiorty over the target base. Is this to get us in the mindset of what CT is gonna be like? Just a thought.:noid
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
I suggest you read more on the subject of D-Day. Wow! (http://www.4wd.com/4wdforums/images/smilies/brick.gif)
Yea no kidding, my grandfather landed with the Canadians at Normandy, he was the sole survivor out of his unit of 219 men...If that was undefended those other 218 dead men deserve an explanation...
Zazen
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
Donzo, I can pretty tell anyone on range who I am fighting, by "their style". It is because I FIGHT.
Anyone that plays this game will tell you "they know is in that other plane" as they have their own style. I'm sorry that I know when Shane, CptDeath, AKDogg, Pistol, Falcnwng, VegasX, MacMAW, BGBMAW, IceMAW, KillnU, and MANY others are in that plane behind me, or in front of me.
Oh, so you DON'T know me.
Thank you for clearing that up.
-
Im not sure if i like the new system or not. It has some qualities for sure, and in other ways it not so great (to be polite).
Im not ready to vote yes or no just yet.
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
Sorry, it isn't a human instinct. It is an Individual CHOICE. Again start an Anthropology thread in the O' Club. You're just stalling the inevitable, but hey, keep dodging the truth.
Also, I don't need to quote a lyric from "Soul Asylum's - Black Gold" to try and help me. :aok
This is my first post that has been proven to be true:
It not only was prevalent on 200, it's being proven in here too.
So let me get this straight. You have actually taken the time to look up each person posting in the thread and see what country they belong to?
-
In fact I do not believe I have seen anyone post "defending open bases is there favorite way of playing".[/B]
Defending is one of my favorite things to do in game.
Though defending with extreamly small number vs a hoard isnt fun. A 1 to 2 even 1 to 3 odds disadvantage is fun for me but more then it becomes just too hard.
Reason its so hard to get better odds then that for a defense is that everyone is out chasing a unprotected base as there is no incentive to defend.
Tex
-
Originally posted by Donzo
1) What's the purpose of having a large map if all the action is being forced in small areas?
2) What's your problem with the NOE captures? And why do you find the need to throw in the "mega-squad" reference?
Well the Bop's hate it, I don't need to know anymore:aok
(truly, ya apparently CAN still take rear bases, which would be quite a feat/interesting mission, and ya can furball/blow-up stuff ANYwhere. With that crew you guys put up on Monday nights, bull-rushing a heavily defended base and capturing it would make for a great accomplishment, I'd think--assuming you want a fight)
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
I suggest you read more on the subject of D-Day. Wow! (http://www.4wd.com/4wdforums/images/smilies/brick.gif)
maybe you should?
Originally posted by Stang
Calling Normandy "almost undefended" is the biggest understatement of the year.
if they had attacked Calais, they would have never got off the shingle. Why? because we told them we would be coming there, and they had the most defences there. Even going there TODAY you will see that it would have been an impossible task landing there.
they choose the weakest part, and also with operation bodyguard working at max.... it kept the Germans from reinforcing Normandy because they "knew" the main attack was coming at Calais or maybe Norway....
oh and you also have the US landing on some japanese held islands without any fights......hmmm
-
I've only been "flying" in AHII since April, not long enough to become a furballer, toolshedder, griefer or whatever - just lowly noob. I wasn't happy with the first round of changes and voiced that opinion a few times here in the BB. Anyway, I gave it a chance and am still here. I still am not totally happy with everything but I'll have to say this - HTC may not make everybody happy with every change but I don't think anybody can realistically accuse them of just trying to piss players off. While I may not agree with everything I have to salute HTC for constantly trying to improve gameplay vs. letting the game become stagnant without a care for the ongoing health of the game.
That said, I spent a couple of hours in LW Orange yesterday evening and for the short time I was there kinda enjoyed a "focused" conflict. I know this first implementation is a test and no doubt will develop further into a more polished scheme for base captures. I can see the requirement for the "win the war" crowd of more teamwork on a larger scale in order to capture bases. That to me is real strategy at the higher level and necessitates better tactical planning for each phase of the "offensive". The strat part of the game for me at least could be even more attractive than just a loosely knit crowd just descending on a random base, defended or not, and then just sort of disintegrating afterward. Actual planning of better offensive and defensive operations that by necesssity would be less willy nilly than it has been up to now.
And I suck as a dogfighter. I've been putting off actually having to spend some time in the TA. I might be forced to now. I guess that'll be a good thing in the long run because over time I would probably get bored with being an eternal noob as far as my dogfighting skills go.
BUT, I must be doing something right. Last night I got flamed on 200 for the first time!! Seems I rammed somebody who was on my 6. Hmm, haven't been able to reconstruct how I did that but - whatever, I guess I have arrived!
Sorry for rambling. Had a cancerous thing excised from my ear this afternoon and am presently under the influence of oxycodone. I'm a noob with that too.
Anyway, as I said, to HTC for the ongoing efforts to improve gameplay, whether I agree with it all or not, at least they're trying.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
Im not sure if i like the new system or not. It has some qualities for sure, and in other ways it not so great (to be polite).
Im not ready to vote yes or no just yet.
There is no vote
-
Tried the orange Arena again today,
Climbed to near 20k in a Spit and was foolish enough to stay in a HO position with a 190 coming down from a lot higher.
Back to base, climb out to 23k Ah! This is better, nearly Co-Alt now but one dead P51 later and the other P51 runs away.
A few more minutes and yep my tank tells me to RTB
Refuel and Re-arm try again just an assist this time
Well it may suit some, but to get my preferred one on one type of fight the only way is up and it takes way too long and leaves too little fuel to stay there very long. Additionally I miss the variety of gameplay so I could furball, or join the hoards and even frantically defend against the hoards when required.
Nope this is not the game I enjoy any more. It simply feels too restrictive. In the few hours I was up, one base got taken maybe two. I have maybe a couple of hours after work to play and I have enjoyed AH up until a day or two ago because I was able to go to into an Areana where there were plenty of people on line have some fun before logging off.
I've not played any other game online since I started AH. I'm still going to want to fly something like AH and will hang around a while yet to see what shapes up, but the way the main Arena is now, AH no longer has the appeal to me. Only a couple of months back I built a new PC, got a new set of CH USB gear just so I could get greater pleasure out of the this game alone.
I wish I could be more constructive but I prefer it the way it was, to how it is at the moment. It will never suit everyone, it will never be perfect and Hitech and team deserve the praise for the difficult task of working to make a great game better. This is one of those few occassions when I think you have got it wrong. Will it attract new subscribers? Sure. Will anyone leave, of course they will, they allways have and will do. The serious question is, will more join than leave or visa versa? I don't know the facts and figures, but I think this will reduce numbers.
-
In my view it will work OK....................
The criticism I have now is that it is poorly implemented........(OK its a test)
Obviously the blue line has missed some fields out and they presently sit there stating they are viable target when infact they are exactly the opposite........... they are indeed totally uncapturable.....
Further the route the blue line takes really needs some consideration.. the area of 43-51 on the present map requires that the northern country has to travel more than 3 sectors by air to bring any airborne attack or defence into to play....this defies the objective.
I can think of other terrains where GV vields have been daisy chained between distant rows of air fields where similar problems would ensue....
Its my view that terrains have to be designed for this type of system, with carefull consideration of field locations and gv cross spawns......I do not think a line can be simply drawn on existing maps.
However I am sure that once the gameplay effects of such a system are known then the terrains can be modified to make it work very well.
Having said that I am saddenned that such an artifiscial methodology is adopted to focus conflict............. I am afraid that we will get to know certain parts of these maps very well indeed........rather too well.
-
Originally posted by Overlag
maybe you should?
if they had attacked Calais, they would have never got off the shingle. Why? because we told them we would be coming there, and they had the most defences there. Even going there TODAY you will see that it would have been an impossible task landing there.
they choose the weakest part, and also with operation bodyguard working at max.... it kept the Germans from reinforcing Normandy because they "knew" the main attack was coming at Calais or maybe Norway....
oh and you also have the US landing on some japanese held islands without any fights......hmmm
Ahh but they were facing real death and unbelievable odds. We're not dying so why not fight in a game designed to let people do that?
And which Japanese Islands were those btw? Guadalcanal? Tarawa? Pelieleu, Okinawa? Iwo Jima?
Again. We're not really dying and are playing a game that allows us to compete against real people. Why not take advantage of that?
You wear a 303rd BG tag. How many undefended bases did the real 303rd capture? How many milk runs did they fly during their operational career?
-
Originally posted by Banzzai
Bish can capture
A75 V43 C24 C30 C62 C82 A83 C87 V110 C119 C162 C171
C201 C242 C244 A67 V32
Infact reading that list the two that Bish could capture was A75 and V43.
CV's are listed on every sides list.
A83,V110, A67 & V32 are listed on every sides list but are infact not on the blue line and so are uncapturable
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
You wear a 303rd BG tag. How many undefended bases did the real 303rd capture? How many milk runs did they fly during their operational career?
its not my fault that bases are undefended. AND.... i rarely take part in base capture anyway, because it seems that it is not suppose to happen anymore....
any bombing of strat is called milkrunning in this game..... so yes, we do that all the time.
-
Originally posted by Overlag
its not my fault that bases are undefended. AND.... i rarely take part in base capture anyway, because it seems that it is not suppose to happen anymore....
any bombing of strat is called milkrunning in this game..... so yes, we do that all the time.
Overlag, if you want to take your 17s and go deep, I'd be more then happy to grab a 51 and escort.
If you guys in the 303rd are pounding the bases behind the lines to slow the reinforcements to the 'front', more power to ya.
That's what 17s should be doing
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Overlag, if you want to take your 17s and go deep, I'd be more then happy to grab a 51 and escort.
If you guys in the 303rd are pounding the bases behind the lines to slow the reinforcements to the 'front', more power to ya.
That's what 17s should be doing
Would using the 17's to smash the FH's at a field to make it eaiser to take be acceptable?
-
Yes, as long as you are going for a base capture and not just greifing. Most furballers can accept FHs being down for a base capture. It's when some people just knock them down to stop a fight that irks furballers. Unfortunatly a lot of base takers get thrown into the greifer catigory.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
That applies to all the bases chained together. They do not all have to be in the chain.
I took this screenshot yesterday (http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahgs/clipboard.html) and it shows all the fields a country can capture on that terrain.
The system is pretty flexible.
With the chained fields, you cannot proceed to the next field in the chain without first taking the one currently marked by the large ICON. However, any field not in the chain can be taken at any time.
To expedite finding those fields, the list is provided in the country status.
I like the way Skuzzy fights. He pummeled the enemy until they were black and blue :)
Also, after this thread finishes it will surely be much tougher to make 'the longest' thread.
-
One angle I have not seen discussed in this thread is the idea that a figther-jock or buff-driver or striker in a historical situation would have any say whatsoever in deciding his target for the day's sortie. Granted there were generals and airmarshalls who did this but they were driving a desk not an aircraft or tank. So the argument taken by some here that in "the real war" they were not limited to attacking one target/base/factory/city is total BS, unless you want to be the napoleon sitting at the desk and directing the war effort for your chesspeice and ordering your minions around...errrr...wait a second...NOW I GET IT!
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Overlag, if you want to take your 17s and go deep, I'd be more then happy to grab a 51 and escort.
If you guys in the 303rd are pounding the bases behind the lines to slow the reinforcements to the 'front', more power to ya.
That's what 17s should be doing
whats the point of bombing airfields to slow resupplys if they are only down 15minutes?
id rather bomb strat (what b17s DID) to slow down resupply of troops/ord. that works better on a grand scale.
and if that was linked to how many bases are captureable in a zone it would be even cooler... that way you have to take out STRAT before bases turn big.
Originally posted by SuperDud
Yes, as long as you are going for a base capture and not just greifing. Most furballers can accept FHs being down for a base capture. It's when some people just knock them down to stop a fight that irks furballers. Unfortunatly a lot of base takers get thrown into the greifer catigory.
whats the difference?
-
Originally posted by Tilt
Infact reading that list the two that Bish could capture was A75 and V43.
CV's are listed on every sides list.
A83,V110, A67 & V32 are listed on every sides list but are infact not on the blue line and so are uncapturable
Not quite correct Tilt. If the fields are not part of the path, they can be captured at any time.
-
Originally posted by SuperDud
Yes, as long as you are going for a base capture and not just greifing. Most furballers can accept FHs being down for a base capture. It's when some people just knock them down to stop a fight that irks furballers. Unfortunatly a lot of base takers get thrown into the greifer catigory.
I'm a furballer, but I have a few observations:
1. It's called griefing. Grief meaning sorrow, unhappiness, misery etc.
2. I don't think we have many griefers in AH. The toolsheders you complain about probably just want to help you win the fight by bombing the enemy base. And when they succeed they are probably just as pissed as you are that you didn't capitalize on the opportunity and take the base they so skillfully suppressed for you.
3. I can understand that furballers don't have much interest in T3h W4R, but when it gets to the point that you're angry at people for playing the game as it was intended to be played it is time for you to go to the DA or H2H.
4. In fact I consider us furballers to be the griefers in AH. We are the ones who play the game contrary to the way it was designed to be played, causing grief to the players that are true to HTC's design and spirit of the game.
-
I like some aspect of focusing the fights and have a recommendation for improvement.
---- First, my reasons why I like focusing the fights. ----
Focusing the fights clearly makes it much easier to find well-attended fights, which I like.
Focusing the fights countracts the apparent human tendency to reinfoce lopsided fights. The way things were, it was often the case that many players would choose to be the 21st player in a 20-on-5 fight in preference to joining, say, a 10-on-10 fight; and most people eventually leave a 5-on-20 fight when they are on the side of 5. This is a feedback mechanism that works against balance. Focusing the fights tends to combine the fights together, which helps correct imbalances.
I enjoy well-attended, relatively balanced fights much more than lopsided ones or sparsely attended ones. For 1-on-1's, I can go to the dueling arena or hang out at the periphery of a bigger fight -- so I don't necessarily lose that aspect if fights are focused.
---- Second, my suggestion for improvement. ----
I do think that restricting the fight to be over only a couple spots on the map is more restriction than is optimal. While I do enjoy the air action, there is less variety in choice, and there are times when there will not be any CV's or ground vehicles that can be involved (when it's far inland or when there are no vehicle spawns from one base to the next capturable base).
Focusing the fights is not altogether artificial, though. In real WWII, commanders had to keep in mind supply lines. In fact, the issue of supply lines is another reason I like some restriction rather than a wide-open capture map.
What I suggest is to have more supply lines and to use those to determine which bases can next be taken -- like was involved in the Stalin's Fourth scenario. There, you typically took the next base on a supply route, but there were several supply lines. It looked like this:
(http://www.electraforge.com/brooke/flightsims/scenarios/stalins_fourth/pics/Tilts_total_map2small.jpg)
That's what I'd like to see. It focuses the fights more than the old way, but it is less restrictive than the current test way. It will focus the fights, but allow GV's and CV's almost always to have something to do, and it gives a little more choice. You'd have maybe 4 bases (per enemy) to choose to take next instead of just 1.
-
This is how Planetside does it.
-
just came from orange, the knight "hord" was "steamrolling" almost undefended rook bases, 4-5 in a row, i don't know where the rook furballers were but they were not defending bases. Maybe they were off somewhere playing 1 v 1. The rooks had more players than knights.
HT better find a new way to make people "fight".
44MAG
-
Originally posted by john9001
just came from orange, the knight "hord" was "steamrolling" almost undefended rook bases, 4-5 in a row, i don't know where the rook furballers were but they were not defending bases. Maybe they were off somewhere playing 1 v 1. The rooks had more players than knights.
HT better find a new way to make people "fight".
44MAG
The rooks were up at the bish fields in the northern part of the map, where they had local numerical superiority.
-
Originally posted by Viking
...snip...
4. In fact I consider us furballers to be the griefers in AH. We are the ones who play the game contrary to the way it was designed to be played, causing grief to the players that are true to HTC's design and spirit of the game.
Viking, you seem to be suffering from a common misconception -- that the game was "designed" for capture to be central.
Let me quote HiTech:
Originally posted by Hitech
...
quote from some other guy:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some play the game to fulfill the actual parameters that it was designed for, which is to overcome and conquer bases, and eventually the country, thus winning the war/game.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a false assumption.
The game was designed to have fun at different types of combat. Conquering bases is just a means to promote combat and hence fun. But by no means is it more or less justified than going out and just mixing it up.
HiTech
__________________
The point of the game is not to capture, which would put the Air to Air guys in the "wrong". It is to have fun FIGHTING -- in HiTech's words, "to promote combat." The "war" gives context for the fighting to take place, but the war isnt the main point of AH.
Combat is the point. And from the designer himself, then, capturing without combat is ...pointless.
Hitech quote came from THIS THREAD (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=193315)
-
Originally posted by john9001
just came from orange, the knight "hord" was "steamrolling" almost undefended rook bases, 4-5 in a row, i don't know where the rook furballers were but they were not defending bases. Maybe they were off somewhere playing 1 v 1. The rooks had more players than knights.
HT better find a new way to make people "fight".
44MAG
yup 4 different squads, plus some lone ranger guys all flying for 1 base. i created one of those "missionz" which took the base almost unoposed.
the missions have to be more robost though.
we had light P51s (omg a plane without ORD?!?!) fly in 5minutes earlier, these took the planes down low and then moved off to defend West of the field to stop planes coming from another base.
The P47s dropped FH, ack then town. A20s also hit town. some P47s headed off now they was light to help the Western cap, while others stayed at the base.
the fights can be more "realistic" now.... but it still doesnt stop hordeing, and its WAY to restrictive
-
I'm the CO of The Pigs On The Wing, alot of you new guys won't remember our glory days, but there were times when I led the Pigs to take 15-20 bases sometimes in a night. Ask Moil, he'll tell you what we were.
We sure as hell didn't avoid fighting to take those bases, lest you forget names like hylandr, citation and seraphim spanking your butts and all those Oinks on channel 1.
We took bases, and we were damned good at it.
Listen, I know this may arrive as some surprise to some of you guys, but perhaps you should know that angry little feeling you get when you see some red dots on your map racing along to your flank to capture a base where you aren't at, is the self same angry little feeling we get when we call on channel that we have deacked and busted the town at a base and need help with the cap and none of you guys show up.
For alot of us, alot more of us than you think, dogfighting is just one aspect of the game.
No we don't avoid dog fighting anymore than you guys do, it just isn't all we do, and it sure isn't what we want to be limited to.
Originally posted by Simaril
capturing without combat is ...pointless.
Capturing without combat is called "Lack of Defense".
Combat without Objectives and Goals is Pointless.
Furballing for Hours over the Same Blue Strings is More Pointless.
Requiring others to furball over the Same Blue Strings with you is Absurd.
-
Originally posted by Overlag
maybe you should?
if they had attacked Calais, they would have never got off the shingle. Why? because we told them we would be coming there, and they had the most defences there. Even going there TODAY you will see that it would have been an impossible task landing there.
they choose the weakest part, and also with operation bodyguard working at max.... it kept the Germans from reinforcing Normandy because they "knew" the main attack was coming at Calais or maybe Norway....
oh and you also have the US landing on some japanese held islands without any fights......hmmm
If you have a "battle" as I SAID, how can they land on them undefended?
Normandy WAS defended. Rommel did NOT listen to Hitler and increased coastal defenses in Normandy, contrary to Hitler's wishes. HITLER and his minions THOUGHT they would hit Calais.
Again, READ MORE with your buddy.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Like hell I don't.
Give it up Twitchy, their the only ones that fight
-
Greetings,
Ummm, back to a post a bit more on topic, played again tonight. The one base takable per side is a bit restrictive. (yes, I understand others can be taken, but they won't end the war) I am thinking the post earlier which determined multiple lines of supply (or axis of advance) is a solution. And they can probly be changed from like map to like map which would result in multiple grand tactical schemes for each map.
I would recommend that CVs have the ability to influence the fight in that they could change a field from 'untakable' to 'takable' - why do I get the feeling that I am inventing new words here?:O
Regards,
-
As a player who enjoys all aspects of AH (base defence, base capture, A2A)
it has been my experience that capture attempts are met with light, moderate, heavy and yes sometimes no resistance. To say that all who are against the
current test configuration always avoid fighting and don't enjoy fighting is
complete rubbish.
do bases sometimes get captured with no defence?........ yes.
So what? don't you think that most would eventually get bored
of "rolling undefended bases" and start seeking out a more challenging
engagement?
there are already 2 LW arenas so why not raise caps and keep 1 as is and the other with the "restricted" capture rules. put the same map in both and see where the players go.
-
WOW has to be one of the biggest Furballer VS Shedder threads evar!!!
Geeezz guys take it somewhere else if you please, some of us are trying to figure this out and make it better than what it is now. We know it has problems and I would assume HT and crew are trying to ajust things to take care of them...
I personally don't like the 1 base at a time thing as it just makes for to much of a stale mate. I was in Orange literally ALL day from around 7:00am to 10:30pm trying to get a handle on it and I and a few squad mates had some if limited success.
I think the biggest cause of the stale mate between Bish and rooks was like someone else meantioned here that we had to take 3 Vbases in a row and thus bish had to keep flying farther and farther out in an attempt to cover the Vbases while the rooks had air bases all around the farther out Vbases. This made it next to impossible to get to the next air base that would have been for all intents and purposes the next Bish strong hold on the line.
I do dissagree that the current large maps can't be made to work with some form of this system but better thought as to how the lines are laid out need to be given. Like in the above situation instead of the lower line hiting all the air bases and the uper line hitting all the Vbases I think it should have been more of a zig zag going from air base to Vbase and back in some fassion. this would have been more balanced for both sides.
(http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n259/Flaydone/zigzag.jpg)
I started messing around with ways that might have been better and this looked good except for the LOOOOOONG line leading to the zone base and no matter how I went at it I had a similar problem some where. Soo I started looking at other possibilities and this one didn't look all that bad.
(http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n259/Flaydone/zigzag2.jpg)
Though now that I look at it the line going from the air base in 7,17 to the Vbase in 7,18 should be moved aver to the bases 1 sector right, but you get the idea.
In this situation you would fight it out to a point where the front would devide into two fronts letting you keep a balance of air and Vbases on both fronts and making play a tad more interesting untill either the attacker pushed on and eliminated the remaining thread to the west or was pushed back. The line to the north leads to the zone base but I would think you might want to deal with the lower line first or it might become sowhat of a pain :D
Just had a thought.. HItech I know you wouldn't want the attackers to keep ram roding right on through the country and possibly hitting other forks in the line and thus further deviding the fronts so would it be bossible to require that in order for you to push on up the line you would need to keep the line connected to your home country? Ther for if the attacking country didn't finish dealing with the remains of the first line then there would be the possiblity of them being cut off on the northern line and any forward movement on the nothern line would stop untill the line was reastablished. On top of this the bases that were cut off could then be turned into capturable at any time bases as if they were cut off from a supply line and there for weakened?
I hope I am being clear enough :) But from what you said this morning in the arena this sounds real close to something that would meet your spesifications, correct?
Any way just more thoughts. I hope they are good ones.
-
Sorry if this was already mentioned, but... (edit - I see llama suggested some of this, but my idea is a bit different)
How about making the number of capturable fields a multiple of the number of people online? Then modify it based on if you're outnumbered or not. The numbers can be adjusted, but here's an example that shows the general idea:
Setup rules - Your country can capture one field per 20 people. For each 20% you're outnumbered, you are allowed to capture one additional field in the country that outnumbers you.
So, let's say rook has 50, bish has 70, knit has 100...
Rook is allowed to attack 2 fields per enemy country, plus they're outnumbered by bish by 40% and by knit by a whopping 100%, so in total, rook is allowed to attack 4 bish fields and 7 knit fields.
Bish can attack 3 fields per enemy country by default. They outnumber rook but are outnumbered by knit by about 40% so they can attack 3 rook fields and 5 knit fields.
Knit has 100 players but outnumbers everyone so they can attack 5 rook and 5 bish fields.
This way, you reduce the amount of fields an outnumbered country has to actively defend, an outnumbered country has more flexibility to make sneek attacks when outnumbered, but you're still requiring players to fight each other instead of mindless milkrunning and rear area porking.
Lastly, leave the strat targets legit targets so die-hard milkrunners still have something they can blow up.
-
I almost forgot...
Nilsen, you don't get a vote until you buy a joystick that actually WORKS.
:rofl
-
it's all good:noid
-
I still dont understand CV role in new system :huh
-
Id like to see more then one base capturable per front. Im not much a fan of flying in the horde - to many greens around are not my thing. With the new set up, fights are even more concentrated.... no "satellite attacks" on surrounding bases.
Other then that, i think the setup could work out well.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
....snip...
Capturing without combat is called "Lack of Defense".
Combat without Objectives and Goals is Pointless.
Furballing for Hours over the Same Blue Strings is More Pointless.
Requiring others to furball over the Same Blue Strings with you is Absurd.
Twitchy:
The "pointless" jab was an attempt to be cutesy, but when you're worked up I could see it sounding inflammatory. Sorry for that, never my intent.
You're worked up, and you're PO'd. Been there, done that. Slow down a sec, though.
I've never said that capturing bases or winning the war is bad. Far from it -- without that structure, this game would get old really fast. There is a reason we dont play in another game's dogfight arenas....
All the same, COMBAT -- not capture -- is the goal of the game. Just like I'd never want to tell you how to play, you shouldnt really expect to tell others how to play -- so you shouldnt get mad when nobody cares about taking the base the Pigs have prepped. And you shouldnt EXPECT others to care about defending a base.
HT is trying an experiment that's designed to get the guys who want to fight A2A into the same zones as the guys who want to capture. That's it, nothing more. It's not pro-furballer or anti-landgrabber.
-
Originally posted by Oleg
I still dont understand CV role in new system :huh
Support only.
Oleg
-
Originally posted by Schatzi
Id like to see more then one base capturable per front. Im not much a fan of flying in the horde - to many greens around are not my thing. With the new set up, fights are even more concentrated.... no "satellite attacks" on surrounding bases.
Other then that, i think the setup could work out well.
Ppl who just want to fight can do it between any 2 field, so i hope its not a big problem (i dont like to fly in overpopulated areas as well). The more ppl in arena, the more likely "side" fights will happens.
-
Originally posted by Niros
Support only.
Niros
Hope you are wrong, they deserve better role.
In overpopulated area CV will not survive any long, but in any other places it will useless.
-
Geeezz guys take it somewhere else if you please, some of us are trying to figure this out and make it better than what it is now. We know it has problems and I would assume HT and crew are trying to ajust things to take care of them...
Yes ... this should be the main objective of this thread ... not a Furball vs Strat thread nor a fractured History lesson.
How about the system select the first bases that are capturable and draw a blue line between them. When that base is captured, then blue lines are drawn to any base that is contained in a sector that abuts the sector of the field that you just captured and they become captureable.
In Flayed's last picture the attack route (single blue line) starts with going from 7,16 to 8,16.
Once the field in 8,16 is taken, blue lines are drawn to fields in 9,16 - 9,17 - 8,17 .
Now, if the the field in 8,17 is taken, then the blue lines are drawn to the fields in 9,16 - 8,18 - 7,17 - 7,18.
This would create a growing a "spider" web front. This still keeps the front focused to a "general" area of sectors and not just focused on a base to base front.
Wish I had a place to host a picture such as Flayed's to illustrate.
PS ... as far a CVs go ... once a CV enters a sector where there is a field, a blue line should be drawn from the CV to the field in that sector and that field becomes captureable ... and not show as a BIG icon. This way CVs can be used to create different fronts in a stealthy manner ... as it should be.
-
Originally posted by Simaril
The point of the game is not to capture, which would put the Air to Air guys in the "wrong". It is to have fun FIGHTING -- in HiTech's words, "to promote combat." The "war" gives context for the fighting to take place, but the war isnt the main point of AH.
"Capturing territory through the use of air, land and sea power is the objective of Aces High."
This is straight from the help file. HTC, should this be updated?
-
Originally posted by Donzo
"Capturing territory through the use of air, land and sea power is the objective of Aces High."
This is straight from the help file. HTC, should this be updated?
Let's be honest....as the pre-firefox spelling skill shows, as a linguist, HiTech is a very good programmer. :lol
He's clearly said, though, that the goal of the game is to have fun while fighting in the style you enjoy best. That means that if you like fighting for a base, or defending it -- GO FOR IT! If you enjoy fighting as a contest of skill -- GO FOR IT!
This test, he's clearly said, is an attempt to get both those styles fighting near the same bases. It ought to bring our activities together, not divide us.
The ONLY thing that's fundamentally lost is the ability to attack an undefended base. Is that REALLY what some are missing?
-
So, to slither, sneak, to seek covertly, is absolutely 100% not okay-- is what I gather.
Next week's issue: How to stop spying.
-
Yes slap I agree on the CV Idea they would be likea a wild card for each country. :) If you manage to take an NME field then you could start picking away at that spot on the line. Or if we had a branching system of lines and some were on the coast these would make for a bigger more tasty target. Just a bit more intelligent thinking then just send the CV to the closest base.
I also had another thought on the branching lines. I know some people like the longer NOE runs I know I do, so what hapenes if you made the bases that fork KEY bases that could be recaptured even after the NME has moved past them. They then would have to come back and take care of the problem befor moving on. This would make them extreamly important to your war effort and a major target for the defending country. Though this may open up to many fronts from what HT was saying.
HT really looking at it I think really to make use of CV's and to have a little more thought in game we will need a bit more than a 2 bases one each side to attack per front. not to meantion The other problem with people not even having to look at the rest of their country for possible sneak attacks or runs on the factories.
Oh and here you go slap try this. http://photobucket.com/
-
Originally posted by Oleg
Ppl who just want to fight can do it between any 2 field, so i hope its not a big problem (i dont like to fly in overpopulated areas as well). The more ppl in arena, the more likely "side" fights will happens.
People who want to fight can also do it in the DA, i know that.
"The more people in the Arena" is a bit of a problem for me, as im non-US.... The numbers are fairly low when im flying.
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
If you have a "battle" as I SAID, how can they land on them undefended?
Normandy WAS defended. Rommel did NOT listen to Hitler and increased coastal defenses in Normandy, contrary to Hitler's wishes. HITLER and his minions THOUGHT they would hit Calais.
Again, READ MORE with your buddy.
I'm not the one that said it was undefended.... it was under-defended maybe. But the point is, you choose the path of least resistance. Its the same for EVERY thing. Its human nature. If i was playing Red orchestra or DOD:S and came up to a heavily defended part of the map, id think about my options and maybe go around them or try and work out a way of gaining the advantage in the area by securing the flanks so we can attack from 2 sides. Some just run and gun into the area, die, and whine about campers, or in AH case, hordes/gangbangers.
if there's a hard base to capture, capturing a relatively under-defended base next to it would mean you had 2 bases close to it giving you a upper hand...... 2 bases vs 1 sort of thing.
again, its NOT the attackers fault no one defends.... With uber ack at bases, everyone expects the AI to defend for them.
I'm willing to bet if there was no ack at a field, more people would be up just defending there own airspace.
-
S!
Had a thought about the blue line system of base capture. At the beginning of the war, instead of one long line, make all or most front line bases capturable with blue lines leading from those bases to the next capturable base. On a map the size of the current test map you could have maybe 5-7 different blue lines. Imo this would open up more of the map and add more strategy. Say for instance, well, if we go this way we take a chance of leaving our left/right flank exposed……or we need to make it seem we are attacking over here just to throw off our main objective. Just a thought.
I love this game but I have issues with some of the changes. However, I’m not leaving. I have too much fun in here and have a lot of friends that I enjoy fighting with and against.
Don’t know where else I can get that for $15 a month.:aok
S! all
-
Originally posted by Simaril
The ONLY thing that's fundamentally lost is the ability to attack an undefended base. Is that REALLY what some are missing?
YES -
As I have written before, one very important part for my own gaming experience was not only the pure flying / fighting part itself. But also to scan the map, looking for clues were a possible threat is building up. Looking for hints on enemy NOE missions on remote fields. Examining flashing bases just to see it´s a surprise attack, resulting in being the being the lone defender at a V field doging bombs in my tiger while calling for help. Maybe eventually succumbing to superior numbers. Fierce small-scale fights with a handful participants about a remote field, while the majority of people did the great "A1-A19" clash...
I did very rarely participate in such raids on "undefended fields", but I had tons of fun trying to bust them. Most undefended fields did not say undefended that long.
It is simply not true that "The ONLY thing that's fundamentally lost is the ability to attack an undefended base"
-
exactly, its way to limited at the mo... I still think the "blueline" should be linked to the zone in some way.... if the strat is down, more bases are take-able. if its at 100% only 1 or 2 can be taken.
that way deep penertration raids of groups of buffs will become more "standard" as will the defence missions against them. since a whole country is limited to 2 bases, there should be more "spare" to take part in this part of the game.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
I'm the CO of The Pigs On The Wing, alot of you new guys won't remember our glory days, but there were times when I led the Pigs to take 15-20 bases sometimes in a night. Ask Moil, he'll tell you what we were.
We sure as hell didn't avoid fighting to take those bases, lest you forget names like hylandr, citation and seraphim spanking your butts and all those Oinks on channel 1.
We took bases, and we were damned good at it.
Listen, I know this may arrive as some surprise to some of you guys, but perhaps you should know that angry little feeling you get when you see some red dots on your map racing along to your flank to capture a base where you aren't at, is the self same angry little feeling we get when we call on channel that we have deacked and busted the town at a base and need help with the cap and none of you guys show up.
For alot of us, alot more of us than you think, dogfighting is just one aspect of the game.
No we don't avoid dog fighting anymore than you guys do, it just isn't all we do, and it sure isn't what we want to be limited to.
Capturing without combat is called "Lack of Defense".
Combat without Objectives and Goals is Pointless.
Furballing for Hours over the Same Blue Strings is More Pointless.
Requiring others to furball over the Same Blue Strings with you is Absurd.
Tried it your way last night Twitchy. That is, working on the premise it's the other guys fault it's not defended.
Went into MW for a change. Went low numbers country as I usually do. Checked the map and noticed a dar bar way away from the main fighting and one of our bases flashing. Up I went grabbing like mad in my 38G.
They of course were already at alt so getting to them with any kind of equal alt wasn't going to happen. No way I can stop the initial hitting of the field. There are 4 of them and 1 of me. They are of course in 190s, Tiffie and an LA5. They pass right by me to get all the acks down. and the VH. I get a couple before they get me. Tough to win a 4 on 1 consistantly in particular when they are all running in for the HO's with their cannons.
But the others are RTB so i up again as more are inbound. I think in the end it was me against 5-6 guys. It's a fairly steady stream though. This time there are Lancs included. I get credit for 4 this flight although two are proxies cause they augered on their dive bombing runs. I end up getting ganged again. By this time the VH is down, acks are down and the vulch pattern is there. I try and up a couple times as they are working the town and the next nearest field is too far away so any hope I have of holding it is slim. Something about getting vulched kinda takes the fun out of things, but Ive got your arguement in the back of my mind so I try again and get vulched one more time. Then the FH's go down. All this time my countrymen are running their mishuns to take other fields elsewhere so there is no other help. (MW numbers being what they are)
I gave it my best shot, but numbers what they were, it was inevitable that I would have little chance.
Your arguement would be that it's my teams fault for not defending. With numbers as they were and often are in the arenas, how would you suggest we handle it?
To me it's an example of why HTC is trying to come up with a solution to give everyone a chance to have fun, cause I'll tell ya, trying to defend when you have no chance is about as much fun as root canal. And while it was 5-6 v 1 in MW, imagine with LW numbers that being 25-5 or something similar. Still not going to be much fun for the guys trying to defend. Since it's a game, the ' its war' argument doesn't work for me.
At least in this set up the forces have some chance and parity where the defenders can focus their efforts on a certain front and give it some purpose to going up to defend.
Does it need tweaking. Clearly folks are seeing potential ways to do this.
But it's still better then the status quo.
-
Originally posted by Simaril
Twitchy:
The "pointless" jab was an attempt to be cutesy, but when you're worked up I could see it sounding inflammatory. Sorry for that, never my intent.
You're worked up, and you're PO'd. Been there, done that. Slow down a sec, though.
I've never said that capturing bases or winning the war is bad. Far from it -- without that structure, this game would get old really fast. There is a reason we dont play in another game's dogfight arenas....
All the same, COMBAT -- not capture -- is the goal of the game. Just like I'd never want to tell you how to play, you shouldnt really expect to tell others how to play -- so you shouldnt get mad when nobody cares about taking the base the Pigs have prepped. And you shouldnt EXPECT others to care about defending a base.
HT is trying an experiment that's designed to get the guys who want to fight A2A into the same zones as the guys who want to capture. That's it, nothing more. It's not pro-furballer or anti-landgrabber.
==============
I think this was well said. Having A2A mixed up with the gv's and the bombers makes for a lot of fun targets and challenging flying...
For example: I'm too far from the hoard to engage in a dogfight, but look, there's a formation of bombers coming in - I'll get a fight anyway.
I just think they need to open it up somehow to more than one front per country intersection...just for a change of pace...I get shot down a lot (newb!), but sometimes I'd like to get shot down by somebody different! :)
Seriously, though, it can be tough to pick out the other newbs out there (that I can take out) when there is only one place to fight, loaded with the top gunners.
Having a lot of fun, nonetheless...
-
Originally posted by Lusche
YES -
As I have written before, one very important part for my own gaming experience was not only the pure flying / fighting part itself. But also to scan the map, looking for clues were a possible threat is building up. Looking for hints on enemy NOE missions on remote fields. Examining flashing bases just to see it´s a surprise attack, resulting in being the being the lone defender at a V field doging bombs in my tiger while calling for help. Maybe eventually succumbing to superior numbers. Fierce small-scale fights with a handful participants about a remote field, while the majority of people did the great "A1-A19" clash...
I did very rarely participate in such raids on "undefended fields", but I had tons of fun trying to bust them. Most undefended fields did not say undefended that long.
It is simply not true that "The ONLY thing that's fundamentally lost is the ability to attack an undefended base"
well said lusche!!!!! there IS alot more to it!!
surprise attacks (like pearl harbor) lead to more fights ,rather than everyone banging heads over the same couple of bases all day.
-
Originally posted by Oleg
Niros
Hope you are wrong, they deserve better role.
In overpopulated area CV will not survive any long, but in any other places it will useless.
=====================
I can see a HUGE role for the CV's, especially in this new capture scenario. I flew a bunch the last couple of nights (in trouble for it too!) in LW Orange and there were at least two times that the CV stood out.
1. We (rook) were fighting to capture one base, and the FH's were down, but the CV was right in there with us so we could take off from there and keep fighting. I don't remember the outcome, but the presence of the CV was absolutely necessary!
2. I was on last night, and we were getting steam-rolled by the knts down around 185. There were times the bases were far from where we were taking off, but were near the water, and then there was a jump across the water that took 5-10 minutes to fly across later on. The closest CV (171)was WAY down below and nowhere near the fight. Had it been up there, we COULD have had a shot at keeping them on their own side of the water...but couldn't. It made a difference by NOT being there.
As for the CV in the "big picture" of the game and all of that, I don't know...but as for the individual fighting areas and where the confrontations are, I thnk they have a BIG role.
-
Originally posted by DadRabit
S!
Had a thought about the blue line system of base capture. At the beginning of the war, instead of one long line, make all or most front line bases capturable with blue lines leading from those bases to the next capturable base. On a map the size of the current test map you could have maybe 5-7 different blue lines. Imo this would open up more of the map and add more strategy. Say for instance, well, if we go this way we take a chance of leaving our left/right flank exposed……or we need to make it seem we are attacking over here just to throw off our main objective. Just a thought.
I love this game but I have issues with some of the changes. However, I’m not leaving. I have too much fun in here and have a lot of friends that I enjoy fighting with and against.
Don’t know where else I can get that for $15 a month.:aok
S! all
Yes this is an exelent idea. Would make a country look around their land a bit more and maybe try to intersept my bombers coming in for the factories. :)
-
Originally posted by 1Boner
well said lusche!!!!! there IS alot more to it!!
surprise attacks (like pearl harbor) lead to more fights ,rather than everyone banging heads over the same couple of bases all day.
============
I agree. As a newb, I like to look around and try new things. The pure fun of flying and fighting and trying to bust that PT boat and kill the C47 before it drops the troops makes for a lot of fun. It can get old being cannon fodder for the butt-busters out there! (Although I never do run from one!) ;)
-
I've been reading this "the only thing you lose is the ability to take an undefended base" thing for two days here. Let me recount last night's experience in the LW Blue arena.
I'm a Bish, as I've always been. We're down to 15 fields spread across the map and the Knights have taken the base on our furthest point from us (a sneak attack). For a while we seem to be trying to take it back but after a few missions I find myself alone in my Spit with 4 Knights. I get 2 before some friendlies arrive and I fly home for fuel. Now I see our port flashing so I up an Ostie to try to hold onto it. It's a Rook attack. Three fighters. I get all three but more follow like a flood gate opening. Finally they get me and we end up losing the base. Now I look at the map and see dar bar in our 163 base sector. I go up and up a 163. They aren't going for the 163 base, just some factories. Whew! I end up flying 3 163 missions landing 7 kills on guys going for factories, the 163 base (yes, someone was going to vulch it in a 190) and our HQ. Finally, time for bed. Good Night (both literally and figuratively).
I don't see how that kind of experience can happen under this new system. The variables simply can't exist when there are only 2-3 bases that you can capture, or that can be captured. Kiss those 163 missions goodby. Forget about a lone defensive stand at a vehicle base or port.
This isn't just about attacking undefended bases but I will add that there is value in that as well. Remember being a newbie? Sometimes those undefended bases are just what you need to hone some of your skills (bombing, dive bombing, straffing, etc.)
I'm sure someone will find a way to attack me for writing this and for my opinion and because I chose to fly good planes for a night while I could because over the past two days reading these boards that seems to be the norm. I don't care. I do care about what direction this game will take in the future though.
-
well said lusche!!!!! there IS alot more to it!!
surprise attacks (like pearl harbor) lead to more fights ,rather than everyone banging heads over the same couple of bases all day.
What is the "a lot more to it." I think Guppy summed it up above. You guys want to be able to hit barely defended or undefended bases so 4 of you can fight one guy. That is about all I can read from this thread that there is to it.
surprise attacks like pearl harbor had people waiting to defend. As Guppy showed with concrete examples there is no one waiting to defend bases that can't be defended due to low numbers.
You guys make it sound like people are manning ready rooms just waiting for a base to flash and if they don't up to defend then too bad. This is so far from the case.
I never thought I would see the day where people were mad that they had to fight in combat sim.
What you guys want is analogous to playing capture the flag with only one team. Yay, we ran up and captured the flag with no one there, Hi Five everyone. :rolleyes:
-
This isn't just about attacking undefended bases but I will add that there is value in that as well. Remember being a newbie? Sometimes those undefended bases are just what you need to hone some of your skills (bombing, dive bombing, straffing, etc.)
So if I reply to you am I attacking you, sheesh guys leave the victim stuff at home.
If you want to hone some of your skills (bombing, dive bombing, straffing, etc.) that is why there is a TA and offline. Why do you need to do it in Arenas where the action is. If you don't want to be bothered those are the places to go.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
What is the "a lot more to it." (...)
What you guys want is analogous to playing capture the flag with only one team. Yay, we ran up and captured the flag with no one there, Hi Five everyone. :rolleyes:
Honestly, I think you don´t even read my message...
-
Originally posted by Quah!
What is the a lot more to it. I think Guppy summed it up above. You guys want to be able to hit barely defended or undefended bases so 4 of you can fight one guy. That is about all I can read from this thread that there is to it.
Suprise attacks like pearl harbor had people waiting to defend. As Guppy showed with concreate examples there is no one waiting to defend bases that can't be defended due to low numbers.
You guys make it sound like people are manning ready rooms just waiting for a base to flash and if they don't up to defend then too bad. This is so far from the case.
I never thought I would see the day where people were mad that they had to fight in combat sim.
What you guys want is analogus to playing capture the flag with only one team. Yay, we ran up and captured the flag with no one there, Hi Five everyone. :rolleyes:
lmfao!!!! you sound like a broken record!! anything else to biotch about except taking undefended bases?? so what if some people like doing that? for most there is a strategy to what they are doing. we all get the point that you don,t "get it" and you think its stupid. we also don,t care what you think. go play the up and re-up furball game. i personally don,t care how you play, it doesn,t affect me. and i,m sure the way other people play doesn,t affect your style of play either.
if you don,t care about "winning the war" then how does how other people play affect you?
wah wah wah undefended bases !!! wah wah wah undefended bases!!
hi-tech , those guys are taking undefended bases!!! wahhhh
you have no idea, why i play like i do. but you think you know.
i have no idea why you play like you do.
i don,t care why
and i won,t biotch about it either
frickin pathetic!!
your playground buddy,
Boner
public relations officer for Boner
-
Boner, answer your own question.
How does your style of play affect how other players play the game?
I understand your goal is to win the reset. Go for it. I don't mind.
But does your style of play affect others who don't see winning the reset as fast as possible the same way as you?
Twitchy in one of his posts expressed how he see's 'furballers' impacting on his way of playing. He sees that they don't contribute to 'winning the war'.
How does your 'winning the war' mindset impact on those who don't play that way?
-
Honestly, I think you don´t even read my message...
I read it, I just don't agree with it. So you scan the map for flashes... yadda, yadda, yadda.
Lets face it, it's the hordes that want to pork and capture undefended bases all night long that are the reason for this test change. As many have stated in this thread given a choice most will take the path of least resistance, thank god HT wants this game to be about fighting each other and not people running away from each other.
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
Geeezz guys take it somewhere else if you please, some of us are trying to figure this out and make it better than what it is now. We know it has problems and I would assume HT and crew are trying to ajust things to take care of them...
Yes ... this should be the main objective of this thread ... not a Furball vs Strat thread nor a fractured History lesson.
How about the system select the first bases that are capturable and draw a blue line between them. When that base is captured, then blue lines are drawn to any base that is contained in a sector that abuts the sector of the field that you just captured and they become captureable.
In Flayed's last picture the attack route (single blue line) starts with going from 7,16 to 8,16.
Once the field in 8,16 is taken, blue lines are drawn to fields in 9,16 - 9,17 - 8,17 .
Now, if the the field in 8,17 is taken, then the blue lines are drawn to the fields in 9,16 - 8,18 - 7,17 - 7,18.
This would create a growing a "spider" web front. This still keeps the front focused to a "general" area of sectors and not just focused on a base to base front.
Wish I had a place to host a picture such as Flayed's to illustrate.
PS ... as far a CVs go ... once a CV enters a sector where there is a field, a blue line should be drawn from the CV to the field in that sector and that field becomes captureable ... and not show as a BIG icon. This way CVs can be used to create different fronts in a stealthy manner ... as it should be.
========
Slap,
This is very much what I had in mind also in my earlier post. The winning of a base makes access to the "next" bases possible. I also like the idea of adding in the supply-line factor as others are describing. Add your idea of the CV's being able to initiate a capture and we have a well- structured, but not restrictive, mode for overall game play, but focusing the efforts into somewhat predictable areas.
As you think this mode of play through toward the end (when the ROOKS are dominating the whole map, that is) ;) it would seem that the forces would be getting spread thin and each successive capture would be harder and harder, since defending previously-won territory would require more and more forces.
Makes me want to go jump in a Spit and fly...but I don't think my boss would appreciate it.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Went into MW for a change.
(much snippage)
I read your story Dan, and while I would say that is largely typical there's another way I've seen that play out that is even more typical in many respects...
When you find a group of guys trying to capture an undefended base and lift to defend with more than one defender (yet still outnumber 2:1 or worse (I have seen a mission with 20 guys in it give up when 3 defenders appear) the attackers will disperse and pop up elsewhere. So you follow them to their new target only to find that attack evaporate and pop up again in a place where there are no freindlies. That is where the whack-a-mole comparisons come from.
-
It all started with the pizza map.
-
lmfao!!!! you sound like a broken record!! anything else to biotch about except taking undefended bases?? so what if some people like doing that? for most there is a strategy to what they are doing. we all get the point that you don,t "get it" and you think its stupid. we also don,t care what you think. go play the up and re-up furball game. i personally don,t care how you play, it doesn,t affect me. and i,m sure the way other people play doesn,t affect your style of play either.
if you don,t care about "winning the war" then how does how other people play affect you?
wah wah wah undefended bases !!! wah wah wah undefended bases!!
hi-tech , those guys are taking undefended bases!!! wahhhh
you have no idea, why i play like i do. but you think you know.
i have no idea why you play like you do.
i don,t care why
and i won,t biotch about it either
frickin pathetic!!
your playground buddy,
Boner
Are you done with your little melt down Boneboy??
Taking undefended bases is what turned the old MA in to what some have called a slum. If you think people finding every way in which to avert conflict in a combat game are good for the game then you are more of a lost cause then most.
Your the one that is throwing the furballer name calling around. Either get back on topic and grow up or go pout in the corner. Wetting your pants and trying to insult me because you don't like my opinion only makes you look like a child. :aok
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
I gave it my best shot, but numbers what they were, it was inevitable that I would have little chance.
Heh. My friend.....that is the strategy of WAR!
You didn't enjoy getting ganged and vulched? Well, fine, go play your silly and boring Quake game in the DA. True war-winners love getting ganged and vulched while they defend their bases and their own horde works its clever magic over on the other side of the map. All part of grand strategy, don't you know, especially if you can sneak out of the hanger onto the runway just as the vulchers arrive. They'll never expect it. Honest.
At least, I have to believe that's so, based on what I'm reading here.
- oldman (your experience mirrors most of my admittedly few MA base defense experiences, BTW.)
-
Originally posted by Simaril
Let's be honest....as the pre-firefox spelling skill shows, as a linguist, HiTech is a very good programmer. :lol
He's clearly said, though, that the goal of the game is to have fun while fighting in the style you enjoy best. That means that if you like fighting for a base, or defending it -- GO FOR IT! If you enjoy fighting as a contest of skill -- GO FOR IT!
This test, he's clearly said, is an attempt to get both those styles fighting near the same bases. It ought to bring our activities together, not divide us.
The ONLY thing that's fundamentally lost is the ability to attack an undefended base. Is that REALLY what some are missing?
This is what you posted:
"The point of the game is not to capture"
This is what I responded:
Originally posted by Donzo
"Capturing territory through the use of air, land and sea power is the objective of Aces High."
This is straight from the help file. HTC, should this be updated?
So what, excatly, does your last response have to do with anything said?
You clearly stated that the point of the game is not to capture.
I simply pointed out that from a newcomer's point of view (provided they actually read the help files) the game is about capturing territory as the help file states.
So your statement is actually incorrect.
I was simply asking if this in fact needed to be changed as to not mislead those coming onboard.
In other words I did not ask for you interpretation of what HTC is trying to do.
-
Even if the sole point of the game were to be about taking bases, it would still be about taking defended bases and that is what HTC is after with this change, thank God!
-
Originally posted by Quah!
If you think people finding every way in which to avert conflict in a combat game are good for the game then you are more of a lost cause then most.
So the solution to this problem is to spoon feed those who do not avert conflict?
Like I said in the past...let's just get rid of all the bases. Click FLY and your are "birthed" into the air at 2000 ft going 250 kts. To hell with landing or taking off (that crap takes too long), just click and engage in a fight. That's what you're looking for isn't it?
-
Don't be so coy Donzo. You are not getting spoon fed. Even without the change most people just followed the horde around, the only thing that has changed is the horde cant run from the defenders as easily.
It really hasn't changed game play much at all in the grand scheme of things. Is it really just a control issue for you??
And if you want the conflict then again how is this a bad thing? It guarantees more conflict. If you really do want it than you should be happy.
-
how do you make people defend a base? as i said in a early post, last night in LW orange we knights were rolling up rook bases that were lightly defended if at all, and the rooks had more players on line than the knights, yet they did not defend the bases. And with the "blue line" they had to know where we would attack.
so, do you want us to wait for a "defense" before we attack? Can they stop us from attacking by not defending?
"hey, you can't attack that base, it's not defended"
:rofl
and donzo has the right idea, a "fighter town arena, air launch at 5000 ft unlimited ammo and fuel, launch right into the fight. lots of air to air.
44MAG
-
Originally posted by Donzo
So the solution to this problem is to spoon feed those who do not avert conflict?
Like I said in the past...let's just get rid of all the bases. Click FLY and your are "birthed" into the air at 2000 ft going 250 kts. To hell with landing or taking off (that crap takes too long), just click and engage in a fight. That's what you're looking for isn't it?
I think what many folks want is an excuse to fly combat whether it be escorting bombers, ground attack or flying aircover for the jabos. To go with that, they want some understanding that there will be opposition at the target so they can fight. If they are a part of a base capture under those conditions, so be it. They don't mind. Is winning the war their overriding goal in the game? Nope.
There also appears to be group that wants to take the path of least resistance to win the reset. They tend to take comfort in flying with the largest group in the high number country as it makes the goal of winning the reset easier.
To them, AH is all about conquest, gameplay be damned. If you can find a way to win the war, it doesn't matter if the other guy is enjoying himself or not.
Being put in a position where they have to fight is galling to them as they want the option not to fight as well. This is hidden under the guise of 'strategy'. They want to be able to 'fake everyone out' by attacking where no one is. Again because the goal is to win the war.
This is confusing to the other group of players as they don't get why anyone would pay to fly against other people only to avoid them.
And since no one is really dying and planes are free, why wouldn't they want to test their skills against other players?
-
how do you make people defend a base? as i said in a early post, last night in LW orange we knights were rolling up rook bases that were lightly defended if at all, and the rooks had more players on line than the knights, yet they did not defend the bases. And with the "blue line" they had to know where we would attack.
so, do you want us to wait for a "defense" before we attack? Can they stop us from attacking by not defending?
"hey, you can't attack that base, it's not defended"
So your game hasn't changed then, so why all the fuss??
For the people that want to fight and know there will be one when they get there the change is good. Again so why all the fuss?
Personally with this change I think there should only be two sides, then you wouldn't have any path of least resistance, but I guess HT is trying to consider you guys as well.
-
Originally posted by Donzo
...snip...
In other words I did not ask for you interpretation of what HTC is trying to do.
Sheesh you guys are testy lately.
In most settings, our exchange -- if you can call it that -- would be considered a "conversation." You know, guys chatting across a table, downing a cold one...
Do you really think that what I wrote was an argument, or an attack, or arrogant posturing? If it came across that way, I can only apologise...but having reread the posts (and rereading them again thanks to your considerate quoting and analysis :lol ) I gotta say I just dont see how you'd get that.
Methinks some of us really need a few deep cleansing breaths!
-
Originally posted by Quah!
Are you done with your little melt down Boneboy??
Taking undefended bases is what turned the old MA in to what some have called a slum. If you think people finding every way in which to avert conflict in a combat game are good for the game then you are more of a lost cause then most.
Your the one that is throwing the furballer name calling around. Either get back on topic and grow up or go pout in the corner. Wetting your pants and trying to insult me because you don't like my opinion only makes you look like a child. :aok
thought the old ma was a slum because of too many players. that supposedly was the reason for the split arenas.
finding every way to avert conflict?:huh
and yes , i am a lost cause
and i like wetting my pants (its warm and squishy).
throwing the furballer name around!!!:rofl
insult you? no need.
i just think this new test map needs alot of serious re-working.
i realize that its just a test.
but i also think that it is being implemented because of the whining of the vocal minority:noid
i have never heard anyone outside of these bbs mention the HUGE disruption to the game that sneaking bases causes.
if there are other reasons -fine-
but i,m sick of hearing that sneaking bases is the reason for this abomination!
very wetly yours,
Boner
public relations officer for Boner
-
Originally posted by 1Boner
but i also think that it is being implemented because of the whining of the vocal minority:noid
i have never heard anyone outside of these bbs mention the HUGE disruption to the game that sneaking bases causes.
public relations officer for Boner
LOL which vocal minority would it be Boner? Yours or mine? :)
Which of us represents the majority in your mind? :)
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
LOL which vocal minority would it be Boner? Yours or mine? :)
Which of us represents the majority in your mind? :)
lmfao!! probably both!! we should all probably just stfu and leave well enough alone.
-
Originally posted by john9001
how do you make people defend a base? as i said in a early post, last night in LW orange we knights were rolling up rook bases that were lightly defended if at all, and the rooks had more players on line than the knights, yet they did not defend the bases. And with the "blue line" they had to know where we would attack.
so, do you want us to wait for a "defense" before we attack? Can they stop us from attacking by not defending?
"hey, you can't attack that base, it's not defended"
:rofl
and donzo has the right idea, a "fighter town arena, air launch at 5000 ft unlimited ammo and fuel, launch right into the fight. lots of air to air.
44MAG
===========
We WERE defending the bases (rooks) last night - what, you didn't notice us?:confused:
It's just that the rest of our guys were up there steam-rolling the bishops like you were steaming us! (maybe better?):lol
It was a lot of fun, actually...lots of fighting.
And just to address the Donzo comment you agreed with - I thought that's what goes on in the 8v8 areas. I flew in there before trying out the MA's...which I like a lot better.
-
you did not read what i said, when we got there , there was no fight, and we could not go anywhere else because of the BLUELINE, we could not attack any other bases. bomb capture reload, bomb capture reload. your complaint was attacks on undefended bases, we are now forced to attack undefended bases.
the law of unintended consequences.
i'm done with this thread.
44MAG
PS, was addressed to quah, not mvizzasr. you rooks did put up a good defense at first when you were still in our territory( i died many times) but then it faded away. :D
-
All i can say is i like the new system and here is why.
If I feel like defending. I can up a 262 and know I'll see higher alt buffs inbound at some point. No chasing dots around map .
Or to defend against high alt jabos just up a Mk XIV they have to head this way at some point. I also have to think about not getting dragged down by light fighters.
If i feel like attacking. Hell now, I better think about how i want to do it. No more ultra simplistic grab, dive , drop and fight . I better send a few friends out in front to drag the high defenders down before I make my run. This is the same for when i am in buffs ( well all but the dive part).
If am the one thats suppose to be dragging down the defenders . I better do my job or my buffs and jabos wont get through.
This has all added to the game .
IMHO If you don't like what i have just described. You don't like the intended spirit of the game. Interaction among players not inanimate objects.
My 2 cents.
Bronk
-
you did not read what i said, when we got there , there was no fight, and we could not go anywhere else because of the BLUELINE, we could not attack any other bases. bomb capture reload, bomb capture reload. your complaint was attacks on undefended bases, we are now forced to attack undefended bases.
I read what you wrote, twice now, my reply still stands, why all the fuss if you got to do what you always do.
How is this any different?? Why would you need to attack a different base, what was wrong with the one you had to attack that you would need to go somewhere else. It seems a lot of you guys are made because you dont have total control any more.
The game is still the same. At least now if people wanted to defend they know you would be there and that you couldn't run to another base as soon as they showed up to defend.
-
One thing I would like to see added though.
The low numbers side could capture any enemy base in there home territory.
This would require the high numbers side to reacquire that base before advancing.
Bronk
edit: was suppose to be reacquire .
-
oops.
-
Originally posted by 1Boner
lmfao!!!! you sound like a broken record!! anything else to biotch about except taking undefended bases?? so what if some people like doing that? for most there is a strategy to what they are doing. we all get the point that you don,t "get it" and you think its stupid. we also don,t care what you think. go play the up and re-up furball game. i personally don,t care how you play, it doesn,t affect me. and i,m sure the way other people play doesn,t affect your style of play either.
if you don,t care about "winning the war" then how does how other people play affect you?
wah wah wah undefended bases !!! wah wah wah undefended bases!!
hi-tech , those guys are taking undefended bases!!! wahhhh
you have no idea, why i play like i do. but you think you know.
i have no idea why you play like you do.
i don,t care why
and i won,t biotch about it either
frickin pathetic!!
your playground buddy, Boner
If you were trying to "prove a point" to the "furballers"(even though we don't just furball, we just like to FIGHT) you failed. You only PROVED our point more and now I understand what HiTech meant about "Vocal Minority". He wasn't talking about us, but about you and your cohorts who are afraid to FIGHT.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
One thing I would like to see added though.
The low numbers side could capture any enemy base in there home territory.
This would require the high numbers side to require that base before advancing.
Bronk
Kinda like that idea. All original home territory bases should be capturable.
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
If you were trying to "prove a point" to the "furballers"(even though we don't just furball, we just like to FIGHT) you failed. You only PROVED our point more and now I understand what HiTech meant about "Vocal Minority". He wasn't talking about us, but about you and your cohorts who are afraid to FIGHT.
afraid to fight?
nope! wrong again einstein!! i love air to air fighting!!
just gets boring after about an hour.
other things to do in this game.
don,t just furball? just like to fight?:huh
understand hi tech? you understand nothing.
afraid to fight!!! thats priceless!!!
your fraidy cat pal,
Boner
public relations officer for Boner
-
Originally posted by Bronk
One thing I would like to see added though.
The low numbers side could capture any enemy base in there home territory.
This would require the high numbers side to require that base before advancing.
Bronk
Great idea.
-
Originally posted by Simaril
Great idea.
did you mean re-aquire?-----if so--i think that would be a step in the right direction. it would be a step up from the existing test map.
good idea!!
-
Originally posted by 1Boner
did you mean re-aquire?-----if so--i think that would be a step in the right direction. it would be a step up from the existing test map.
good idea!!
I fixed it.
Its reaCquire and was thinking faster than i can type .
Again :p :D
Bronk
-
If you read my post of earlier today I don't think there is a solution following the current course even if you make all original bases re-capturable. One of the things I like to do in the game, among others, is to defend vehicle bases and ports by myself in an Ostie. I always know someone will come along thinking it's going to be an easy target and I've frustrated a lot of players and scored a lot of kills by just being there and had great fun doing it. That scenario among others will be out the window with this solution.
As I understand it, the reaon this came about is that people wanted the large maps back (myself included), but there was some fear that people wouldn't actually fight each other if they got so spread out. How about this as a solution: Reduce the size of the large maps to something bigger than the small ones but smaller than they are now? Enough room to spread out away from the furballs a little if you want to but not so large as to cause huge areas with no one in them.
I rarely (but sometimes do) follow the large packs, either in attack or defense. Part of the reason is that I have an older computer and I sometimes experience frame rate drops when around too many others. I know I need a new machine but I just can't afford it at the moment. I still want to fight, just not in a furball (although I sometimes join furballs too) where my frames drop to 5-10.
There has to be a solution that maintains the diversity available within the game as it currently exists.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
I read what you wrote, twice now, my reply still stands, why all the fuss if you got to do what you always do.
How is this any different?? Why would you need to attack a different base, what was wrong with the one you had to attack that you would need to go somewhere else. It seems a lot of you guys are made because you dont have total control any more.
The game is still the same. At least now if people wanted to defend they know you would be there and that you couldn't run to another base as soon as they showed up to defend.
If youve have two braincells you could tell if a base as under attack... red dots and read bars do stand out... so does red falshing,
its a matter of keeping an eye of the whole game, rather than one sector.
Also how can you say the game is still the same?,
It is for you, excpet theres a higher grid player number concentration, wich for you is great...
But it has changed hugely for the other types of players. being told waht to take rather than choosing is a pretty big change isn't it,
so is having 4 arenas instead of one, isn't it?
-
evidence to suggest stale mate.
Base numbers have ended up in a diff of 1 at the end of two days,
P.S. how long is this test lasting for?
and shouldnt there be a poll to record oppinions accurately?
-
But it has changed hugely for the other types of players. being told waht to take rather than choosing is a pretty big change isn't it,
so is having 4 arenas instead of one, isn't it?
The way I see it, it was always follow the leader. Where ever the main group went so did the rest of you. So what is the difference, now you have a little help in deciding where to go next.
Like I said au nauseum, but gets lost on you guys is,
The game is very much still the same. At least now if people wanted to defend they know you would be there and that you couldn't run to another base as soon as they showed up to defend.
John pointed this out quite clearly in his posts above.:aok
-
evidence to suggest stale mate.
Base numbers have ended up in a diff of 1 at the end of two days,
P.S. how long is this test lasting for?
and shouldnt there be a poll to record oppinions accurately?
Why does it matter when there is an arena that is completely the same without the change, if you hate it that much you can go there, no?
Or are you saying that the majority of the player base is in there, maybe because they like it, and you have to be where the numbers are???
It's just like last night, there were a handful of people in LWO crying about the change. My question was if they didnt like it go to the other LW arena.
I wish HT would do this in the EW, MW arenas. This is where people avoiding each other gets real bad, due to low numbers and depending on if the avoidance players are in there en mass.
-
Originally posted by Laurie
evidence to suggest stale mate.
Base numbers have ended up in a diff of 1 at the end of two days,
P.S. how long is this test lasting for?
and shouldnt there be a poll to record oppinions accurately?
Yup ... thats a stalemate.
I guess one side isn't any smarted than the other which usually results in a stalemate.
If you think this stalemate proves anything ... your wrong.
HTC doesn't do polls ... this thread and those who constructively add to it with ideas and suggestions is what HT listens to ... I think he flys right by the :cry
-
Originally posted by soupcan
As a player who enjoys all aspects of AH (base defence, base capture, A2A)
it has been my experience that capture attempts are met with light, moderate, heavy and yes sometimes no resistance. To say that all who are against the
current test configuration always avoid fighting and don't enjoy fighting is
complete rubbish.
do bases sometimes get captured with no defence?........ yes.
So what? don't you think that most would eventually get bored
of "rolling undefended bases" and start seeking out a more challenging
engagement?
there are already 2 LW arenas so why not raise caps and keep 1 as is and the other with the "restricted" capture rules. put the same map in both and see where the players go.
my thoughts exaclty,
have 'late war trail', cap 400(can rise if gets full)
and 'late war norm' 'Ditto'
-
Originally posted by Quah!
Why does it matter when there is an arena that is completely the same without the change, if you hate it that much you can go there, no?
Or are you saying that the majority of the player base is in there, maybe because they like it, and you have to be where the numbers are???
It's just like last night, there were a handful of people in LWO crying about the change. My question was if they didnt like it go to the other LW arena.
I wish HT would do this in the EW, MW arenas. This is where people avoiding each other gets real bad, due to low numbers and depending on if the avoidance players are in there en mass.
Blue was, full had no CHOICE.
lift arena caps and problem solved, its not in my power to do so though:)
-
do bases sometimes get captured with no defence?........ yes.
So what? don't you think that most would eventually get bored
of "rolling undefended bases" and start seeking out a more challenging
engagement?
Problem is, they don't get bored, it's done every night and the main reason HT is testing this new change. :aok
Blue was, full had no CHOICE.
Fair enough, but when I was on Blue was always half of Orange and I had to wait a few times for caps to change to get in Orange.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
Why does it matter when there is an arena that is completely the same without the change, if you hate it that much you can go there, no?
Not exactly. The arenas are limited as to the number of players that can get in, thus forcing you to go to the "open" arena. If I have my choice then you're right, I'll go to the LW Blue arena every time.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
The way I see it, it was always follow the leader. Where ever the main group went so did the rest of you. So what is the difference, now you have a little help in deciding where to go next.
Like I said au nauseum, but gets lost on you guys is,
John pointed this out quite clearly in his posts above.:aok
thing is you dont have to defend now, all action is served to you on a plate, you dont have to get off your furball to defend, missions will be right under your, over the field, so you have it great, i have no problem wiht your style of gameplay, i have a problem with mine being restricted.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
Problem is, they don't get bored, it's done every night and the main reason HT is testing this new change. :aok
Fair enough, but when I was on Blue was always half of Orange and I had to wait a few times for caps to change to get in Orange.
people maybe trying to try it out would have caused increased numbers, lets wait a while first before drilling out numbers.
-
thing is you dont have to defend now, all action is served to you on a plate, you dont have to get off your furball to defend, missions will be right under your, over the field, so you have it great, i have no problem wiht your style of gameplay, i have a problem with mine being restricted.
Of course you have to defend now, what you mean is I won't have bases sneaked, which I can't defend. Now with a limit on the number of bases capturable the other country has a better chance of defending against your sneak attacks.
Other than you not being able to get away from the defenders and choose a base where no one knows you are at, how are you being restricted.
John posted last night, Knights had no problem playing status quo game while the Bish and Rooks slugged it out.
I agree you don't have the option to choose any base and take it, and HT is working on giving you guys more than one choice of bases. I still don't see why all the fuss.
These changes will provide more to the game than the little that is being lost. And since mostly what is being lost only allows less action, I believe it is a good step in the right direction.
-
On the same token, let's wait a while before we declare this a miserable and total failure. The different types of gameplay should never have been completely exclusive, and it's obvious the game designers don't wish them to remain so. While it's not yet perfect, HTC has always (IMO) tried to strike a compromise that best suits as many customers as possible, and that's a good thing.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
The way I see it, it was always follow the leader. Where ever the main group went so did the rest of you. So what is the difference, now you have a little help in deciding where to go next.
Like I said au nauseum, but gets lost on you guys is,
John pointed this out quite clearly in his posts above.:aok
even if the above WAS true. why would you care?:huh
LAURIE ! don,t bother arguing with these guys.
they got us all figured out.
they have a much better understanding of the game than anybody else.
you must understand that they are experts on everything in the game.
they like to FIGHT!!
we run from fights, just ask em ,they,ll tell ya!!
you gotta understand that we don,t know how to play the game properly.
don,t bother arguing---its like trying to reason with a really dumb playground bully.
we understand why they like to play the way they do,and we have no problem with it.
they however don,t understand (they think they do) why we play differently than they do.
they never will
ignorance is bliss!!
ignorantly yours,
Boner
public relations officer for boner
-
Originally posted by Quah!
Other than you not being able to get away from the defenders and choose a base where no one knows you are at, how are you being restricted.
See my first post of today.
-
I want to know how many of you "just defend your field" types fly high cap over rear fields waiting for the attack?
I'll bet none of you . What you are asking for is for the rest of us to be bored to tears waiting for an attack to come.
Get real most times if they get any resistance they just move to the next base with no uppers.
Either add some tweaks to the test that you might like to see or whine elsewhere.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Bronk
I want to know how many of you "just defend your field" types fly high cap over rear fields waiting for the attack?
I'll bet none of you . What you are asking for is for the rest of us to be bored to tears waiting for an attack to come.
Get real most times if they get any resistance they just move to the next base with no uppers.
Either add some tweaks to the test that you might like to see or whine elsewhere.
Bronk
wait for an attack??----hell no---but i like to keep my eyes all over the map to make sure we are not being sneaked. when i see a town flashing, or a base flashing, or see a dar bar in a suspicious area--i go to investigate.
if there is a noe or any other type of threat to one of our bases, i will spread the word for a quick defense.
if no one shows to help--so be it.
sometimes they do--sometimes they don,t.
we just lost a base.
sooner or later we are gonna fight to take that base back.
we don,t cry that someone just sneaked one of our bases.
we should have been paying attention!!!
your sneaky pal,
Boner
public relations officer for Boner
ps. i thought you guys knew how to play this game!!
-
Originally posted by Bronk
I want to know how many of you "just defend your field" types fly high cap over rear fields waiting for the attack?
I'll bet none of you
You lost your bet.
-
Boner in game name if you don't mind please.
Bronk
-
Alot of you furball whiners remind me of this kid we used have that lived next door when I was little. He would sit at the play ground and cry because nobody would play with him, meanwhile the rest of the kids were playing in droves all around him and having a ball. We finally started beating him up and he quit comming around, but the kid would sit there by himself in a corner and act like the world was comming to an end because nobody would play with him, it never even occured to that kid to get off his arse and join the others, he wanted us to come to him and there was no other way around it.
Grow up. I know it's hard sometimes, but your mommas should have taught you a long long time ago that sometimes you have to share your toys. If you don't share, then nobody is going to want to play with you. Some basice pre-school socialization skills here. Getting mad because nobody wants to play your game your way should tell you alot about yourself. It definately tells us something.
There's nothing wrong with the game as it was before it became a catering service, if you can't find a fight in AH, then that's pathetic. If you find yourself chasing dots around, hey, you're the one chasing the dots around. Don't like having your base taken undefended, defend the damned thing or take your spanking like a man. Don't like bombers dive bombing your base, hell shoot them down. Don't like the way somebody is playing the game, then play yahoo checkers or something.
I'm sick of people bellyaching about the game, only to find the game gets changed to soothe their aching bellies. The ack is ridiculous now, wasn't that enough for you guys? Troops can't be porked without a friggin army of heavy jabos now, was that enough? Towns have ack now, was that enough? Just an example of how ridiculous it has gotten, people whined and carried on about hoardes, so we got ENY to 'balance' it out, and then you see the very same people in the MA whinning and carrying on about the lack of coordination and teamwork. One's man's hoarde is another man's teamwork my deluded friends.
Having to hit designated and predetermined bases is about as entertaining as Super Mario Brothers.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Boner in game name if you don't mind please.
Bronk
sure no prob------ 1Boner----thanks for askin !!
i try not to hide behind a fake bb name in here.
-
nicely put twitchy
-
Originally posted by Lusche
You lost your bet.
Lusche bet you were that guy in a war tale i heard.
Sniper has an enemy pill box all staked out. Problem is the enemy knows he's there. The sniper doesn't get one kill because the war ends .
:D
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Laurie
If youve have two braincells you could tell if a base as under attack... red dots and read bars do stand out... so does red falshing,
its a matter of keeping an eye of the whole game, rather than one sector.
Also how can you say the game is still the same?,
It is for you, excpet theres a higher grid player number concentration, wich for you is great...
But it has changed hugely for the other types of players. being told waht to take rather than choosing is a pretty big change isn't it,
so is having 4 arenas instead of one, isn't it?
Laurie did you read my post regarding this up thread a bit? You are essentially suggesting that folks need to be on the ground in the 'ready room' waiting for the scramble call.
Even then the attacker is going to have alt, which means stopping the initial attack is probably doomed to failure. So there goes ack and the VH, which means the vulch pattern is already set.
Are you volunteering to be the ground controller watching the 'plots' and do you have enough guys willing to sit by the phone waiting for the call to 'scramble'?
How often are you on the recieving end of these attacks? How does it work for you?
Asking seriously as the pattern is generally the same for me as I fly a lot of base defense.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Alot of you furball whiners remind me of this kid we used have that lived next door when I was little. He would sit at the play ground and cry because nobody would play with him, meanwhile the rest of the kids were playing in droves all around him and having a ball. We finally started beating him up and he quit comming around, but the kid would sit there by himself in a corner and act like the world was comming to an end because nobody would play with him, it never even occured to that kid to get off his arse and join the others, he wanted us to come to him and there was no other way around it.
Grow up. I know it's hard sometimes, but your mommas should have taught you a long long time ago that sometimes you have to share your toys. If you don't share, then nobody is going to want to play with you. Some basice pre-school socialization skills here. Getting mad because nobody wants to play your game your way should tell you alot about yourself. It definately tells us something.
There's nothing wrong with the game as it was before it became a catering service, if you can't find a fight in AH, then that's pathetic. If you find yourself chasing dots around, hey, you're the one chasing the dots around. Don't like having your base taken undefended, defend the damned thing or take your spanking like a man. Don't like bombers dive bombing your base, hell shoot them down. Don't like the way somebody is playing the game, then play yahoo checkers or something.
I'm sick of people bellyaching about the game, only to find the game gets changed to soothe their aching bellies. The ack is ridiculous now, wasn't that enough for you guys? Troops can't be porked without a friggin army of heavy jabos now, was that enough? Towns have ack now, was that enough? Just an example of how ridiculous it has gotten, people whined and carried on about hoardes, so we got ENY to 'balance' it out, and then you see the very same people in the MA whinning and carrying on about the lack of coordination and teamwork. One's man's hoarde is another man's teamwork my deluded friends.
Having to hit designated and predetermined bases is about as entertaining as Super Mario Brothers.
Practice what you preach Twitchy :)
-
Originally posted by 1Boner
even if the above WAS true. why would you care?:huh
LAURIE ! don,t bother arguing with these guys.
they got us all figured out.
they have a much better understanding of the game than anybody else.
you must understand that they are experts on everything in the game.
they like to FIGHT!!
we run from fights, just ask em ,they,ll tell ya!!
you gotta understand that we don,t know how to play the game properly.
don,t bother arguing---its like trying to reason with a really dumb playground bully.
we understand why they like to play the way they do,and we have no problem with it.
they however don,t understand (they think they do) why we play differently than they do.
they never will
ignorance is bliss!!
ignorantly yours,
Boner
public relations officer for boner
Please spare the dramatics.
Some of us have been here for quite some time and most came from some of the finest base taking strat squads to ever participate in Aces High. I did, and my squad caused conflict and loved every minute of it. We never ran from it.
My squad also looked for it too ... if another premiere base taking squad was attacking an area ... we rushed there in numbers to beat them back. We never said ... oh, AKs are smashing x base so lets go attack y base while they are busy. We took pride in pushing back the AKs. It was our job to clash with the AKs squad as it was their job to clash with us. Not true these days.
In AH 1, when I started playing, there were no large maps ... small maps could easily last longer than a week ... such is not the case today ... small maps are cycled in the LW arenas like toilette paper. One small map never makes it to the required Wednesday map change. Why ? ... hordes and milk-running mindset.
When AH 2 came in and larger maps were introduced, it was extremely hard to reset a map, hence the Wednesday auto map change. Once milk-running and hordes became the norm, a large map has a hard time sticking around long enough for the auto map change.
Some of us know the strat all too well, and from what I have witnessed in the past couple of years is a complete watering down and ineptness of base taking that is embarrassing to past premiere base taking squads.
If a base is even lightly defended, most squads will disappear like a fart in a wind tunnel and seek a base that has no active defense and hope like hell no one catches on.
This is why we are, where we are.
Mind you, there are some fine base taking squads in AH 2, but for the most part, most are laughable.
Nothing would be finer than to see some of these AH 2 premiere squads bang heads and I think that is what this system is going to bring forth ... and then we will see the sparks fly.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Alot of you furball whiners remind me of this kid we used have that lived next door when I was little. He would sit at the play ground and cry because nobody would play with him, meanwhile the rest of the kids were playing in droves all around him and having a ball. We finally started beating him up and he quit comming around, but the kid would sit there by himself in a corner and act like the world was comming to an end because nobody would play with him, it never even occured to that kid to get off his arse and join the others, he wanted us to come to him and there was no other way around it.
Grow up. I know it's hard sometimes, but your mommas should have taught you a long long time ago that sometimes you have to share your toys. If you don't share, then nobody is going to want to play with you. Some basice pre-school socialization skills here. Getting mad because nobody wants to play your game your way should tell you alot about yourself. It definately tells us something.
There's nothing wrong with the game as it was before it became a catering service, if you can't find a fight in AH, then that's pathetic. If you find yourself chasing dots around, hey, you're the one chasing the dots around. Don't like having your base taken undefended, defend the damned thing or take your spanking like a man. Don't like bombers dive bombing your base, hell shoot them down. Don't like the way somebody is playing the game, then play yahoo checkers or something.
I'm sick of people bellyaching about the game, only to find the game gets changed to soothe their aching bellies. The ack is ridiculous now, wasn't that enough for you guys? Troops can't be porked without a friggin army of heavy jabos now, was that enough? Towns have ack now, was that enough? Just an example of how ridiculous it has gotten, people whined and carried on about hoardes, so we got ENY to 'balance' it out, and then you see the very same people in the MA whinning and carrying on about the lack of coordination and teamwork. One's man's hoarde is another man's teamwork my deluded friends.
Having to hit designated and predetermined bases is about as entertaining as Super Mario Brothers.
LMFAO You just described yourself . YOU want to attack where there is nobody playing and want praise for doing it.
So here ya go. WOW GREAT JOB in taking that undefended base. While the rest of us were having fun fighting people. WAY to go avoiding the big fight and taking out those skilled tool sheds .
Feel better now?
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Laurie did you read my post regarding this up thread a bit? You are essentially suggesting that folks need to be on the ground in the 'ready room' waiting for the scramble call.
Even then the attacker is going to have alt, which means stopping the initial attack is probably doomed to failure. So there goes ack and the VH, which means the vulch pattern is already set.
Are you volunteering to be the ground controller watching the 'plots' and do you have enough guys willing to sit by the phone waiting for the call to 'scramble'?
How often are you on the recieving end of these attacks? How does it work for you?
Asking seriously as the pattern is generally the same for me as I fly a lot of base defense.
no ground controller needed----check the map every now and then
defend a base against enemies? you mean fight?
if its overwelming numbers?---you will probably lose the base
should have been paying attention.
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
"Alot of you furball whiners remind me of this kid we used have that lived next door when I was little. He would sit at the play ground and cry because nobody would play with him, meanwhile the rest of the kids were playing in droves all around him and having a ball. We finally started beating him up and he quit comming around, but the kid would sit there by himself in a corner and act like the world was comming to an end because nobody would play with him, it never even occured to that kid to get off his arse and join the others, he wanted us to come to him and there was no other way around it."
Speaks volumes ... now I understand.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
LMFAO You just described yourself . YOU want to attack where there is nobody playing and want praise for doing it.
So here ya go. WOW GREAT JOB in taking that undefended base. While the rest of us were having fun fighting people. WAY to go avoiding the fight big .
Feel better now?
Bronk
How sad. Not only have you completely missed my point and illustrated a grandoise ignorance of the concept of sharing, but you have clearly demonstrated the utter arrogance of the Furball mentality. You're right, everybody should play the game the way you like it played. As long as you get what you want, everybody else be damned. Let me clue you in on a little something brunk, I don't need your praise for taking your base, defended or not. If nobody is there to defend a base when my squad comes rolling in, how in the sam hell is that our fault? If somebody is there to defend it, then we fight.
I'd like to see what you guys would have to say if Base taking and strategy was now being required and you were on the recieving end of this experiment. Swing it the other way for once HT and see how they like it.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
There's nothing wrong with the game as it was before it became a catering service.
Yes there was. I could never find enough mini-crab cakes, roast beef and beer.
BTW Hitech, the BBQ was delicious. :aok
Now back to the kitchen and make me some pie! :t
-
Seen some good idea's to bring "Strat factories" into the game. Most are good idea.
What about this idea all sides have 6 capturable bases on the blue thread but for each ENEMY factory that's bombed below 30% (takes 1 set good bombers 3 passes or 2 sets 2 passes to accomplish 30 %, by the way) it takes 1 or YOUR own sides fields off the thread. from 6 to 5 capturable fields and so on to just 1.
OR
Reverse that idea. 1 base capturable but bombing strat factories opens up more capturable fields.
HQ dar death could use a change. How about if HQ goes down all capturable fields Towns stay down 90 mins irrespective of HQ resupply.
Someone elses idea (forgot who...sorry) said no fields capturable until the "CITY" gets bombed below 50%. I like this idea alot.
I have no idea if the above is codable
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
Speaks volumes ... now I understand.
Great, now will you quit crying because nobody wants to furball with you all the time? Defend a base, find a furball, sneak something NOE, Pork some troops, there's plenty of fun to be had for all if you stop crying long enough to get off your arse and find it.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
How sad. Not only have you completely missed my point and illustrated a grandoise ignorance of the concept of sharing, but you have clearly demonstrated the utter arrogance of the Furball mentality. You're right, everybody should play the game the way you like it played. As long as you get what you want, everybody else be damned. Let me clue you in on a little something brunk, I don't need your praise for taking your base, defended or not. If nobody is there to defend a base when my squad comes rolling in, how in the sam hell is that our fault? If somebody is there to defend it, then we fight.
I'd like to see what you guys would have to say if Base taking and strategy was now being required and you were on the recieving end of this experiment. Swing it the other way for once HT and see how they like it.
Guess what the only thing that has been changed is YOU have been told what target you have to take. Now the challenge is to figure out a strat to take that target. Or is that a little to big for you to get your mind around ?
As far as me being a furballer :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl . Ask anyone who has ran into me in game. I am far from a pure furballer. I suggest you ask 68KO or 68Falcon if I am a valuable squad member in FSO's. Cause guess what kinda hard to furball in there when your given a buff to fly.
As far as the MA goes my squad in there does it all . Sometimes together sometimes in small groups.
The furballers have been on the "receiving" end of the short stick for quite some time now.
It's just YOUR turn in the barrel get use to it.:aok
Bronk
-
Originally posted by 1Boner
no ground controller needed----check the map every now and then
defend a base against enemies? you mean fight?
if its overwelming numbers?---you will probably lose the base
should have been paying attention.
You didn't answer my question Laurie.
What's your experience under the same circumstances. If you are in flight and check the map and see something building do you auger and run to it?
How much time do you spend watching the map vs flying?
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Alot of you furball whiners remind me of this kid we used have that lived next door when I was little. He would sit at the play ground and cry because nobody would play with him, meanwhile the rest of the kids were playing in droves all around him and having a ball. We finally started beating him up and he quit comming around, but the kid would sit there by himself in a corner and act like the world was comming to an end because nobody would play with him, it never even occured to that kid to get off his arse and join the others, he wanted us to come to him and there was no other way around it.
Grow up. I know it's hard sometimes, but your mommas should have taught you a long long time ago that sometimes you have to share your toys. If you don't share, then nobody is going to want to play with you. Some basice pre-school socialization skills here. Getting mad because nobody wants to play your game your way should tell you alot about yourself. It definately tells us something.
There's nothing wrong with the game as it was before it became a catering service, if you can't find a fight in AH, then that's pathetic. If you find yourself chasing dots around, hey, you're the one chasing the dots around. Don't like having your base taken undefended, defend the damned thing or take your spanking like a man. Don't like bombers dive bombing your base, hell shoot them down. Don't like the way somebody is playing the game, then play yahoo checkers or something.
I'm sick of people bellyaching about the game, only to find the game gets changed to soothe their aching bellies. The ack is ridiculous now, wasn't that enough for you guys? Troops can't be porked without a friggin army of heavy jabos now, was that enough? Towns have ack now, was that enough? Just an example of how ridiculous it has gotten, people whined and carried on about hoardes, so we got ENY to 'balance' it out, and then you see the very same people in the MA whinning and carrying on about the lack of coordination and teamwork. One's man's hoarde is another man's teamwork my deluded friends.
Having to hit designated and predetermined bases is about as entertaining as Super Mario Brothers.
Must say this is a keeper. It is defiantly a 10.
Wall of text.
Contradicts himself.
Dos not take his own advise.
In reality I should delete it for flame bait. But just can't bring my self to , because then would just give him another reason to tell us how we are so screwed up and don't even listen to him, when at the same time he is complaining that we some time listen to people.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Great, now will you quit crying because nobody wants to furball with you all the time? Defend a base, find a furball, sneak something NOE, Pork some troops, there's plenty of fun to be had for all if you stop crying long enough to get off your arse and find it.
Um Twitchy? The only one complaining about the new set up is you. We 'furballers' as you describe us were doing all those things you describe without complaint in the new set up. The great irony to me is that the first base capture was a mission set up by one of those guys labeled a furballer, Stang.
The only crying seems to be from the guys who want to be able to run the end around against little or no opposition.
-
It's healthy that everyone has strong opinions about this game. This is the very reason the game is one of the best available. We play our differences in the arenas good and bad. It makes the game worth coming back to.
My CO Nomde hates the new change. But last night he went along with us and BlueKitty posted a 56th mission for bombers, jabos, and fighter cover. We rolled 3 bases in a row. HiTech served us lemons, 56th made damned good lemonaid. Everyone who joined had a great time. We also had excellent support from GV's following the "Blue Brick Road". Total combined effort against strategic targets.
You may no longer be able to sneak feilds, but we could have used NOE sneaks to all the defenders airfeilds within one sector to kill fighter hangers and vehical hangers. I seem to remember WW2 it was SOP to send medium bombers and jabo ahead of raids to suppres enemy assets near the targets.
Is there any chance we can get 11 more pages to this thread about how to make the best, or at the least how to take advantage of this new arena style? I cannot beleive a bunch of grown men lack the imagination or wearwithal to dominate anything HiTech throws at them by this point in their obvious and talented careers as AH Uber Players.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
The furballers have been on the "receiving" end of the short stick for quite some time now.
Bronk
Oh really? Was it the Ridicul-ack? Was it the inability to pork fuel? Was it the Huge Ack Ridden towns? Was it the Elimination of Night Time? Was it the ENY? Was it the New Hoarde preventing arenas? Was it the addition of god knows how many troops at a base? What was it that stuck it to the furballers to the point where they felt they had to be vinidcated? You're out of your mind, this game has been bent and shaped to please you guys to the point where you can't even fly over an enemy field anymore without star wars looking ack.
-
Great points buster, but then if all this action was a result of the change how is it that HT gave you lemons, when in fact he has given you a better way to play.
-
See Rule #7
-
Originally posted by twitchy
:cry :cry :cry :cry
Sorry your score padding is coming to an end . DEAL WITH IT.
Bronk
Edit: I'm sorry Twitchy i should have counter pointed.
Box formations , lazer guided bomb drop accuracy , all buff guns tied together, dive bombing heavy bombers, no wind for bomb drift , F3 mode .... ect ect ect.
But please continue whine . I'll get some sharp cheddar ready.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Great, now will you quit crying because nobody wants to furball with you all the time? Defend a base, find a furball, sneak something NOE, Pork some troops, there's plenty of fun to be had for all if you stop crying long enough to get off your arse and find it.
Maybe you haven't noticed but Slapshot is NOT one of the ones "crying" in this thread. In fact except for you, 1Boner, and Overlag there have been very few here crying at all.
I don't know you Titchy, aside from the obvious impressions you are making here via your posts, I never recall running into you in-game over all these years (not saying I never have I just don't recognize your name) I went to look at the scores page and see what kinds of planes you fly, and get a non-emotional impression of "how you play". Then I noticed the recent tour when you flew 47 sorties as a fighter and got 2 kills, and have not recently (I only looked at the last few tours) been able to break above 2 or 3 deaths per kill. Having looked at empirical data it seems to me that, with all due respect, the only "way to play this game" that you have a specific talent for is dying.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Great, now will you quit crying because nobody wants to furball with you all the time? Defend a base, find a furball, sneak something NOE, Pork some troops, there's plenty of fun to be had for all if you stop crying long enough to get off your arse and find it.
Then only one crying around here, and at decibel levels approaching that of a NASCAR track, is you.
Just goes to show how myopic you are ... I do it all ... check my November tour stats ... but I do prefer air-to-air combat over all things offered in AH.
Mind you, I have ignored all aspects prior to the arena changes and field changes ... cause base taking was laughable and embarrassing at best. Most attempts that I watched were nothing but fuster clucks who's only real intention was to vulch and get attaboys for landing 8 vulch kills.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Must say this is a keeper. It is defiantly a 10.
In reality I should delete it for flame bait. But just can't bring my self to , because then would just give him another reason to tell us how we are so screwed up and don't even listen to him, when at the same time he is complaining that we some time listen to people.
Yeah that's what I was saying HT. :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
You didn't answer my question Laurie.
What's your experience under the same circumstances. If you are in flight and check the map and see something building do you auger and run to it?
How much time do you spend watching the map vs flying?
(using my best laurie voice) depends guppy. obviously if you're in a dogfight you don,t get a chance to check the map too much!! lol
but on the way to a fight or flying a bomber etc. i check it alot.
if i can,t get to the base myself, i,ll let those who can know about it.
if it is a strategically important base---i will auger (very rare)
if nobody gets to the base and we lose it? no big deal, we will fight for it later.
your watchful buddy,
Boner (i mean laurie!!)
-
Actually, yeah it was. Enjoy checkers. It's easy to win with only one player.
-
Originally posted by 1Boner
(using my best laurie voice) depends guppy. obviously if you're in a dogfight you don,t get a chance to check the map too much!! lol
but on the way to a fight or flying a bomber etc. i check it alot.
if i can,t get to the base myself, i,ll let those who can know about it.
if it is a strategically important base---i will auger (very rare)
if nobody gets to the base and we lose it? no big deal, we will fight for it later.
your watchful buddy,
Boner (i mean laurie!!)
So, even you guys telling us to defend, don't actually defend your bases?
Is this "Comedic Irony Friday" or what?
-
i don't know about you guys, but twitchy has convinced me. i'm not saying what of though.
-
Originally posted by Edbert
and have not recently (I only looked at the last few tours) been able to break above 2 or 3 deaths per kill.
Hey now watch it bub . :D
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Edbert
Maybe you haven't noticed but Slapshot is NOT one of the ones "crying" in this thread. In fact except for you, 1Boner, and Overlag there have been very few here crying at all.
I don't know you Titchy, aside from the obvious impressions you are making here via your posts, I never recall running into you in-game over all these years (not saying I never have I just don't recognize your name) I went to look at the scores page and see what kinds of planes you fly, and get a non-emotional impression of "how you play". Then I noticed the recent tour when you flew 47 sorties as a fighter and got 2 kills, and have not recently (I only looked at the last few tours) been able to break above 2 or 3 deaths per kill. Having looked at empirical data it seems to me that, with all due respect, the only "way to play this game" that you have a specific talent for is dying.
very well thought out statement edbert---no--really
i responded to all the guys in here "crying" about how people were taking undefended bases.
unfortunatly its getting ridiculous at this point.
but anyhow---theres been alot of cryin from both sides in here.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
Great points buster, but then if all this action was a result of the change how is it that HT gave you lemons, when in fact he has given you a better way to play.
Dude ... u need to re-read the post again.
They were given lemons (they thought) ... and they made lemonade ... that means they worked with what they had and turned it into something good ... as they discovered in the end.
Wish I was on last night to participate in that mission with the 56th ... BlueKitty is one of the old guard that knows the strat system inside and out ... the fact that he created a mission says alot. The dust on his mission book must have been 6 inches thick.
WTG 56th :aok
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
So, even you guys telling us to defend, don't actually defend your bases?
Is this "Comedic Irony Friday" or what?
where in that post did it say that.
it was in response to : do you guys fly high cap over bases to defend against sneak attacks (a brilliant question)
jeeeeez you guys just turn answers into whatever you want them to be.
-
Well, HT, perhaps I should clairfy. I'll sum it up like this, my 14.95 is base taker money, always has been.
-
Originally posted by 1Boner
where in that post did it say that.
it was in response to : do you guys fly high cap over bases to defend against sneak attacks (a brilliant question)
jeeeeez you guys just turn answers into whatever you want them to be.
if i can,t get to the base myself, i,ll let those who can know about it.
So you don't feel the need to personally defend it ... let someone else maybe defend it
if it is a strategically important base---i will auger (very rare)
So you will rarely defend a base while already on a sortie
if nobody gets to the base and we lose it? no big deal, we will fight for it later.
Sorry ... I didn't get there to defend
So what you are saying is that your defense has specific parameters ... do ya think that others may have the same parameters and find it hard to defend un-defended bases cause they might already be BUSY like you.
-
Originally posted by Edbert
Then I noticed the recent tour when you flew 47 sorties as a fighter and got 2 kills, and have not recently (I only looked at the last few tours) been able to break above 2 or 3 deaths per kill.
Yeah, I auger alot to go help defend bases or run troops for people. I'm not obsessed with my fighter score to the point where I feel like I need to have all my targets in a barrell for me.
-
Boner,
Somehow you and Laurie got juxtaposed in that first quote, and when you responded, I missed the switch. I can't tell from any of your other posts whether you're saying to defend or not, merely that you don't.
warmest retards,
furboll
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
The only crying seems to be from the guys who want to be able to run the end around against little or no opposition.
It wasn't crying but see my first post of today regarding why I don't like the new set-up. This wasn't the reason.
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
if i can,t get to the base myself, i,ll let those who can know about it.
So you don't feel the need to personally defend it ... let someone else maybe defend it
if it is a strategically important base---i will auger (very rare)
So you will rarely defend a base while already on a sortie
if nobody gets to the base and we lose it? no big deal, we will fight for it later.
Sorry ... I didn't get there to defend
So what you are saying is that your defense has specific parameters ... do ya think that others may have the same parameters and find it hard to defend un-defended bases cause they might already be BUSY like you.
lmfao!!! yup your right --i,m wrong
you guys really are a hoot!!
yeah --other guys might be busy too--wow --what was i thinking???:O
i,m done with this---no reasoning with the unreasonable.
no matter what you say--they will turn it around to fit their opinions.
a regular riot!!!
idioticaly yours,
Boner
ladies and germs----Boner has left the building!!!!
-
Originally posted by 1Boner
idioticaly yours,
Boner
Sig anyone :D
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Quah!
Great points buster, but then if all this action was a result of the change how is it that HT gave you lemons, when in fact he has given you a better way to play.
Sorry Quah just using visual imagery with a tad bit of license to weave the tapestry. I like the new direction personaly. Just trying to be inclusive of my audience.....The mission was an excellent bunch of fun. :D
I would rather see our community butting heads to make the best of this than attacking each other here on the BBS. :aok
Change is always hard for communities. But without change the community will stagnate and dissolve. HiTech knows this better than we do. Our $14.95 a month does not make HiTech our COAD slave. It's a gate fee to HiTech so he will allow us to be his guest, and a vote of confidence that he is commited to this endevor for the long term.
Are people complaining because of the change itself or because before the change they had mastered some aspect in the previous system and looked forward to it each time they logged on as a constant in their life? This may sound silly, but it's how humans emotionally operate. Change causes people to loose things that make them feel good. So for those individuals you can see the $14.95 a month is paid as their fee to keep something unchanged in their lives.
-
Just out of curiosity HT, how much time do you spend playing the game? I'm not being facetious, and I don't want to know what your id is or anything, but I'm curious as to how much time you actually spend in the game because I wonder if you base your decisions on the game, or this BB.
I don't know how you go about things obviously, but if you created a game id nobody recognised and went into the game to ask opinions you might be surprised at the difference of opinion between the game and the BB.
-
HiTech never plays. He just randomly changes the game in the manner he feels can piss off the most people, as that is great for buisness. He only caters to a small minority of people who send him 12 year old bottles of Scotch. He definately does not have the best interest of the game at heart. He and Skuzzy sit around in Grapewhine and just laugh their tulips off at all the comotion they can cause.
Right, twitchy?
-
Stang shhsh errr HiTech errr Stang....stop giving yourself away. Now you gonna have to get another ID again.....;)
-
Originally posted by Stang
HiTech never plays. He just randomly changes the game in the manner he feels can piss off the most people, as that is great for buisness. He only caters to a small minority of people who send him 12 year old bottles of Scotch. He definately does not have the best interest of the game at heart. He and Skuzzy sit around in Grapewhine and just laugh their tulips off at all the comotion they can cause.
Right, twitchy?
How many bottles would it take to get me me a Mk XII ?
Seriously I don't want to insult the man .
:D
Bronk
-
Originally posted by twitchy
I don't know how you go about things obviously, but if you created a game id nobody recognised and went into the game to ask opinions you might be surprised at the difference of opinion between the game and the BB.
Oh my yet another great idea, why didn't I ever think of creating an anonymous game ID.
Twitchy:
Has it ever possibly crossed your mind that I might actually be good at what I do.
That possibly I take It very seriously , that I try get ideas in any way shape or form I can think of.
That I play the game under different accounts when I want to get a feel for whats really going on. That I possible have long term friends who I have played with ,for over 17 years in online sims, that I talk to and get their feel
and their opinion?
That some ideas I have been actually thinking about for years before I try implement them? Or that I use other people in this office as sounding boards about what they think of ideas.
Or have you ever considered that asking me this type question is almost completely out of bounds in this type thread. Because all a question like this is, is an attempt by you to now switch from the topic at hand, to a way to not talk about the issue, but rather criticize me.
You should really try take a rational, logical argument / debate about the topic , instead of putting up straw man arguments like this.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
Oh my yet another great idea, why didn't I ever think of creating an anonymous game ID.
Twitchy:
Has it ever possibly crossed your mind that I might actually be good at what I do.
That possibly I take It very seriously , that I try get ideas in any way shape or form I can think of.
That I play the game under different accounts when I want to get a feel for whats really going on. That I possible have long term friends who I have played with ,for over 17 years in online sims, that I talk to and get their feel
and their opinion?
That some ideas I have been actually thinking about for years before I try implement them? Or that I use other people in this office as sounding boards about what they think of ideas.
Or have you ever considered that asking me this type question is almost completely out of bounds in this type thread. Because all a question like this is, is an attempt by you to now switch from the topic at hand, to a way to not talk about the issue, but rather criticize me.
You should really try take a rational, logical argument / debate about the topic , instead of putting up straw man arguments like this.
HiTech
Yea yea thats all great.
Now on to the important question. How much scotch for the Mk XII.
Bronk
-
I have to either quit flying and sleeping to keep up with this thread or both!!!
Maybe I should learn to speed read.
Anyone happen to have Evelyn Woods phone number?
-
Originally posted by hitech
Twitchy:
Has it ever possibly crossed your mind that I might actually be good at what I do.
HiTech
does this mean you never make a mistake though?
-
Bronk. I'm thinking in the 200 bottles of craigenmore range.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
a way to not talk about the issue, but rather criticize me.
You should really try take a rational, logical argument / debate about the topic , instead of putting up straw man arguments like this.
HiTech
Yeah I'm just out to get you Hitech. :rolleyes:
Straw man arguements? I asked you a simple question HT.
Paranoia aside, here's a rational logical arguement for you, some of us, actually alot of us, don't like furballing.
Is that simple enough?
-
Originally posted by bustr
You may no longer be able to sneak feilds, but we could have used NOE sneaks to all the defenders airfeilds within one sector to kill fighter hangers and vehical hangers.
While I really don't like to be involved in base taking, this is exactly the sort of thing that those who DO enjoy it ought to be coming up with. The game has changed, no doubt about it, because it's become more difficult to accomplish the same goal. The tools are there, as Bustr's people and Stang's people have showed. You just have to use them in new and clever (and probably more historically-accurate) ways. I'd think most would actually welcome the challenge.
- oldman
-
Originally posted by Overlag
does this mean you never make a mistake though?
LOL:
You really do not have any concept of creating things that haven't been done before do you.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Oh really? Was it the Ridicul-ack? Was it the inability to pork fuel? Was it the Huge Ack Ridden towns? Was it the Elimination of Night Time? Was it the ENY? Was it the New Hoarde preventing arenas? Was it the addition of god knows how many troops at a base? What was it that stuck it to the furballers to the point where they felt they had to be vinidcated? You're out of your mind, this game has been bent and shaped to please you guys to the point where you can't even fly over an enemy field anymore without star wars looking ack.
I am about as far from a furballer as you can get. The added ack was probably the best thing done in the game. If you saw a base flash before you were lucky to get an Osti out of the hanger before the ack, troops, and VH were down then the 20 err....combat pilots would just circle and vulch half the time not even hitting the town.
Heck, I could take a cannon bird and and usually kill the ack and troops by my self and my gunnery sucks. ENY only effects you when You have numbers way out of whack.
Now, I get a chance to defend against such attacks and I LIKE IT. The statement was made before about defend your base, now I can at least have time to and maybe get some countrymen to assist. If my Osti gets toasted and the VH is dead I now have a chance that a mannable ack is still up. I just wish there was more, or harder VHs.
The new test I'm not too thrilled about. One main reason is when I have been on there has been no ground game that I saw. Bases that could be spawned to were not captureable.
It boils down to taking a base isn't the cakewalk it used to be.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Bronk. I'm thinking in the 200 bottles of craigenmore range.
HiTech
HMM anyone wanna buy a kidney.
:D
Bronk
-
Originally posted by hitech
LOL:
You really do not have any concept of creating things that haven't been done before do you.
HiTech
it was a simple question.....obviously it hit a nerve or something.
edit: btw i wasnt disagreeing with you. other wise i... and many others wouldnt be here. however the honest question still stands.
-
Yeah I'm just out to get you Hitech.
Straw man arguements? I asked you a simple question HT.
Paranoia aside, here's a rational logical arguement for you, some of us, actually alot of us, don't like furballing.
Is that simple enough?
Nice way to once again make another straw man by calling me Paranoid. Of course that way you can just totally dismiss my last post in your mind, why else would you say such a thing.
And the funny thing,
some of us, actually alot of us, don't like furballing.
This is not even an argument, just a statement. And not only that it is a statement you have been repeating in almost every one of your post.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Yeah I'm just out to get you Hitech. :rolleyes:
Straw man arguements? I asked you a simple question HT.
Paranoia aside, here's a rational logical arguement for you, some of us, actually alot of us, don't like furballing.
Is that simple enough?
I like fighting, HiTech wants FIGHTING. YOU, want capturing of undefended fields. Those days are GONE. Get over it. The sooner you DO, the easier it will be.
And STOP CONFUSING "Furballing" with FIGHTING.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Has it ever possibly crossed your mind that I might actually be good at what I do.
Yeah, and actually I've put about $1000 bucks in your pocket because you're good at what you do.
-
Overlag: Your right it did strike a nerve, my funny bone.
The point of my post was like saying well Dhuuuuuuuuuuuuu type response. Of course I make mistakes, the thing is , you do not seem to recognize, that this last test is in response to other mistakes I have made.
Mistakes are the engineers way of creating thing, basically design, test, evaluate, redesign, test evaluate.
But the thing is , Ive been doing that process for quite a while in reference to online flight Sims.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by Overlag
it was a simple question.....obviously it hit a nerve or something.
What his was implying is that in the software world when creating something that no one else has ever done before ... the mistakes you make, far outweigh the things you do right ... it's the mistakes you make is what you learn from ... it's a way of life.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Nice way to once again make another straw man by calling me Paranoid. Of course that way you can just totally dismiss my last post in your mind, why else would you say such a thing.
And the funny thing,
This is not even an argument, just a statement. And not only that it is a statement you have been repeating in almost every one of your post.
HiTech
Can't argue with that. Can't really reason with it either. Whatever it is. Good to know you care though.
Sorry guys, screw it. I was just rambling and out to get hitech. Furball away, arcade fish in a barrell is alot more fun than a silly war game.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Can't argue with that. Can't really reason with it either. Whatever it is. Good to know you care though.
Sorry guys, screw it. I was just rambling and out to get hitech. Furball away, arcade fish in a barrell is alot more fun than a silly war game.
Exactly, you are like a politician. You will have NOTHING that resembles a Common Ground of the "Fighters" and the "Milkrunners". Your mind was made up before your first post twitchy.
The door is that way if you don't like it -------------->
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
The door is that way if you don't like it -------------->
Yeah it always comes down to that don't it.
I was wondering when one of you guys would throw that in there.
My butt is this way <---------- if you like it. :p
-
I also notice that there is a discrepancy between the general opinion on the Bulletin Board and country channel in game.
It appears that the general concensus here on the boards is positive towards the change. That is not the opinion most widely expressed in game.
Knight's country channel was laden with angry voices directed at the recent changes last night. Many people were disappointed and hoping that this does not become the capture model for all arenas.
I am ambivalent about the whole thing, but it should be pointed out that the most widespread opinions here are definitely not the opinions being expressed in game.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Can't argue with that. Can't really reason with it either. Whatever it is. Good to know you care though.
Sorry guys, screw it. I was just rambling and out to get hitech. Furball away, arcade fish in a barrell is alot more fun than a silly war game.
Flying an online mmo like a box game is whats silly.
And thats what hitting undefended bases is .
Bronk
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Yeah it always comes down to that don't it.
I was wondering when one of you guys would throw that in there.
My butt is this way <---------- if you like it. :p
I understand your frustration twitchy, but AH2 was going down the drain. You of all people should understand and realize it. I'm not MAD at you, just frustrated that you aren't seeing the bigger picture here. I've been trying to "push you" into realizing this.
I believe, I sense a little humor in there. THAT is a start. Help HT, instead of nitpicking. That goes for everyone. Majority of us are adults, start acting like it.
<> twitchy, No harm, no foul.
-
Originally posted by mQuinn
I also notice that there is a discrepancy between the general opinion on the Bulletin Board and country channel in game.
It appears that the general concensus here on the boards is positive towards the change. That is not the opinion most widely expressed in game.
Knight's country channel was laden with angry voices directed at the recent changes last night. Many people were disappointed and hoping that this does not become the capture model for all arenas.
I am ambivalent about the whole thing, but it should be pointed out that the most widespread opinions here are definitely not the opinions being expressed in game.
Duly noted ... "widespread opinions here are definitely not the opinions being expressed in game" ... and very believable.
HT has admitted, to a point, that the first rendition of the capture system maybe too restrictive. He is having Flayed work out a possible new approach that he is going to try and implement ... hopefully ... so we just need to sit tight and watch it unfold.
Things will get better before they get worse, but I don't think that the system capture logic is going to go away ... like ENY and multiple arenas.
-
Originally posted by hitech
That I play the game under different accounts when I want to get a feel for whats really going on.
HAHA! Hitech is getting on to my account and ruining my score! I can blame it on him now! :furious
:lol :rofl
Seriously though, I hope it does get tweaked and some of the suggestions for tweaking get listened to.
:noid
-
I like the New capture system :aok
With some tweaking It should be great
-
Furball away, arcade fish in a barrell is alot more fun than a silly war game.
Sorry you don't get out of this one that easy.
Twitchy I believe I might understand you more than you might think.
My guess is you like to strategize how best to defeat the other team. You like the feeling of accomplishment when your side wins the battle,and especially the war. You like thinking how can we take the most bases from the other side. Create a strike with your friends ,and then win the battle.
Now don't confuse me with some other stone throwers around here. I have in no way implied that wanting to play the game that way is bad thing.
Your worried that by implementing a different system, you will no longer be able to accomplish those goals. I.E. You keep saying the word furball. Furball implies a static fight that goes on forever at a single base. This is in no way what I am trying to accomplish.
Also understand that I really do take your play style into account. But what I am trying to accomplish is in no way against what I view your play style as.That type of play is just as important as any other style of play.
It really is all about balance. What I simply am trying to accomplish is a better balance between offense and defense. That makes for a better overall game, and a better "Fight" which should give the guys with your play style a better feeling of accomplishment when they do win the war.
HiTech
-
I am a newb. I don't know all the background, but I've learned a LOT just from reading (and reading and reading...). I've actually picked up a few strategic pointers from listening to both sides of all of this.
I just want to say that I subscribed because I like to fly, fight, shoot, and everything else this game has to offer. I have a lot of fun opportunities out there yet to learn (gv's, bombers, ships, etc.) and am looking forward to them all.
I can tell one thing already, both from playing and from all the posts. The HTC gang cares about this game and about the community. (wipes away a tear) If they didn't care, nothing would change, and your rates would go up. They do, so they listen. And they try.
It is obvious that the community really likes this place, as they are willing to fight over it.
I'm an engineer. I know new stuff doesn't always work the first time. But you keep trying. I say everyone who pays and wants to fly has a responsibility to try to HELP with suggestions, ideas, and experiences. Just the fact that there is a real person who actually WORKS on the game who sits here and reads everything everybody posts about this stuff makes me glad I put the money down!
I don't know all the ins-and-outs of this game, but I'll put in my two cents to try to make what they are trying to implement successful for everyone! I didn't like the restrictive nature of the new method at first, it goes against my concept of what this game is about. But I'm thinking about ways to make it work out, not just saying I don't like it. Think...create...be helpful. If it doesn't work out, then you can at least say you tried and you don't feel bad about getting rid of it!
Maybe its just that I'm older and have kids of my own, and this is one of the best "games" that I have seen that is geared toward mature-thinkers, not just the "fastest trigger" like other video games. Maybe some perspective helps.
Going home...maybe I'll get to fly a little tonight.
-
Man, this thread is better than Desperate Housewives.
-
Great reply Hitech, that's more like it. :aok
I think the bottom line here is that, despite the subtle nuances, there are two basic styles of game play. Those who like to dogfight, and those who like win maps. I think the frustration inherent here with the winning maps people is that we have seen alot of changes lately that seem to favor the former, and there is a growning consensus amung alot of us that the game is becomming too unbalanced in the favor of the dogfighters as it is.
Ultimately my point is that as the game stands right now, both schools of thought are pretty much equally represented in the game. If these new changes are implemented, it will unquestioningly be to the benefit and preference of the dogfighters, and a detriment to the base taking school of thought.
Things tend to ultimately and eventually balance themselves out, the furballers generally tend to gather together at a base or two and do their thing, the base takers tend to do their thing. Why force it?
What about Orange becomming the Furball Arena, and Blue becomes the strategic arena? We've already got the two arenas there, we would all the option of choosing then, and the furballers could carry on without having to worry about a bunch of Pigs rooting up their back fields, and the base takers could do their thing.
-
Twitchy, you are looking at this like it's you versus the furballers, and that everyone is lumped into one of two categories, when really the average players probably fall somewhere in between. There are a lot more than just 2 mindsets.
And this bit about the changes only suit the furballers is crap.
-
When the horde is rolling against you...and it often does if you a bish....its nice to steal a base and divide their attention...oldest trick in the book. A honest to goodness military tatic around for a thousand of year.
If you limit the bases that can be captured fine....but give more more than two on each front... how about say 5, 7, 9? Two or three bases seems a bit low. I haven't seen a lot of base capturing or coordination or movement with the new system. It could lead to more squads working together in co-ops, but so far I haven't seen it.
There are boxers and there are fighters...Fighters want to wade in and kick arse... Boxers like to pick on the edges and make you pay for your mistakes. Neither respects the way the other plays the game.
I appreciate your efforts HT and think the changes in the game are valid and will make the fighters happy.... all I ask is to please keep the boxers in mind HT.
Give us Strat...and the bring back the SQUID so I bomb him!
I know, I know ...Spoken like a true milkrunning, toolsheding, cherry picking strat guy. :rofl :aok
-
he's trying to get us all to play together, twitchy. Most of us want that. It makes for a far getter game. Why don't you?
:confused:
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
Twitchy, you are looking at this like it's you versus the furballers, and that everyone is lumped into one of two categories, when really the average players probably fall somewhere in between. There are a lot more than just 2 mindsets.
And this bit about the changes only suit the furballers is crap.
Said the man with furboll in his signature.
-
Originally posted by Stang
he's trying to get us all to play together, twitchy. Most of us want that. It makes for a far getter game. Why don't you?
:confused:
We do play together, have been for years, we just don't all play the same way. Why don't I what? Furball with you all night? You speaking for hitech now, or are you just one of many players who has an opinion like myself?
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Said the man with furboll in his signature.
It's my gameID, and I chose this one because it makes Furball whine. Keep reaching.
-
Is there an ignore button on here somewhere?
-
Ah screw it. Waste of time.
-
Twitchy: Your post was the first logical argument in non winning post I have seen you make.
Because I think that either type playing by them selfs can not be sustained. Just like I do not want a fighter town. Even though the pure furballers think it would be great, I do not believe so. I also do not believe a pure race to capture fields game play (rather than fight for fields) can be sustained.
With the basic method of making pinch points, war begins and both sides start to really fight and hence interact. It creates a greater need for coordination and complex tatics and timming, and not just getting a bunch of people together, seeing who can hittem where they ain't the quickest.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Is there an ignore button on here somewhere?
clicky (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/member2.php?s=&action=addlist&userlist=ignore&userid=9168)
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
You've made it quite clear that you have no interest in air combat or opposition. We, on the other hand, like to interact with our opponents. Why you are so fundamentally opposed to that concept, in a game based solely on that, boggles the mind.
Yeah, actually you've made it quite clear that no matter what is said, you still seem determined to relegate anything said in opposition to a simple 'we don't want to fight'. Dude, if you ever see me running from a dogfight it's because I'm out of ammo.
Hitech, I want to take a reall good hard look at this...
"a game based solely on that"
They really think that way. That is why it's so hard to hit some middle ground here, they honestly think the game is based solely on furballing. Anything else to them is atrocious. No wonder I can't get any help at a base, with friends like these on your country, who needs enemas.
Yes Hub, furballing.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Twitchy: Your post was the first logical argument in non winning post I have seen you make.
Because I think that either type playing by them selfs can not be sustained. Just like I do not want a fighter town. Even though the pure furballers think it would be great, I do not believe so. I also do not believe a pure race to capture fields game play (rather than fight for fields) can be sustained.
With the basic method of making pinch points, war begins and both sides start to really fight and hence interact. It creates a greater need for coordination and complex tatics and timming, and not just getting a bunch of people together, seeing who can hittem where they ain't the quickest.
HiTech
I think what your doing in orange is exactly what will make what you just said "happen"! There will be the whines and complaints about this and that, but it is definitely the future set-up for each arena. If this is implemented, in all arenas, it will force whoever is in that arena to interact in a battle between themselves no matter what the numbers! Now a 10 man advantage becomes more even with defenses concentrated. Each arena will have a different size "battle" to choose from. If you don't like 200 person furballs in LW u jump to EW and engage in a 80 person furball! ingenious! I think you're going in the right direction! :aok
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
Originally posted by Bronk
HMM anyone wanna buy a kidney.
:D
Bronk
No, but if this deal goes through, I know someone who might want a liver!!!:D
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Yeah, actually you've made it quite clear that no matter what is said, you still seem determined to relegate anything said in opposition to a simple 'we don't want to fight'. Dude, if you ever see me running from a dogfight it's because I'm out of ammo.
Hitech, I want to take a reall good hard look at this...
"a game based solely on that"
They really think that way. That is why it's so hard to hit some middle ground here, they honestly think the game is based solely on furballing. Anything else to them is atrocious. No wonder I can't get any help at a base, with friends like these on your country, who needs enemas.
Yes Hub, furballing.
Twitchy, noone is preventing you from recieving help at a base. You just have to be "cool" enough to get people to do what you say! (warning intentional abuse of the word "and" ahead!) Create yourself a squad and post missions and tune to this channel or that and assign targets and form up and lign with target, and send jabos in first to hit radar and take out the troops and hit the town and bring troops and capture the maproom. Who is preventing you from doing this????? Noone...........except an actual fight for it! So start shaving and using deodorant and get urself some devoted fellas together and go for it! hee hee j/k bout the deodorant! Its real simple! While you are doing that "we" furballers are going to be marianas turkey shooting yas out of the sky! Accept the challenge!
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
:lol
I believe we a meltdown.
-
Originally posted by SkyRock
Create yourself a squad and post missions
Yeah I might do that someday. :rolleyes:
Do you actually play the game?
-
Originally posted by BaldEagl
I've been reading this "the only thing you lose is the ability to take an undefended base" thing for two days here. Let me recount last night's experience in the LW Blue arena.
I'm a Bish, as I've always been. We're down to 15 fields spread across the map and the Knights have taken the base on our furthest point from us (a sneak attack). For a while we seem to be trying to take it back but after a few missions I find myself alone in my Spit with 4 Knights. I get 2 before some friendlies arrive and I fly home for fuel. Now I see our port flashing so I up an Ostie to try to hold onto it. It's a Rook attack. Three fighters. I get all three but more follow like a flood gate opening. Finally they get me and we end up losing the base. Now I look at the map and see dar bar in our 163 base sector. I go up and up a 163. They aren't going for the 163 base, just some factories. Whew! I end up flying 3 163 missions landing 7 kills on guys going for factories, the 163 base (yes, someone was going to vulch it in a 190) and our HQ. Finally, time for bed. Good Night (both literally and figuratively).
I don't see how that kind of experience can happen under this new system. The variables simply can't exist when there are only 2-3 bases that you can capture, or that can be captured. Kiss those 163 missions goodby. Forget about a lone defensive stand at a vehicle base or port.
This isn't just about attacking undefended bases but I will add that there is value in that as well. Remember being a newbie? Sometimes those undefended bases are just what you need to hone some of your skills (bombing, dive bombing, straffing, etc.)
I'm sure someone will find a way to attack me for writing this and for my opinion and because I chose to fly good planes for a night while I could because over the past two days reading these boards that seems to be the norm. I don't care. I do care about what direction this game will take in the future though.
Noticed that last night--Bish have been avoiding the Blue arena test, and are thus slowly losing each day (I assume they rule in Orange?)
-
Originally posted by bj229r
Noticed that last night--Bish have been avoiding the Blue arena test, and are thus slowly losing each day (I assume they rule in Orange?)
Is the test in Blue now?
-
All
HT ,
Its a fine start on something. May need a bit of tweaking here and there but I really have no issues at all with it. I tried it all day yesterday and never had a problem finding a fight. Which is what I like.
I rolled in a few missions last nite that Blukitty set up. Everything seemed pretty solid in that you really have to coordinate things well. I'm not big into the base capture thing really. I do it every now and then. Maybe run an M3 around when I need a break from my mindless yanking , banking and ocassional cherrypick.
Good luck with it. I'm sure I'll still be around to see a few more changes.
If there is anything 71 sqd. can do to help with EASY things (we're not all that bright :rofl ) give us a shout.
Thanks for a great game to blow off steam.
-
Eh....colors shmolors...that must be why I blow up so much stuff at work:rofl
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
I played the new arena setup for the first time yesterday. I'm quite exicted about the new game play ht has introduced into the arena. High alt fighting, I found myself flying up two 20k in a p47d40. I guess my furballing days and going for a high kph is over in the new setup. No more high alt dweeb comments lol. Shoot i'm even flying the p51d and might start escorting bombers: >
-
See Rule #5
-
Originally posted by Donzo
Is the test in Blue now?
Nope, i was in Blue last night doing this. Not sure how that comment came about but I think whoever it was had their colors mixed up.
-
Originally posted by slapshot:
Nothing would be finer than to see some of these AH 2 premiere squads bang heads and I think that is what this system is going to bring forth ... and then we will see the sparks fly.
This has always been posible.
If it wasnt happening for you, you must have been avoiding it :rolleyes:
All you guys could do was :cry about the BOPS when they launched their missions, and now you trying to convince me you miss it?
Who's leg are you really trying to pull huh? :rofl
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
I don't like it. I do love the thrill of capturing bases, and I this limits my opportunities to do so.
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #5
-
Originally posted by hitech
Overlag: Your right it did strike a nerve, my funny bone.
The point of my post was like saying well Dhuuuuuuuuuuuuu type response. Of course I make mistakes, the thing is , you do not seem to recognize, that this last test is in response to other mistakes I have made.
Mistakes are the engineers way of creating thing, basically design, test, evaluate, redesign, test evaluate.
But the thing is , Ive been doing that process for quite a while in reference to online flight Sims.
HiTech
i understand that, and this comes back to the points i made in our PM's about changes not really being thought out fully, and not all results predicted properly.
But then the only way to test how we react (or don't) is to do it, then fix any issues after. which you are doing fine.
the reasons some people don't like this "blue line" thing is the logic behind the ordering, it seems totally random. The main issue people have is the freedom...some people liked choosing there own paths, some people looked at certain bases on the map as there focus for the main goal. Some also liked checking bases if they started flashing, and liked defending them.
this latest change does away with almost all of that, at least in its current form because its TOO restrictive.... but that's why you are testing it.
its good for off peak hours, but it needs to increase as numbers increase, and maybe decrease if sides get uneven.
If A has less then B and C, then B and C should have, for example 4 bases between them to fight over, while A only has 1 per country to defend. that way most of B and C's forces will be up fighting each other, while the low numbered side can concentrate there forces at 1 point.
another idea would have it linked to strat in a zone... at different steps on the list there's multipliers that enable more bases to be captured. 100% up = x1 (of the default). 60% x2 (just an example). This would create reasons for countries to do strategic bombing, and make anti-buff pilots happy too....I'm one of those guys. I like bombing, and i love anti bomber patrols also hehe.
another way to "free" up the system would be to make it so 20 or more troops is needed for a small base to be captured....that way if you REALLY wanted that base you would have to bring in many goons. would that work?
ill say it again... the only reason I'm unhappy with this is its currently too restrictive, and thats why im throwing up many ideas to tweak it, however they are probably getting lost in the whines hehe...
(i think ive edited this post enough now....LOL)
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
Hammy thats why I posted >>>some<<< .
I am well aware of your talents.
But like i said weren't a lot of off peak players complaining about not finding the fights?
Just an observation from another idiot.
:rolleyes:
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Hammy thats why I posted >>>some<<< .
I am well aware of your talents.
But like i said weren't a lot of off peak players complaining about not finding the fights?
Just an observation from another idiot.
:rolleyes:
Bronk
apologies spew forth.............sorry, i thought you was targeting me personally.
paranoia lol :noid
-
Hammy NP it's understandable.
Was reading a few post when something triggered memories about off peak players and lack of fights.
Bronk
-
Ok Twitchy, you have made your point(s?). I think we got it.
Let me weigh in favor of the changes.
Aces High has gone through a number of growing pains over the years. Gameplay has changed as the community has grown and player density has risen. There is a theoretical sweet spot between being too crowded / restricted and having too much space where the best strategy is to avoid one another by attacking the weakest spot. HTC is attempting to find that sweet spot.
IMO The added arenas and this funneling of capturable bases are their attempts to tune the gameplay to a level it was at before Aces High popularity first outgrew its maps. The fights will be better and the level of gameplay will rise as new Strategies are developed; not based on finding the closest undefended base or creating the largest horde that scares off all competition, but on organized attacks defeating tenacious defenders.
-
im sorta failing to understand how this setup "helps" the furballers?
furballers cant furball if griefers (err bombers) flaten there base ready for capture.
furballers cant fight in hordes
from what ive seen furballers tend to fight over nothing other than kills..... and furballs seem to be 10-20 planes, this blue line system makes a sector full of 50ish planes.
this change doesnt favor furballers at all.... it favors people who like combat.
-
Overlag gets it.
-
Originally posted by VOR
Overlag gets it.
see, some people are upset cos they think this change is for furballers. others (like me) are just upset about being so restricted on the game..... and the freedom we had all "grown up" with in this place.
brings me to WWIIOL wiki page:
Similarly, changes have been made to add more structure to the game by limiting battle to certain arenas designated by players enrolled in the "High Command". This ensures inexperienced players aren't simply wandering around an unoccupied and inactive area.
Interestingly, these improvements, which are lauded by players craving faster action, are unpopular amongst some players who instead favored the previous design
funny..... this idea seems to be the same as something WWIIOL done.....lol :) (also with same results)
-
I've started playing WW2OL since those new changes you mentioned. At first, I got hissy cause I wasn't able to take anything I wanted to anywhere I wanted whenever i wanted.
After thinking about it, it's made the game alot more interesting for me than it used to be. There's a focused front line area and the battles can be intense (and fun). It's also frusrating sometimes wondering what the high command is thinking making some decisions they make, but in that regard it's just like being in a real military unit. Think of it as immersion factor or realism if it makes it any easier. ;)
Anyway, I'm not advertising that game on these forums, just using it as a reference.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Paranoia aside, here's a rational logical arguement for you, some of us, actually alot of us, don't like furballing.
Is that simple enough?
Then don't. There is nothing that prevents you from attacking any base on the map, you're just now limited to the ones you can capture. I'm sure that this process is still undergoing some tweaking and the way the "base capture paths" may change to allow more of a branching of the bases that can be attacked. You can already see the process is being tweaked if you read some of the other threads in here.
And man...you better be glad you never played AW4W. With only 4 capturable airfields and 4 capturable V bases you and the other tool shedders would have cried in your milk.
ack-ack
-
Originally posted by hitech
Bronk. I'm thinking in the 200 bottles of craigenmore range.
HiTech
For a Spitfire XII?
Bronk I'll goes halfs with ya :)
-
Originally posted by VOR
Anyway, I'm not advertising that game on these forums, just using it as a reference.
same here.. just reference.... i just thought it was a funny parallel to whats happening here. I played WWIIOL alittle, but then had to choose between the two..... i couldnt aford the time or money to play both AH and WWIIOL.... and unluckly for hitech im still here ;) lol anyhow... WWIIOL needed it.
its still a marginal point to say if AH needs this sort of system. but its still work in progress. who knows it might turn into the perfect system we've *ALL* been waiting for.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
I don't like it. I do love the thrill of capturing bases, and I this limits my opportunities to do so.
Explain to me how this limits your ability to capture bases?
Is this because you have to fight for em now?
-
Originally posted by Overlag
this change doesnt favor furballers at all.... it favors people who like combat.
Finally :)
-
Originally posted by Overlag
this change doesnt favor furballers at all.... it favors people who like combat.
10 pages later, Finally!. He get's it.
-
i mean really man..is there something wrong with you!!!!!!!!!!!
ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!:confused: :lol :huh :aok :noid :O
-
Don't think for a minute that I don't know where to find you, Skuzzy.
:noid
-
been a while for me gents
hope to be back by january.
Anyway enough said.
So the main arena has been split into 4 now to encourage fighting?
Now we have a system that predetermines what bases can be captured? by a specific or predetimed order?
analysis of a chain in a cog?
Trying to force all into a certain area to take a base?
So gone are the noe missions and the surprise attack deep into enemy heartland?
Sorry to say I will miss those greatly.
The enemy not knowing what i will do or where i will go inspired me greatly having a predetermined area of what i can do and what I can accomplish is meaningless, think I will keep my money in my pocket for the time being, sad to say this game has come to this.
A WW2 areana where the enemy knows and expects you to attack sad!!
Good luck to you all I think its pathetic
-
Originally posted by Overlag
from what ive seen furballers tend to fight over nothing other than kills..... and furballs seem to be 10-20 planes, this blue line system makes a sector full of 50ish planes.
this change doesnt favor furballers at all.... it favors people who like combat.
He's had an epiphany! Angels are singing in Heaven! :aok
Zazen
-
Hitech:
Because I think that either type playing by them selfs can not be sustained. Just like I do not want a fighter town. Even though the pure furballers think it would be great, I do not believe so. I also do not believe a pure race to capture fields game play (rather than fight for fields) can be sustained.
With the basic method of making pinch points, war begins and both sides start to really fight and hence interact. It creates a greater need for coordination and complex tatics and timming, and not just getting a bunch of people together, seeing who can hittem where they ain't the quickest
While I fully understand this line of thinking and it's concept, it now (IMO) creates a small and on going prob/complaint.
After attempting to take said base, team A can't quite pull it off due to the "50+ planes at the choke ponit" team A decides to pull it's forces together, coordinate an attack & capture plan and go after team B's field.
Now you have 10+ flights of bombers (maybe more), xxx number of fighters and lord knows how many C47's and M3's.
They fight their way in, hit the base hard, kill the city and drop their troops.
What do you think is going to happen next? "hey guys great attack!!"
"hey fellas nice execution and that troop drop"
OR
"Geeeez, where is team A's horde going next"
"Oh great, the toolsheddars killed the place" "why don't ya bring more Lgay7's and Runstangs next time" "Ya don't wanna fight, ya just wanna kill bases and take um"
Either way, you're this or that for fighting or this or that for running or this or that for striking.
Wish it wasn't this way.
my 2 cents
-
See Rule #4
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Explain to me how this limits your ability to capture bases?
Say please.
-
Not sure I understand how the new capture system is supposed to work. How is the order of base capture determined?
It appears that each side can now only hit the fields that have been determined to be available for capture. with no ability to use any type of strategy to effect a base capture.
One can't first capture a near by Vehicle base to allow you to spawn in GV's in support of the attack, or a defender to capture an nme GV base to draw off resources. It also appears that any organizational play will be determined by the game, no more free will to chose where and when one side attacks. No more NOE attacks on the other side of the map to draw away resources.
It also appears to unfairly split one countries resources to defend against to attacking when one country has nme on both sides.
Don’t like it. I feel it really changes the entire makeup of the game and makes the game and the outcome of any engagement within the game totally predictable.
It would be different if the sides of each team were balanced however, none of the arena changes had accomplished that. Game play in any arena can and most often is lopsided.
That makes this new arena setup totally unfair to the side with the lowest numbers.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Explain to me how this limits your ability to capture bases?
Is this because you have to fight for em now?
it takes away ones ability to chose where to attack and where to defend.
it takes away the strategy element of the game.
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
10 pages later, Finally!. He get's it.
erm i had it all along.. i just thought it was funny everyone going on and on about it being a "pro" furball move.
-
HT, just how does this new base capture system work? How is it that right now knights are between the Rooks and Bish with a total of three knight bases open to capture while only one rook base and one Bish base are open to capture? Knights have to spread out their resouces to defend three bases while Rooks only have to defend one and Bish only have to defend one base each and there are no bases between Rooks and Bish that are open to capture, anywhere along their very long border.
-
Traveler and others HiTech is working on this and it seems I am helping..
I would guess that we would be working tward a middle ground between the furball and the base capture/strat guys.. It is not all furball oriented, if it was I would totally hate the system I am CO of the BOP's bomber wing so I don't have much to do with furballs, though I have been known to partake in them.
I love the strat side of the game and I think most of the crankyness over this test is from the fact that it seemed a bit heavy handed and promoted a little to much furball with not enough strat play...
I hope I am helping HT bring it back the other way some so there is a little more thought to it with some element of surprise here and there and of course the good old fight vs fighter combat.
I understand the need to find a way to concentrate players on these huge maps, if we were left with a giant map and the 200 players there would most likely be a lil fight here and there with others rolling bases waaaayyyy of in left field some where.
I think the little maps could be left alone at least in the more populated arenas there seems to always be a good fight going on for bases in thease.
Though thats HT's call.
I really wish everyone would just calm down for a bit and roll with the tests here. We can see that the current system has a problem and it is being changed I hope for the better.:) Just stop argueing with each other and go shoot each other down for a bit wile throwing insults at each other over chan 200 or something LOL You sound like my 4 kids arguing over a toy.
Any way I'll let you get back to your normally sceduled bickering now. all
EDIT: traveler look at another thread posted by HT on the general discution to see what is being changed.
-
Originally posted by Flayed1
EDIT: traveler look at another thread posted by HT on the general discution to see what is being changed.
HT ---->
"Testing Capture system in LW orange today
We are testing out a new field capture system
in the LW Orange today.
This system should allow us to use large maps
with lower populations.
The new system only allows fields to be captured in
A certain order. Fields that are currently capturable
by your country are shown as larger icons.
To display the field capture order, right click on map
and click Field Order.
__________________
__________________
For Bribes
"
that's what HT chose to say in the Aces High News and Announcements That's where the offical announcements are posted, right?
-
Originally posted by Overlag
im sorta failing to understand how this setup "helps" the furballers?
furballers cant furball if griefers (err bombers) flaten there base ready for capture.
furballers cant fight in hordes
from what ive seen furballers tend to fight over nothing other than kills..... and furballs seem to be 10-20 planes, this blue line system makes a sector full of 50ish planes.
this change doesnt favor furballers at all.... it favors people who like combat.
it creates a chock point in which heavy aircaraft can only attack one target for base capture. The heavy aircarft will get little to no fighter cover from furballers that refuse to climb highter then 10 feet or fly more then 10 miles to a target. Makeing it easy for nme fighters to sorty over a chock point looking for the heavy aircraft that can only attack at that point. The strategy play of the game is now gone.
-
No the thead (Falyed1 can you do me a favor) You alredy posted there so nvr mind :)
-
Originally posted by Flayed1
I understand the need to find a way to concentrate players on these huge maps, if we were left with a giant map and the 200 players there would most likely be a lil fight here and there with others rolling bases waaaayyyy of in left field some where.
Wasn't that the pupose of the darbar and the flashing bases. If people chose not to defend a base that is flashing , under attack , that is there choice. But to programe into the game a predefined order of base capture that will get real old, real fast.
You want to slow down base capture increase the number of troops that are necessary to capture a base. Develop engineering troops or support troops that give meaning to the services performed on an airfield. If troops at an airfield are all dead then there is no one there to re-arm an aircraft, or pump gas. tie the strat targets to an airfields ability to launch an aircraft.
I tested the game a few years ago after AW3 was shut down by EA games. I tested it for two weeks and decided to become a paying customer because of how the game played and the way the environment functioned. I don't care of either anymore.
-
I spent some time in orange, and had a slightly mixed opinion.
First, finding a fight was no problem. In fact, the fight I found right near one of my bases was really balanced. No hordes, only a handful of retards just zooming through in their LAs, and it was fairly fun.
The problem however, was that the whole night I never got more than 1/2 of the way towards the enemy's base. Why? Because I'd take off, maybe fight some guy near my base, and then head towards the enemy base. 10 minutes later, I'm barely halfway there and I see that there are some bad guys back near my base, so I turned back around and fought those guys again.
I really admire the persistence of those who flew relatively slow planes all the way from their field to ours. If I had to fly in this arena and wanted to fight people over near THEIR base, I'd probably end up joining the LA crowd for no reason other than it takes too darn long to get there. A lot of fast fighters would show up, P-51s, FW-190s, etc., and they'd all show up around 20-25k and have to slowly spiral down to where the fight really was, from 10-12k on down to the deck (or zoom down, HO someone on the way past, and then rip their wings off in our ack).
I know I told HT I wouldn't harp on this, but aside from having my first 2 fights of the night ended by unmanned ack before I could get near any other aircraft, the only thing that sorta bugged me was that it really is a pain *going anywhere* to fight. Plenty of bomber guys take off from rear fields to grab alt, and if a fighter guy needs alt all he has to do is grab alt in the opposite direction before heading towards the enemy, but it seemed like an awful lot of guys were having to plod a really long way to get to the fight, and even climbing straight towards the fight they arrived waaaaay above it. Like 10k above it.
Anyhow, it just seemed a bit sad that the fight was really easy to find but because of the distance involved, there was very little teamwork shown by the guys who had to fly the long distance to get there. After getting shot down, it might be 15 minutes before I'd see the same guy back in the fight, and that really discourages people getting together to fight and doubly discourages people trying to RTB.
I got double teamed ONCE the whole night, and that was from an LA and 190 who just happened to meet up near our field. Yea it wasn't exactly prime time in the arena (about 5am central time) but to see a nicely developed fight fed by singletons trickling from a field 15 min away was just sad. It was a good fight, but I'd like to have been able to take it to the enemy without having to drone so much.
-
Time to leave.
It is obvious that AH Main Arenas are turning into a Arcade style game and moving away from the whole simulation experience.
Account Deleted.
I only hope that Combat Tour is better than the hype!
Best of luck to all at Hitech and I hope to see you soon.
VoX Out. :cool:
-
Time to leave also.
No reason given.
Good luck to hitech and the crew. Will see how well TOD turns out.
-
S!
What Flayed1 said! :aok
I too hope the other arenas are left alone from the blue line base capture system. I know HT is working to correct the problem that exsits in LW orange and I hope he will open alot more bases for capture.
One thing though. I still dont see where all the "undefended base" talk is coming from. The times I see a base all alone start to flash I know it's either a noe or gv's or a horde. People do up to defend and most of those fights are some of the best fights in here. Sure they eventually capture the base but so what? I had a blast defending it. Goon hunting I hope is not a thing of the past.
S!
-
If nothing else, its certainly funny watching the super horde frantically ploughing up and down the blue lines, bit like Pavlovs dog reacting to an enlarged icon rather than a bell.
-
Originally posted by Traveler
it creates a chock point in which heavy aircaraft can only attack one target for base capture. The heavy aircarft will get little to no fighter cover from furballers that refuse to climb highter then 10 feet or fly more then 10 miles to a target. Makeing it easy for nme fighters to sorty over a chock point looking for the heavy aircraft that can only attack at that point. The strategy play of the game is now gone.
then the "strat" guys have to create balanced missions.... i know bustr, a few FB's and all the 68s did..... we would have P47s heavy, and a20s in the rear defended by a few light P51's. Worked every time. But then rooks even with higher numbers wasnt really defending.
-
Originally posted by Souless
been a while for me gents hope to be back by january.
Anyway enough said.
So the main arena has been split into 4 now to encourage fighting?
Now we have a system that predetermines what bases can be captured? by a specific or predetimed order?
analysis of a chain in a cog?
Trying to force all into a certain area to take a base?
So gone are the noe missions and the surprise attack deep into enemy heartland?
Sorry to say I will miss those greatly.
The enemy not knowing what i will do or where i will go inspired me greatly having a predetermined area of what i can do and what I can accomplish is meaningless, think I will keep my money in my pocket for the time being, sad to say this game has come to this.
A WW2 areana where the enemy knows and expects you to attack sad!!
Good luck to you all I think its pathetic
Amen to that!
-
Originally posted by Overlag
erm i had it all along.. i just thought it was funny everyone going on and on about it being a "pro" furball move.
Some of YOU were using the "furball" word inappropriately. Some of you have no clue as to what a "furball" is. Outside of a feline coughing up. Hell, I'm sure as soon as two planes close in for a fight, it's now deemed a "furball".
-
I just had a nother idea that might make this work on the big maps. Why not try opening all bases in particular zones so you have the forward zones of each counrty open? I can't remember how many zones are on the big maps so maybe this wont work but if there's not enough then how about re-writing the zones so there are a few more?
Just an idea.
-
See Rules #2, #5
-
See Rules #2, #4, #5
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
There we go.
:) :D :lol :rofl
Bronk
-
then the "strat" guys have to create balanced missions....
BINGO ... give Overlag the cookie ... at least he and some others see the light.
Balanced and well thought out attacks ... what a novel concept ... it does appear that that is asking too much of most.
-
Originally posted by BaldEagl
I just had a nother idea that might make this work on the big maps. Why not try opening all bases in particular zones so you have the forward zones of each counrty open? I can't remember how many zones are on the big maps so maybe this wont work but if there's not enough then how about re-writing the zones so there are a few more?
Just an idea.
I was thinking about this a little more. There's probably a relatively easy way to re-write the zones. Let the factories support the same fields they support now (a "master zone") but splt the fields into two or maybe even three sub zones (or "capture zones").
When say, 60-70% of a currently available capture zone has been captured, then the next one becomes available for capture along with the remaining fieds in the current capture zone.
I think an idea like this could appease all factions. It allows some freedom of choice but still focuses players into a smaller area. NOE guys could still do their thing, particularily at the outside fringes of some of the big map zones. CV's for the most part still come into play, etc., etc.
It seems like it would also be a relatively easy solution for HiTech and his staff although I'm not a programmer so I can't say for sure.
No offense to anyone but if those of us who don't like the thin blue line don't make any suggestions and just keep slamming those who do then I think we're going to end up with the blue line and so far I'd guess those suggestions would fit on one page in this thread.
-
See Rules #2, #5
-
See Rules #2, #5
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Yeah I might do that someday. :rolleyes:
Do you actually play the game?
Not only do I play, I own everything you attempt to do in the game! hee hee
ingame cpid CptDeath!:aok
-
Hi! I'm Kettle. You must be Pot?
-
Originally posted by BaldEagl
I was thinking about this a little more. There's probably a relatively easy way to re-write the zones. Let the factories support the same fields they support now (a "master zone") but splt the fields into two or maybe even three sub zones (or "capture zones").
When say, 60-70% of a currently available capture zone has been captured, then the next one becomes available for capture along with the remaining fieds in the current capture zone.
I think an idea like this could appease all factions. It allows some freedom of choice but still focuses players into a smaller area. NOE guys could still do their thing, particularily at the outside fringes of some of the big map zones. CV's for the most part still come into play, etc., etc.
It seems like it would also be a relatively easy solution for HiTech and his staff although I'm not a programmer so I can't say for sure.
No offense to anyone but if those of us who don't like the thin blue line don't make any suggestions and just keep slamming those who do then I think we're going to end up with the blue line and so far I'd guess those suggestions would fit on one page in this thread.
Geez, I'm gushing with ideas now. Here's one more to add to this line of thought. Say a capture zone is 60-70% captured so the next one is set to open. Make all abutting zones open until one field is taken, then close everything but the fields in the capture zone with the lost field. This way the direction of battle across the map could change based on the strategy of the players and add another element to gameplay. This one might be too complex to easily implement but it might be cool.
OK, tell me to shut up now.
-
Originally posted by BaldEagl
Geez, I'm gushing with ideas now. Here's one more to add to this line of thought. Say a capture zone is 60-70% captured so the next one is set to open. Make all abutting zones open until one field is taken, then close everything but the fields in the capture zone with the lost field. This way the direction of battle across the map could change based on the strategy of the players and add another element to gameplay. This one might be too complex to easily implement but it might be cool.
OK, tell me to shut up now.
I think that HT's direction is better displayed in this thread ...
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=193580
If your gushing with ideas ... take a look at that thread ... understand the concept ... and then gush.
Altho your idea has merits ... it looks like it would be some tremendous coad changes and HT has already developed a "system" that he is willing to "tweak" ... I think.
Also, if done right, I think this idea just might be able to be accomplished within the new system ... if plotted correctly ... I could be wrong.
-
See Rule #4
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
I think that HT's direction is better displayed in this thread ...
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=193580
If your gushing with ideas ... take a look at that thread ... understand the concept ... and then gush.
Altho your idea has merits ... it looks like it would be some tremendous coad changes and HT has already developed a "system" that he is willing to "tweak" ... I think.
Also, if done right, I think this idea just might be able to be accomplished within the new system ... if plotted correctly ... I could be wrong.
OK, I'll shut up now.
-
OK, I lied. I didn't shut up. The "pinch points" could still be accomplished on the jump from main zone to main zone or even from capture zone to capture zone.
-
See Rule #5
-
See Rule #5
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
Fellas, since we know that this is a test, and there is a tweak in the works(No pressure there, Flayd) I'd say let's see what happens in a week or two...There's still the blue arena, after all. Hopefully, before this thread busts 1,000 posts.:lol
-
Originally posted by hitech
Because I think that either type playing by them selfs can not be sustained. Just like I do not want a fighter town. Even though the pure furballers think it would be great, I do not believe so. I also do not believe a pure race to capture fields game play (rather than fight for fields) can be sustained.
Thanks for taking the time to do multiple posts in this thread. I realize it was probably a bit of a pain, but it was good to read and understand some of your logic. After trying out the new arena setups for a while here are my thoughts.
The value of your product, for me, has always exceeded the monthly fee by a significant amount. While you have not always produced some of the features I have hoped for, you have provided others that I was not expecting and I have always been entertained. I have discontinued my account in the past, but never because I no longer liked the game or the cost.
Recently while evaluating my monthly expenditures I thought about the value of AH to me. It is really surprising how much the community has played a part in my enjoyment of your game, especially considering I have not been a member of a squad in years. But a large part of the "pull" to sit down at the computer and login was knowing that I would find a group of people flying that I knew - virtually speaking. I knew their voices.. more importantly I knew their flying habits. You joke around.... have some fun, maybe participate in a few missions, maybe save someone's bacon or vice versa.
For myself this part of the experience has evaporated. And I cannot emphasize enough that has been a complete evaporation.
In your game I tend to use some of the features that you have implemented, even though many of those are scorned by some of the mouthy few on this board. That includes scoring, rank, hit percentage etc. My goal in using the game is not to become the top ranking fighter pilot... I don't have the time and frankly there are other things in life far more important to me then devoting that amount of energy to this game. But in the past I've watched and spent a little time in all the columns and enjoyed each type of game play whether fighter, buff, gv or the rest. Typically I would play an evening and then the following day logon and check my score.
What I find now is that I don't bother to pull up the scoring page at all. It seems that I just don't care any more. What is interesting is that pattern follows the myopic behavior of those people who only seem to favor one style of game play. When beginning these series of changes a few months ago you were quite clear about trying to force a behaviour change... I am just passing along what I've noticed for myself and how I participate in the game.
I realize that criticizing your recent changes or your product is a turn off to you, and I don't want to throw up a wall. But the game is moving farther and farther away from what I enjoy. Its a combination of things, but some of it is a lack of variety.
An example. By playing with a group of people for a while you know who can put together a decent mission that has a reasonable chance of success. Once in a while someone puts together something interesting thats a little off the wall, maybe its an SBD attack, or some other infrequently used plane type. You get 10 or 15 people to participate and have a lot of laughs. Maybe an all GV attack.. who knows.... but something different. I'm not seeing any of that any more.
Again, that is part of what 'pulls' me to the computer to login and spend a couple of hours and enjoy myself. I still enjoy the planes, and the fantastic art, the realism of the flight etc. But the other part, which it seems I valued more then I knew, has been seriously reduced if not all together eliminated.
I've been watching the changes and I continue to try and get some playing time in now and then to see how things are going. I am not a member of either your marketing team, or the group of friends you've been working with for years as you've built this game. So my option for feedback is either this forum or a private email... and you probably need another email like a hole in your head :)
My goal with the post wasn't to add to the your irritation level, just pass on one guys opinion. Best wishes for the holidays for your people. Its an interesting period as you try to figure out where to go. From what I can see logging on it looks like there's still plenty of people online. I certainly understand that the bottom line drives all.
Good luck.
-
Please HT for the love of all things AHII, leave the arenas as the were!
I do not like the concept of only one capturable base at a time, especially when they know when and where we are coming. Furthurmore HT, I disagree with a mobile furball all the time. I know that my opinions in the past have not mattered much (Like when I said night time was good), but since you still faithfully get my $15.00 I guess it is a mute point. Ultimately though I HIGHLY dislike the new system which in my opinion is catered to the furballers, It is your decision HT and yours alone.
:mad:
-
(Slap, you were doing fine until that last paragraph) See Rule #5
-
Smash: Excellent post.
Have you considered what has caused the change for you?
HiTech
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Or, like last night in the MWA, the rooks had 60% of the entire map, but that wasn't enough, so they ran 3 sectors in and took the one V-base that had a spawn point to knit HQ, and then killed the HQ with GVs. Didn't bother to take the fields between their front line and the v-base.
I think taking rear bases is unrealistic to the extreme. Milk runners and griefers do this more than folks using legitimate tactics.
I'm definitely going to try logging in today to try this out.
Hitech: Can you let this run for a week, at least, so we can get an overall idea on how it works?
Take a look at how the US fought Japan in the pacific. The strategy was not to engage on every island but to by pass and cut off large number of enemy forces. They avoided the choke points.
-
Originally posted by Edbert
Anyone else notice how many of those who threaten to quit over this are registered in 2006?
Anyone else notice how many of those who threaten to quit don't?
:rofl
It is haveing an effect, 113th Lucky Strikes has been in the game for a very long time and has lost several long time members. Another just pulled the plug today.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Right-click on the clipboard map, select "Country Status", and it will show all the fields that can be captured for each country.
Nothing like haveing good directions. Any chance that the game documentation has been updated or is everyone just winging it?
-
Originally posted by Traveler
Take a look at how the US fought Japan in the pacific. The strategy was not to engage on every island but to by pass and cut off large number of enemy forces. They avoided the choke points.
Yet the islands they did choose to attack were not defended, right?
:rolleyes:
-
See Rule #5
-
Originally posted by hitech
Smash: Excellent post.
Have you considered what has caused the change for you?
HiTech
That will take some thought. I'll post later on and try to give you a worthwhile response.
I will say this. In the game I've started engaging in some of the stupidest dweeb behaviour. Suicide missions, HOs etc, things I just wouldn't have done before. Its definetly not fair to blame that on the game, it may come down to some weird personal defect of which I have more than one :) But some of it has to do with not caring about the score.
I'm going to get flamed royally for this, but I actually have paid attention to how the scoring system worked. All the factors that play in such as # of kills versus the amount of time you're on, your K/D ratio etc. Those things all discouraged suicide missions and general ill-planning on the part of the player. Of course you had to care about the score and rank.
There is not a lot of satisfaction in playing the game in what I would consider a 'poor' way, at least for me. And I find myself logging much sooner and finding something else to do.
-
The incredible, amazing, growning post! 683 in three days or so!:aok
-
HiTech, I have a question for you. Once this is worked out do you plan to do this in all the arenas/maps or just the large maps or haven't you decided yet? It wou seem EW and MW don't need large maps and this system might benefit them due to low #'s. It would also seem a reasonable idea to leave one LW arena with the unchanged small maps and the other LW arena with the large maps using the new system. Just wondering.
I'd also like to ask one more question that I've always wondered about. Were you and/or your staff involved in the Air Warriors sims? I've always assumed you were due to the similarities.
On to those of you who flew in the original version of Air Warrior. You might remember what we all affectionatly called the Valley of the Dweebs. You always knew, 24/7 that there was a furball going on in the VOD while the strat game was being played out through the rest of the arena. For the life of me I can't remember why that was. If we could remember this there may be a lesson to be considered for future development in AHII.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
OK so bombing stuff is strategic. I'll give you that, but many strategery folks have said it wasn't very strategic so what gives. Can you cite any strategery that does not have to do with bombing strat and has more to do with the topic and base capture?
Umm first off your view of furballing is quite narrow and I guess with such a view I wouldn't enjoy them either. And if your sole purpose in an online combat flight game is not to engage in Air to Air Warfare then why or what is the point of even getting online? Chat room?
Why, what fun has it stomped out for you? Is it a control thing where you have to be the one that selects what base you take. Or again are you just wishing you still had the option to take undefended bases??
under the old system of base capture, one never knew where a base would come under attack until it happened. When a base came under attack, people deffended. You could draw resources away from a base being attacked by counter attacking to capture the base that the nme forces were originating from. Or attaching at a more distant target to draw defenders away form a base. by attacking a more distant target with the thrate of capturing that target.
With the new base capture system the thrate of a more distant base being captured is no longer an issue. there is no need to go defend any other target then the one or two bases that can be captured.
Strategy in the new base capture system is to come to the game with the bigest hord.
because there is no side balancing, only server balancing.
-
Originally posted by Stang
Yet the islands they did choose to attack were not defended, right?
:rolleyes:
i think you got it backwards, they did not attack a base BECAUSE it was defended, the base was defended because of threat of attack.
-
Originally posted by john9001
i think you got it backwards, they did not attack a base BECAUSE it was defended, the base was defended because of threat of attack.
Some were and some were not. You might find reading about the pacific war interesting. Not just the major campaigns but the little islands that served as re- supply depots and other rear operations areas that were taken without firing a shot. You can get information form the DOD a lot of it is online.
-
See Rules #2, #5
-
Originally posted by twitchy
See Rule #5
:rofl
:noid :noid :noid :noid :noid
:huh
:lol
:rofl
:noid
-
Now if you will look at Stang's last post guys you may begin to understand why alot of players dont waste their time posting here.
-
Deleeted
-
:lol
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
Originally posted by twitchy
See Rules #4, #5
Name them. I already know you're full of it, but I'd like you to once again prove it.
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
Originally posted by twitchy
There's one.
:aok
My account is "furboll", and it is decidedly active.
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
Twitchy, you aren't representing yourself or your arguments very well. If you're just going on because it's fun to push these guys' buttons, that's understandable. If you're trying to sway opinions, it isn't working.
(I'm not speaking of only the guys you've been pursefighting with in this thread.)
-
Originally posted by twitchy
See Rule #5
Never told you how to play the game...I just said you'd be a whiney little dork in AW4W had you played because you couldn't capture any bases outside the N bases at the Big Lake.
Now if I had said buck it up little man and get in a fighter and fight instead of getting in a bomber and milk run undefended bases...that would be telling you how to play.
ack-ack
-
Look, it's real simple.
Play your game, furball all you like.
But get off your high horses before you go telling me how to play my game.
I pay the same money you do, I play it the way I like to play it.
Why don't you do the same?
That's all there is to it.
-
Buck up little man...there's change a commin'
ack-ack
-
Originally posted by Ack-Ack
Buck up little man...there's change a commin'
ack-ack
No, there's a test in progress. This is called feedback.
Some of the feedback may not reflect a desire to proceed with the changes.
Gasp...
Some people may not like what you like.
-
twitchy, give up while you're behind. I, like you am not entirely thrilled with these new developments but I don't see where you're contributing anything positive at this point.
-
Guess it's bye bye NOE's then , sigh.
Why not just get it over with, and only have 3 fields, one for each side.
The WHOLE strategy element of this game is going to hell in a handbasket.
Going to make a country getting out the bucket very hard once they are in it.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Guess it's bye bye NOE's then , sigh.
Why not just get it over with, and only have 3 fields, one for each side.
The WHOLE strategy element of this game is going to hell in a handbasket.
Going to make a country getting out the bucket very hard once they are in it.
been saying this for 3 days, and ended up char grilled to a cinder, lol,
;)
P.S. havent seen ya online for a while
-
hey twicthy
,
glad to see your still wading on in here :)
if this 'test' stays surely arena caps should be lidted so people can choose what style of play they want to fly, if thier arena of choice is full,
and
why is there no poll to record results accuratley ?
surely this would help research and development by a bundle?:huh
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Guess it's bye bye NOE's then , sigh.
Why not just get it over with, and only have 3 fields, one for each side.
The WHOLE strategy element of this game is going to hell in a handbasket.
Going to make a country getting out the bucket very hard once they are in it.
I think I may have come up with a way to reintroduce the long NOE runs though they may be more focused than befor. I'll work on it some more.
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
Originally posted by Flayed1
I think I may have come up with a way to reintroduce the long NOE runs though they may be more focused than befor. I'll work on it some more.
cc flayed its some nice work your doing ,
any chance of having 'chain starters' dotted around coast for CV;s and noe over-water missions, not every base but some is an acceptable compromise surely?,
maybe have it so that there are samller and more zones, but to be able to to capture any of these bases you must own the 'keyhole base' for that zone, so have lil clusters of bases that depend on the ownership of say two/one 'keyhole bases'
ie.
Zone 5,
Keyhole bases, 27+26
, perhaps make one a port to secure sea couriered supplies?:huh
bases in zone: 28 29, 30, 31
and say perhaps when 75% of a zone is owned, a new path is unlcocked to make 2 more central and deeper zones available,?
this allows noe bases to strike many more places, but not all, and makes them more srategic, i dno its jsut a thought
<>
-
twitchy, HiTech is doing this test to bring the big maps back into play. Even you have to admit that if the big maps just went up with 200 players or so things would get so spread out that most people who thought they were signing up for a combat sim would be bored to tears. Thefore, I see the wisdom in what he's trying to accomplish even though I don't agree with the implementation. That being said, let's hear some ideas that accomplish this goal but still allow for individual styles of play including yours and those you accuse of "crying".
BTW, I remembered why there were always furballs in the Valley of the Dweebs in the original Air Warrior. It was because the two bases on either side of the VOD were the two closest enemy bases on the map, therefore those who liked to fight, not just fly naturally gravitated to the VOD while the strategists had the rest of the map to play with. I'm not normally a furballer (but occasionally am) but I can still vividly remember some of the fights I got into in the VOD. Funny how you can remember that stuff 10 years later. Some of those were the best fights I've ever been involved in and I think if done right HiTech's plan can bring back that type of memorable experience. Not that I never milk-run but who remembers that milk run that you took even one year ago?
-
omg --I made it all the way to the end.... what do I win?
I've been reading so long I've forgotton who's pissed me off!
-
Originally posted by FBplmmr
omg --I made it all the way to the end.... what do I win?
I've been reading so long I've forgotton who's pissed me off!
LMAO. That was funny! (easily entertained)
-
See Rule #5
-
Originally posted by twitchy
See Rule #5
Once again, I don't hear any solutions.
-
Originally posted by BaldEagl
Once again, I don't hear any solutions.
The solution is real simple, and has been offered over and over
ad nasueum, quit worrying about how other people play the game.
-
See Rule #5
-
Originally posted by BaldEagl
BTW, I remembered why there were always furballs in the Valley of the Dweebs in the original Air Warrior. It was because the two bases on either side of the VOD were the two closest enemy bases on the map, therefore those who liked to fight, not just fly naturally gravitated to the VOD while the strategists had the rest of the map to play with. I'm not normally a furballer (but occasionally am) but I can still vividly remember some of the fights I got into in the VOD. Funny how you can remember that stuff 10 years later. Some of those were the best fights I've ever been involved in and I think if done right HiTech's plan can bring back that type of memorable experience. Not that I never milk-run but who remembers that milk run that you took even one year ago?
VoD was fun...unless you were a Czlander then it was just a long flight but fun once you got there.
ack-ack
-
BTW, I remembered why there were always furballs in the Valley of the Dweebs in the original Air Warrior. It was because the two bases on either side of the VOD were the two closest enemy bases on the map, therefore those who liked to fight, not just fly naturally gravitated to the VOD while the strategists had the rest of the map to play with.
VoD was fun but...
I also remember the players from day one wanted larger maps with more captureable bases and they got it. Some the best of times was FR BIG PAC!
I miss the AW community, didn't see alot of B.S. like this going on in their BBS. I think the reason the AW community got along so well was in AW FR we lived for Scenarios. We became friend during the scenarios and stayed that way afterwords. The one thing we all knew was that the arena was just a place to kill time till the next event. In AW, the game wasn't what was happening in BIC PAC or the other arenas, the game was the scenario's.
Well... thats the way I remember AW when I think back to the "good old days".
CAVALRY
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
There is no way I'm gonna read all 700+ posts in this thread, so I'm just gonna say what I think and hope it's not too repeatative.
The new setup encourages too much Horde style fighting. Don't get me wrong, I like being outnumbered... But I don't like being ridiculously outnumbered. If this kind of setup were to continue, it should atleast increase the number of bases available to capture. Instead of just having 2 available to capture at a time on each front, make it more like 5 or 6. Right now there is pretty much 40+ players within a 10 mile radius.
OTOH, I think this setup would work out nicely in the MW and EW, where the populations aren't that high. This way instead of flying around the entire time in EW looking for someone, the fight is concentrated.
-
See Rule #5
-
Originally posted by twitchy
See Rules #4, #5
Don't call the kettle black.
Originally posted by twitchy See Rules #4, #5[/B]
None of those things happened to me and I've posted pleny of suggestions lately. I'm still awaiting one from you.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Look, it's real simple.
Play your game, furball all you like.
But get off your high horses before you go telling me how to play my game.
I pay the same money you do, I play it the way I like to play it.
Why don't you do the same?
That's all there is to it.
So twitchy, go play the game the way you want to. haven't seen anything yet to stop you.
I'm playing it the way I like to as well.
I get this impression that in time you are going to threaten to hold your breath until you turn blue if Hitech doesn't do what you want.
And then I realize that I'm not real clear what you want, outside of the dreaded 'furballers' to leave and go elsewhere.
-
See Rules #2, #5
-
See Rule #2
-
See Rule #2
-
Originally posted by Raptor
There is no way I'm gonna read all 700+ posts in this thread, so I'm just gonna say what I think and hope it's not too repeatative.
The new setup encourages too much Horde style fighting. Don't get me wrong, I like being outnumbered... But I don't like being ridiculously outnumbered. If this kind of setup were to continue, it should atleast increase the number of bases available to capture. Instead of just having 2 available to capture at a time on each front, make it more like 5 or 6. Right now there is pretty much 40+ players within a 10 mile radius.
OTOH, I think this setup would work out nicely in the MW and EW, where the populations aren't that high. This way instead of flying around the entire time in EW looking for someone, the fight is concentrated.
The system is being ajusted. The next version will have 4 bases per country open on 2 different lines, an inner and an outer. The lines will have forks here and there where more bases will be available to hit..
(http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n259/Flaydone/compello2.jpg)
It should look something like this unless HiTech needs to ajust something.
It still might not be perfect but will loosen the restrictions some.
Oh and if your looking at some of those lines that go out to a single Vbase in the middle of nothing, most of them have a spawn farther up the line to help later in base taking efforts..
The inner line stays near the water so CV's might be a little more usefull.
I think we can modify this to be even better but this should atleast help to get the system worked out.. There have been several other ideas discussed that sound and look good for other ways to implement this system..
I would say give it some time... Also I saw that there were 320 people in that arena tonight with the current system. Wonder how high it will go with a better setup. :)
-
I like the test. I see more bombers in use and nice furballs goin on. Its also cool to see the defence folks meeting the offense folks between base caps and the bombers flying their way through. There is no guess work of where the enemy is going next. Its like the best of both worlds.
:aok :rofl :noid
-
Thanks for all the work on this Flayd1.
-
See Rule #5
-
Originally posted by Wolf14
There is no guess work of where the enemy is going next. Its like the best of both worlds.
Radar dude. You have Radar.
There isn't going to be a middle ground here until you accept the fact that alot of us don't like being crammed into bottlenecks and furballs.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Radar dude. You have Radar.
There isn't going to be a middle ground here until you accept the fact that alot of us don't like anything but sneaking around on the fringes and shooting at inanimate objects.
:huh
-
Originally posted by Laurie
cc flayed its some nice work your doing ,
any chance of having 'chain starters' dotted around coast for CV;s and noe over-water missions, not every base but some is an acceptable compromise surely?,
maybe have it so that there are samller and more zones, but to be able to to capture any of these bases you must own the 'keyhole base' for that zone, so have lil clusters of bases that depend on the ownership of say two/one 'keyhole bases'
<>
I think this could be a possibility though at the moment HT seems to be going with loops so I don't know if the system allows for the starting of other individual threads. Even if it dosn't you could run a line from a freindly base across the water to an NME base and finger out a bit. Either just to be a thorn in the NMEs' side or maybe the base is next to a factory so you could pork strat easier.
Really we just need to get through the tests so HT can see what seems to work best for his vision of the game and then bea able to lay out some ground rules for the lines just like they did for making maps.
Here is a quote from the other thread.
"Thanks flayed1, That should work for the next round. Btw hope to have the system in place, along with releaseing the terrain editor that lays out the paths.
And yes it wouldn't be to big of deal to have multiple path sets per terrain, even thow they are made in the TE, the are not int the terrain file itself, but just reside on the host.
HiTech"
Sounds like we are getting closer to the end of the test :)
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Thanks for all the work on this Flayd1.
Your welcome.
I'm just glad I'm not the one who has to program this stuff in :)
-
OK. I finally relented and went into the orange arena, not just to see what it looked like, but to fly tonight. Let me recount my experience:
On the Rook side of the map (remember, I'm always a Bish) the two capturable bases were both VB's. My first mission I up an F6F heavy and head to the enemy VB. A friendly bomber gets the first two hangers, I get the third plus ord and fuel, targets we won't really need after capture. I fly home thinking maybe this isn't so bad. Now I see enemy dar bar building in the sector defending their VB so I up a Spit. I fly out, get two and get shot down. OK, this is still better than I thought it would be. Dar bar keeps building so I arrange a mission. 10 heavy F6F's, 10 Spits to clear the path and 2 C47's to take the base. We take off with 2 F6F's, 3 Spits and 1 C47 after 15 minutes of plea's to join the mission. We almost succeed but where's that spirit of teamwork I've been reading about in this thread? Most of us re-up to re-try the same run but now we've got Rook fighters coming in from the west of the airfield we're upping from. Most of us get picked by the higher enemy fighters. Now our VB is flashing. I up a Tiger and get a quick kill on a Pazer. Soon I'm facing two Tigers and one gets my turret. I end flight successfully but the hangers are down. I decide it's time for a short break and get absorbed watching the last 30 minutes of School of Rock. I come back and the Rooks have steamrolled 3 bases. There's huge red dar bar and no friendlies up on this side of the map. Rooks have a big #'s advantage. I check the other side of the map but Rooks have #'s and fields and we're not doing much better on the other side. I exit for the Blue arena where I had great fights, mostly outnumbered, but fun, the rest of the night.
A few things to note out of this experience:
1. I had more fun and thought the change wasn't as bad when I was winning than when I was losing.
2. I never saw nor experienced this great team-work I've reading about in this thread.
3. I got bored with my limited options, to the point where TV was a better option than the game (almost unheard of).
4. I got exasporated with the overwhelming #'s the Rooks were able to put against us. Had I had another option, I actually believe I could have turned the course of their attack single handedly or at least I would have given it a try.
5. In the Blue arena I kept continually diving into outnumbered situations (mostly 1 on 3-5's) but at least I had the option of deciding how outnumbered I wanted to be so I had more fun trying it.
Just one nights "test".
-
Three bases Oinked in Blue Arena Tonight. Plenty of Fights.
I went to Orange for a little this evening and Logged out after trying to fight 50 cons with a FPS of 10. No Progress, reminded me alot of playing Asteroids on the Atari.
Furballing is a disease. Base Taking is the Cure.
Oink.
-
On the planned one way capture paths:
I don't get something, isn't it true that if a team gets temporarily bottled into a one way string that they'll never be able to mount a counter attack back out of that corner? Take a look at Flayed's map east landmass northwest corner.. The east country could get pused into that set of fields and thereafter pretty much be ignored as they can't fight their way out.
I'd think you'd want every path link to always be 2 way.
-
Well ....at this point this is becoming an infantry game; this is the negation of aviation.
You could play this game with panzers, soldiers and jeeps....
The peculiarity of aviation is the possibility of having a large range of theatre of operation , skipping the obstacle of having to conquer a city/ base in a sequence given by their proximity.
We are losing all this, we are negating what the planes were used for in war, not only for air superiority in an area.
We will not have bomber mission, noe mission, we will not have mission at all, just a big battle for ONE field then another battle for the following field and so on.....
Try to imagine changing planes with soldiers and panzers......you have the same result, you can do the same.....Aces High is becoming Aces of Land:huh
-
Well I gave it a chance, but this change blows.
It is exactly what I predicted it would be, when the #s are even WWI trench warfare...i.e. lotsa dying with little to show for it or when the #'s are uneven....the hoard just powering on down the line.... no thinking involved.
If all the arena go this way HT will lose my 14.95 a month cause frankly this is BORING!
And why was the change needed? Because people didn't want to have to worry about defending their bases! Well now u got it...no need to worry about your flanks, and no suspense/surprise to keep the game dynamic! Also no battles between small groups where a true display of skill will make a difference, only 'the hoard' vs 'the hoard' or else 'the hoard' rolling down the line.
cnuk
-
Originally posted by Traveler
Nothing like haveing good directions. Any chance that the game documentation has been updated or is everyone just winging it?
The game documentation (http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahgs/clipboard.html) was updated the day the test went into effect.
-
*Snip*
-
Originally posted by BaldEagl
OK. I finally relented and went into the orange arena, not just to see what it looked like, but to fly tonight. Let me recount my experience:
On the Rook side of the map (remember, I'm always a Bish) the two capturable bases were both VB's. My first mission I up an F6F heavy and head to the enemy VB. A friendly bomber gets the first two hangers, I get the third plus ord and fuel, targets we won't really need after capture. I fly home thinking maybe this isn't so bad. Now I see enemy dar bar building in the sector defending their VB so I up a Spit. I fly out, get two and get shot down. OK, this is still better than I thought it would be. Dar bar keeps building so I arrange a mission. 10 heavy F6F's, 10 Spits to clear the path and 2 C47's to take the base. We take off with 2 F6F's, 3 Spits and 1 C47 after 15 minutes of plea's to join the mission. We almost succeed but where's that spirit of teamwork I've been reading about in this thread? Most of us re-up to re-try the same run but now we've got Rook fighters coming in from the west of the airfield we're upping from. Most of us get picked by the higher enemy fighters. Now our VB is flashing. I up a Tiger and get a quick kill on a Pazer. Soon I'm facing two Tigers and one gets my turret. I end flight successfully but the hangers are down. I decide it's time for a short break and get absorbed watching the last 30 minutes of School of Rock. I come back and the Rooks have steamrolled 3 bases. There's huge red dar bar and no friendlies up on this side of the map. Rooks have a big #'s advantage. I check the other side of the map but Rooks have #'s and fields and we're not doing much better on the other side. I exit for the Blue arena where I had great fights, mostly outnumbered, but fun, the rest of the night.
A few things to note out of this experience:
1. I had more fun and thought the change wasn't as bad when I was winning than when I was losing.
2. I never saw nor experienced this great team-work I've reading about in this thread.
3. I got bored with my limited options, to the point where TV was a better option than the game (almost unheard of).
4. I got exasporated with the overwhelming #'s the Rooks were able to put against us. Had I had another option, I actually believe I could have turned the course of their attack single handedly or at least I would have given it a try.
5. In the Blue arena I kept continually diving into outnumbered situations (mostly 1 on 3-5's) but at least I had the option of deciding how outnumbered I wanted to be so I had more fun trying it.
Just one nights "test".
Vast majority of the 'teamwork' here has been on the part of Rooks, which have skewed LW arena 's for the shorterm (unfortunately), as the megasquad countries have apparently decided they cant excerise dominance with this setup-- I stayed in Orange for a couple missions last night (Rook) went to Blue out of boredom to particpate in an emdless series of 5 on 10's coming in at 20k--(died a lot, but it was slightly more fun than having NO targets)
I DO have great hopes for this new setup, though. Nothin wrong with a little fight to take a base
-
Just had a thought......
Instead of straight line capture....install a radius system.
so if you attack and capture a base.....all bases within 'x' miles, become capturable.
In that same vein...a CV, all bases within 'x' miles of the CV become capturable as well
I think that this will focus the fight in certain areas, which I'm assuming the whole idea of the orange arena tryout is about, but then allow for a little bit of latitude for sneaks, end runs and flanking maneuvers. Plus it can give the ability to do a 'deep strike' to mess up an enemy's rear.
As well, the CV's can be use to open up a new front, and are no longer useless if the capture line is inland. (will it be normandy, or the Pas de Calaise?)
Not being a programming geek, but, programming in the allowable capture distance could be used along the same vien of ENY and adjustable according to arena conditions.
like I say....just a thought
-
Fixed it Viking. By the way, that would have been a good use of a PM. But thank you for pointing it out.
-
Originally posted by Booz
On the planned one way capture paths:
I don't get something, isn't it true that if a team gets temporarily bottled into a one way string that they'll never be able to mount a counter attack back out of that corner? Take a look at Flayed's map east landmass northwest corner.. The east country could get pused into that set of fields and thereafter pretty much be ignored as they can't fight their way out.
I'd think you'd want every path link to always be 2 way.
The one way strings start at a T base so the idea is that to save the one way string you need to take the T base base back from the attackers by coming down from the main 2 way base loop. Then you would have to clean any attackers out of the one way string if they had taken any bases on it..
The attackers on the other hand are going to want to move on up the 2 way main chain fast to keep the defenders from getting the T base back while cleaning out the 1 way chain so they didn't have defenders harassing them
from the rear.
If the lines are done right no country should ever be totaly stuck. You may have pockets of bases that need saving from the main line but that is it.
This will basicly for a limited time open up another front on the map... If the timing was right there could be 4 fronts open against 1 attacker at the same time depending on how they moved up the chain. And if the timing was real good that would be a total of 8 bases that were being fought over at the same time if you include the 3rd country though I would think that would be rare.
This is not taking into concideration any future line maps with CAAT bases thrown in here and there for NOE raids and such. Also I think that we could at some points branch off into 2 other lines instead of the small single branches I have here.
What I was going for on my line setup was an improved version of the current setup with more thought given to what base was captured when to avoid the (To many Vbases in a row with no air cover) type stall the current setup seems to have. But yet keep HiTechs new idea, the forking 1 way lines simple so we can see how it works.
I would think that after the tests are done we could then make more complex and exciting line maps.
-
Originally posted by ridley1
Just had a thought......
Instead of straight line capture....install a radius system.
so if you attack and capture a base.....all bases within 'x' miles, become capturable.
In that same vein...a CV, all bases within 'x' miles of the CV become capturable as well
I think that this will focus the fight in certain areas, which I'm assuming the whole idea of the orange arena tryout is about, but then allow for a little bit of latitude for sneaks, end runs and flanking maneuvers. Plus it can give the ability to do a 'deep strike' to mess up an enemy's rear.
As well, the CV's can be use to open up a new front, and are no longer useless if the capture line is inland. (will it be normandy, or the Pas de Calaise?)
Not being a programming geek, but, programming in the allowable capture distance could be used along the same vien of ENY and adjustable according to arena conditions.
like I say....just a thought
Actually I think this is possible to some degree now. HT said something to the effect of having the line branch out to 3 bases from a single base. When I was working on this line setup I might have gone to concervitive with my forks but then again it should make it easy to see how the branch system works this way.
EDIT: Skuzz your up early :)
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Fixed it Viking. By the way, that would have been a good use of a PM. But thank you for pointing it out.
Oops! Sorry.
Fixed it.
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
Ok folks, enough with the personal attacks and derogatory remarks.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Ok folks, enough with the personal attacks and derogatory remarks.
Fair enough skuzzy....hope you stand on also.
-
Originally posted by LYNX
Fair enough skuzzy....hope you stand on also.
who is this "Also" and why should Skuzzy stand on him..... :noid
-
Twitchy
I get exactly where your coming. If a base isn't defended then it's NOT defended....simple. If they wanna ignore alert calls them that's up to them....simple. If they wanna up fly to the middle and die that's up to them...simple BUT it has changed mate. It's done it's gone and it's still being tweaked ..reference Flayed1 posts.
Note first and last sentence HTC said to you.
Has it ever possibly crossed your mind that I might actually be good at what I do. That possibly I take It very seriously , that I try get ideas in any way shape or form I can think of. That I play the game under different accounts when I want to get a feel for whats really going on. That I possible have long term friends who I have played with ,for over 17 years in online sims, that I talk to and get their feel and their opinion?
Not getting at you twitchy but state, in light of new system, what you liked about older system and possible translation to new system. I personally would like damaged factories to open more field for capture or the city has to be bombed opening all that's Zone bases for capture. How about ANY hits on HQ allows town buildings to stay for 90 minutes. The dar thing is getting old now. No one bothers about 1 set of bombers any more because they can't influence anything. 1 set can't destroy HQ but 1 set could allow town building to stay down DOUBLE the time...wooohooo "lite the blue touch paper and stand back"......rocket humour :D
I to had a weak system where smoke and lots of activity massively affected my abilities to play. I got OMEGA driver which helped. I then got a Vid card upgrade. Went from 14 FPS to a massive 26 and I tweaked it to a regular 32fps. 4 yrs went by before I could justify upgrading my tower. Spent 250 quid on new tower 90 on Ch stick 70 on peddles 30 per month on cable connection 2 quid electric per week and 9 quid for AH per month.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Not quite correct Tilt. If the fields are not part of the path, they can be captured at any time.
Can you elabotare on this? From what I've seen ALL fields are part of a path, except for the CV's.
-
Originally posted by Donzo
Can you elabotare on this? From what I've seen ALL fields are part of a path, except for the CV's.
For example, A 83 is currently not on a path and is elegible for capture at any time.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Ok folks, enough with the personal attacks and derogatory remarks.
T3h Skuzzster is t3h pwn!!!
-
Originally posted by Lusche
For example, A 83 is currently not on a path and is elegible for capture at any time.
But from what I've seen in the arena, all of the bases are attached to a path, therefore they cannot be captured at any time. The ones that show in the list are the ones currently able to be captured on the path and the CV's.
-
Originally posted by Donzo
But from what I've seen in the arena, all of the bases are attached to a path, therefore they cannot be captured at any time. The ones that show in the list are the ones currently able to be captured on the path and the CV's.
There aren't a lot at the moment, but off the top of my head, 83 (east end of map), V110 (south end of map), few others scattered around that aren't on the line.
-
Originally posted by Donzo
But from what I've seen in the arena, all of the bases are attached to a path, therefore they cannot be captured at any time. The ones that show in the list are the ones currently able to be captured on the path and the CV's.
Believe me: It is NOT on a path and can be captured any time.
-
Originally posted by Lusche
Believe me: It is NOT on a path and can be captured any time.
Ok, thanks. I'll take a closer look.
-
Originally posted by Donzo
But from what I've seen in the arena, all of the bases are attached to a path, therefore they cannot be captured at any time. The ones that show in the list are the ones currently able to be captured on the path and the CV's.
Vast majority are part of the Path, but if ya can figger how to slink past the front and middle bases, ya can get some Hail Mary captures in rear areas--I think there's enough room to noe around edges and not make base flash--if there isnt, just have some tard in a high 51 or somethin activate the dar ring at the base(s) ya have to sneak past--works every time
-
In that same vein...a CV, all bases within 'x' miles of the CV become capturable as well
Whichever country controls and defends a CV better will win the map. Would create some great cv battles. We should try this out.
-
The pwnOmeter going off the wall for teh Skuzz! Has to be at least 100 edited posts in this thread! :rofl :lol
-
Hey twitch and all, please read this concerning NOE's and base capture. HiTech posted it in another thread.
Originally posted by hitech
Killjoy: Element of surprise, while sounding great from an offensive mode, create big problems for actual game play.
Think of it this way, if the element of surprise is so overwellming that there is no way to defend against, then that is the path of least resistance, and hence will become the primary mode of attack. That is the state of affairs as it stood previously with big maps.
Now there are NOE raids that do not cause this, I.E. NOE raids to acheive singular objectives, I.E. hitting cities, factories, possibly 1 open field deep in enemy territory. But if all objectives can be taken by NOE raids, IT creates non defensible game play.
2nd it easy to say, well people should just defend then. Think about what it really takes to defend against NOE raids, and do you really want to do that defense.
To defend successfully at NOE raids, you need more than 1 player.
2nd to defend against them you have to sit in the tower, waiting for the base to flash, and then up soon as it does.
Does that defense sound fun to you ? I.E. do you really want to just wait in tower for something that might or might not occur? Sure if you new a NOE mission was otw, but didn't know where it might be fun. But not where you don't even know if one is going to occur.
Hence what we are talking about is simply balance. I see where NOE raids can be fun, but we have to have a system where they do not become the path of least resistance for base capture.
HiTech
-
See Rule #5
-
Believe me: It is NOT on a path and can be captured any time.
But... so what? If its not on a path, you can't move out from there anyplace, because you can't capture anything around you. But the bases around it can capture it back. What good is it to take???
CAVALRY
-
Try reading it again. He wants balance, not a game of virtual chasing the tail around in circles but never catching it. He reasoned it out very well. That's your choice for not listening. Whine on.
-
"we have to have a system where they do not become the path of least resistance for base capture."
Forced Furballing.
-
Originally posted by CAV
But... so what? If its not on a path, you can't move out from there anyplace, because you can't capture anything around you. But the bases around it can capture it back. What good is it to take???
CAVALRY
If it's not taken, and your country captures the fields on the line past it, you've got the enemy behind your lines. If the enemy takes that and the bases past it, you can take it and get behind their lines. I'd rather be able to hit the enemy from 2 sides than just one, and any additional point from which we can maintain an attack, or defend against one is better than nothing.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
I'm done arguing with you guys over it.
Umm put a sock in it then. We get it your pissed cuz you can score pad .
Bronk
-
Originally posted by twitchy
"we have to have a system where they do not become the path of least resistance for base capture."
Forced Furballing.
Let's be honest, and try to refrain from namecalling and mockery. The simple fact of the matter is that you do not want, and will not tolerate, any sort of setup where you will be forced to either defend against, or be opposed by, any players from the other countries. While there's not anything really wrong with that in the context of some games, it's completely out of place in a multiplayer game designed so that players can, and are encouraged to, fight against one another.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
"we have to have a system where they do not become the path of least resistance for base capture."
Forced Furballing.
and that's a bad thing? you don't need to 'furball', but you DO need fight.
why are you complaining about fighting? isn't that what you pay for? why on earth would you pay to play online if all you want to do is fly alone and destroy buildings? you can do it all by yourself offline. HT isn't trying to get people furballing, he's trying to give everyone something to do, while keeping player interaction, action, and fun involved in the game...
if that isn't what you want, go and play a boxed sim or something you muppet
-
Originally posted by twitchy
See Rule #5
How in the hell did he get furballer out of a post that was all about base captures???:huh
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
See Rules #2, #5
-
Oh and btw, the new system seems to be steering two countries to fight against one! I have been checking the #'s and when one country is down, the other two are ganging it pretty hard! For instance today there were 63 rooks and 59 bish and 46 knights, I looked at the map and noticed only one half of a darbar across the bish/rook lines. The fights were up north and down south and it was gangtard central! All 63 rooks hitting one base up near the HQ, and all 59 bish hitting the port down south. Pretty much snowplowing through the chain! It doesn't really make any difference to me, I am just stating an assessment!:aok
-
Originally posted by hitech
Killjoy: Element of surprise, while sounding great from an offensive mode, create big problems for actual game play.
Think of it this way, if the element of surprise is so overwellming that there is no way to defend against, then that is the path of least resistance, and hence will become the primary mode of attack. That is the state of affairs as it stood previously with big maps.
Now there are NOE raids that do not cause this, I.E. NOE raids to acheive singular objectives, I.E. hitting cities, factories, possibly 1 open field deep in enemy territory. But if all objectives can be taken by NOE raids, IT creates non defensible game play.
2nd it easy to say, well people should just defend then. Think about what it really takes to defend against NOE raids, and do you really want to do that defense.
To defend successfully at NOE raids, you need more than 1 player.
2nd to defend against them you have to sit in the tower, waiting for the base to flash, and then up soon as it does.
Does that defense sound fun to you ? I.E. do you really want to just wait in tower for something that might or might not occur? Sure if you new a NOE mission was otw, but didn't know where it might be fun. But not where you don't even know if one is going to occur.
Hence what we are talking about is simply balance. I see where NOE raids can be fun, but we have to have a system where they do not become the path of least resistance for base capture.
HiTech
_____________________________ _____________________________ __
If this is the case and the real reason for this test why not just add low level radar detection on the big maps? Everything shows up no matter how low. In fact take it a step farther. Make everone everwhere visible all the time. Eliminate the concept of radar entirely from the big maps (big maps only). I for one wouldn't mind being able to see where everone is and in what numbers. Eliminate the element of surprise. Eliminate the path of least resistance for base capture. Know where the fights are.
-
Had high hopes for the new idea.... but still the same old hord. I guess there is no fix, no matter how good something is.... users can ruin it.
A simple change of teams to even teams is beyond so many folks ability... just too many non-competitive individuals out there.
-
BaldEagl: I have considered doing that. The point being there is still fun, and valid tactics for staying hidden. As I have stated factory raids going deep. Hitting surrounding airports flight capabilities. All in all I believe some fog of war is good, like I said it is all about balance.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
BaldEagl: I have considered doing that. The point being there is still fun, and valid tactics for staying hidden. As I have stated factory raids going deep. Hitting surrounding airports flight capabilities. All in all I believe some fog of war is good, like I said it is all about balance.
HiTech
I agree.... besides with this new system you should know were most of the people are most of the time. With the possibility of focused NOE raids...
-
See Rule #5
-
Originally posted by KTM520guy
See Rule #5
lol, Again, HT has talked about nothing but base captures which now should take better coordination and team play! Where do you find anything in the change that said anything about just furballing. He said balanced gameplay! That means now teams/squads/toolshedders just might have to fight for their "booty"! Maybe you're just unconfident about your ability to form up with some people and attain your objective...ie bases, strats, cv's...etc. Just now you'll have to actually fight for it! :aok
-
Now that I've tried the new system for base captures I will make a few comments about it. I think it mite work out .
BUT, Everyone on a side will have to work togather more than every before.
Bish. have always had a problem with defending and now it's just as important to defend as capture. We will have to look at other bases that need to be hit (take out trps/ord) to help protect a base that can be captured. the capture order will change sometimes because another side takes a base and then we have to change the direction of out attack.
PROBLEM, Someone will have to be in charge and tell people where to go (defend this field, take out ord here, attack there}.
ANSWER, Mega Squads like we haven't seen before. Bn. size with companies and Plts. with a set chain of command.
OH, SORRY. big Sqds are surpose to be a thing of the past.
__________________
-
See Rules #2, #4
-
Perhaps HT didn't explain the reason behind all of this clearly enough.
This change isn't about furballers, strat killers or war winners. It's about bringing the game back to what it is intended to be....a game about COMBAT. The last few years, the game has become a game of combat AVOIDANCE. While this is a logical real world[/u] strategy, it really sucks for overall game play. Way more often than not, large groups attack seperate areas of the map and avoid contact with each other until they are forced into that situation. The game was never intended to be a Race to Reset game.
I am often amazed at the number of new people that don't have a clue about how satisfying succeeding versus a live opponent (or opponents) can be. They will simply send hours driving about in tanks and M3's taking undefended fields and believe that they are accomplishing something. In point of fact, they are missing the best part of the game...competition. Without it...folks might just as well play the damned game offline and save the $15 per month.
Oh..BTW, for those worried about being out classed by live opponents...
If I can be successful (and I can) ANYONE can. :D
-
Originally posted by KTM520guy
See Rule #5
Ummm Then I must be a trator to my squad and my way of playing for working with HT to try getting this system to work...
I'm a member of the Birds Of Prey (BOP), one of the largest multi winged squads in AH I would guess. And not only that I am CO of the Bomber wing....
Now I don't think you could get much farther from a furballer than I am. So I really don't see how you figure it's the furballers fault if I can see where this system could be a good thing. Granted the original try at this system is very furball oriented, it just crams to many people into a couple spots with not much in the way of variation but it is being looked into and hopefully fixed....
People need to look beyond the obvious clashes and deaper into the stratigic side of this system.. I think part of the problem is people go into LW Orange and see a very much furball oriented first try at the system and come in here without reading any of the posts about developing it and just start bashing away. Also some of you furballer types arn't helping by responding to the anti furballer posts. I would like people to ignore the inflamitory post and concentrate on constructive ones like in the other thread, it is almost all constructive ideas on how to make the system better than it is now.
Now look at this thread. I would say 75% of it is furballer VS toolsheder rubish.
If you can look beyond the surface of the basic system there is, can be and I think will be more to it than just 2 bases slamming togeather..
AGAIN I say just roll with the changes and see what it evolves into and don't take the first try at face value.
Thank You
FLAYDone
-
See Rule #2
-
See Rule #5
-
Ummm Then I must be a trator to my squad and my way of playing for working with HT to try getting this system to work...
I wouldn't think you are a trator... I just find it odd you have time to work on it. Aren't most men it Nyssa Or. down at "Miss Sally's this time of night? :O
Not that I would know anything about that place....
CAVALRY
-
Originally posted by twitchy
See Rule #2
Because it's after office hours and HTC an Skuzzy are in the bar. Not only that it's Sunday.
Usually the borads ain't monitored over the weekend. If they don't delet on monday I'll be very suprised.
Hang in there :aok
-
Greetings,
I understand what HT is attempting to achieve. Created a few wargames myself back in the ol' cardboard map and counter days. . . . Anyway, one of the aspects missing in AH is the logistical piece.
Frankly, next to the intel piece, that was the most difficult to work into a game. Lines of Communications (LOCs) drive strategic and grand tactical operations far more than the tactical objectives. Up to this point in the game we have had a series of tactical engagements that decide the outcome of the war. Little strategic thought (notice I did not say none) was required to 'win' the game. Now one LOC will drives a county's advance. Granted, this requires even less strategic thought - but from what I read, it is not the desired endstate.
Hopefully we get multiple lines of advance driven by the structure of a LOC from one or more LOC to another set of bases. The frame work of the logistical lines will drive the advance / defense of an area. Until now the ground, mountains and oceans were just something to be flown over (or driven), now the terrain can mean something and analysis for both offense and defense can be done.
More importantly, the frame work can be changed for each type map which could result in a different problem set for the same map. HT is adding grand tactical operations to the game.
Now, we need to put the fuel octain ratings back in the mix, a Spit / LA and Tiger factory in the strategic mix and add in the improvements to performance if you land your plane also . . . .
:noid
Regards,
-
Originally posted by CAV
I wouldn't think you are a trator... I just find it odd you have time to work on it. Aren't most men it Nyssa Or. down at "Miss Sally's this time of night? :O
Not that I would know anything about that place....
CAVALRY
Where are you located CAV?? sound close. I think Miss Sally's has closed down, at least thats the way it looks. :)
-
Originally posted by eagl
Because most of the arguments against the new rules so far seem to focus on complaining that they can't attack undefended fields.
My arguments have been far from this as a reason. Read my posts over the past 2-3 days before generalizing like this.
Originally posted by eagl
Sounds like they're scared people will find out how good (or not so good) they really are.
I'm not. I might not be great and I might not always win but I'm usually up for a challenge. I guess that why I always find myself outnumbered.
Disclaimer: Not speaking for twitchy.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
See Rule #5
Beat you to the punch on that one Kev. I suggested this several days ago when I was REALLY upset.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
See Rule #5
Just hold on Kev it will get better. The next step looks to be my first attempt on the line system but I think I can do better and I think it will get better.
-
Greetings,
Would like to help if needed.
Regards,
-
Wow! A lot of differing opinions here there and everywhere. When I first saw the map in orange, I thought 'NO WAY'...but after a few days, and if everyone would think creatively....There are at least 12 different battles that could be fought at any given time should the number of players be enough. So it's not as limiting as it first seemed and it does enhance that principal of 'Teamwork".
Even though there is a thing or two that I believe shouldn't exist, purely due to the fact that they did not exist in WWII, (And thats what this game is based upon)........HTC, The game is great!
-
Olde English 800
(http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/5/55/180px-OE_800.JPG)
-
Originally posted by Boomer49
Wow! A lot of differing opinions here there and everywhere. When I first saw the map in orange, I thought 'NO WAY'...but after a few days, and if everyone would think creatively....There are at least 12 different battles that could be fought at any given time should the number of players be enough. So it's not as limiting as it first seemed and it does enhance that principal of 'Teamwork".
Even though there is a thing or two that I believe shouldn't exist, purely due to the fact that they did not exist in WWII, (And thats what this game is based upon)........HTC, The game is great!
incorrect sir, its 6, 3 on each country,
restrictive.
It enhances player per grid concentration, nothing else, nothing more.
-
Originally posted by Laurie
It enhances player per grid concentration, nothing else, nothing more. [/B]
And this is bad because....?
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
Like he would want that job. It's a step down from god of a virtual world. :)
Who is this HT guy?
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
Perhaps HT didn't explain the reason behind all of this clearly enough.
This change isn't about furballers, strat killers or war winners. It's about bringing the game back to what it is intended to be....a game about COMBAT. The last few years, the game has become a game of combat AVOIDANCE. While this is a logical real world[/u] strategy, it really sucks for overall game play. Way more often than not, large groups attack seperate areas of the map and avoid contact with each other until they are forced into that situation. The game was never intended to be a Race to Reset game.
I am often amazed at the number of new people that don't have a clue about how satisfying succeeding versus a live opponent (or opponents) can be. They will simply send hours driving about in tanks and M3's taking undefended fields and believe that they are accomplishing something. In point of fact, they are missing the best part of the game...competition. Without it...folks might just as well play the damned game offline and save the $15 per month.
Oh..BTW, for those worried about being out classed by live opponents...
If I can be successful (and I can) ANYONE can. :D
I totally concur with NB's assessment of his skill level:)
-
I spent some serious time playing Saturday. I'm still not sure I like the new setup or not. I will say that I spent more time in a gv than I have in a long time. And as for flying NOE, I took a goon below tree top level to sneak past 3 enemy cons, over their own base, to land in their town, "dropped" troops and captured the base.
It impressed Lynx, who, btw, is probably one of the better "generals" the game has (the other noteworthy that I can think of is ghi).
I see the pluses and minuses to this setup. For the strat crews, your objectives haven't changed. For the bomber crews, the bases around the "next-in-line" base could use having supplies, troops and gv's dropped. GV'ers, you know where the next great tank battle is going to be. Same goes for the furballers.
I don't know about the complaints about "not like WWII". This seems to fall into the same "order of advance" that both the axis and allied powers followed. No point in wasting troops and material capturing and holding a base that's indefensible. No point capturing and holding a defensible point behind enemy lines, where the supply line gets cut. Both powers knew what they could afford to loose, where they needed to defend and what needed capture for advancement (see "island hopping" for just one, but fantastic, example).
TexInVa
aka- Flacco
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
There aren't a lot at the moment, but off the top of my head, 83 (east end of map), V110 (south end of map), few others scattered around that aren't on the line.
.
yes, those 2 only, but the left side of map country doesnt have any miised out of blueline, which makes 83, and V110 look like mistakes, and not really design points.
-
Originally posted by Silat
I totally concur with NB's assessment of his skill level:)
Thanks for the acknowledgement of my virtual suckage. :)
-
See Rules #6, #2, #5
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
If HTC is promoting players playing against players, how can that be bad. No one is taking away base capture. If anything it's going to put the ACM guys in the mix of helping to take bases. Integrating the different styles of play is what it should be about.
IMHO, this just turns AHII into more of an arcade game.
Less strategy. No thinking required. Just fly..join the horde...die...repeat.
Its starting to look more and more like the old "Air Attack." game.
Seriously, it is.
I, for one, would love to see that game that's advertised by HTC on television....
you know, the "war torn skies of europe" one...
David
-
Overlag, your last post makes me wonder if you have done anything else but attack.
And all your points make the new system even more worth while.
1) Before the change, many times when I have upped to defend and if the numbers were close to equal, we would stop the first wave, then the second wave then the pool dried up. They stopped coming because they couldn't fight through the defense. Game over good fights over. 20 mins later you see these same guys just took an undefended base, Yay high five to everyone for not fighting!!!!
In the new system they have no where else to go, or if they do move their options are limited enough that as defenders you can follow them around, thus making the game more realistic and seeming like all the bases are well defended.
In the new system, now instead of running to a new base where no one is at, maybe they have to enlist some bombers to go hit the surrounding bases, or send out fighter sweeps to suppress the surrounding fields, while another group goes after the capturable field. Straters win because now they have to actually use tactics other than hiding.
I think it was baldEagle that was talking about how he was going after the VH and got frustrated and left because he couldn't get the capture. Well my answer is, BEagle YOUR OLD TACTICS didn't and won't work. If your a strat guy, start creating new tactics. Instead of getting all your numbers and going after one objective you should have created smaller groups and hit the fields where the defenders were coming from. NEW TACTICS!!!
Did you ever think to fight them where they were upping instead of fighting them at the base you want to take.
Unfortunately he just took his ball and went home, sort of sad that he didn't rise to the challenge. If all you guys want are easy captures then you really don't want better strat I guess.
2) You up to defend a base, you dont have equal numbers, you get off the field a couple times, repel the first attackers, now all of a sudden it's 20 on 2 and you wonder where all your countrymen are. You look at the map and they are off hitting undefended fields somewhere else. Yay High Five everyone for not fighting a sole and taking undefended bases.
In the new system, with the limited fields hopefully you will see the people that were strung out all over the map that did not want to be in the attacking horde, now grouped together defending one area rather than 1 or 2 spread out all over the map pointlessly defending. Now these guys are able to better group their efforts and defend.
All in all the new changes forces you stray guys to come up with tactics. Something I would think you all have been wishing for, for a long time. It breaths life back into the mega squads, but forces them to take there mega numbers against, hopefully the brunt of the enemy's defenders.
If all you guys opposed to this system, would stop worrying about having to fight it out, and embrace fighting then you would see all the possibilities such a system can deliver. :aok
-
LOL Delta, I would think you of all people would be able to see the need for better tactics in this new system and be able to rise to the occasion rather than cry in your beer.
Where are all these great stratergerist that have been clammering for better more challenging tactics. Now you have them and you are all running for the door. What gives?
You guys have to open your eyes, accept the changes and see what new tactics you can dream up.
I think it's sort of sad, when you have dedicated furballers being able to understand, see the need, create and execute the new tactics while the bonafide strat guys are just sticking their heads in the sand.
Minus Flayed who has stepped up and is doing a great job trying to make this a better game for everyone.
-
IMHO, this just turns AHII into more of an arcade game.
Strategy is more important now then ever before, Yes it can become an arcade type game if you let it and it happen to us last night in that we let a tank battle keep going to long without trying to take out the VH. We were defending a capture able base, Strategy would have been to down VH that was attacking us and go after the capture able base. This is where the large squads will come into play as people learn to play the new type maps if HT keeps them. The loose knit play we have had will not be effective in here, more to capture a base now then just put togather a mission to go after it. You will have to pay atenation to what is happening at bases around it and your base and be prepare to react to it.
MORE STRATEGY WILL BE NEEDED TO WIN A BASE OR MAP.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
I think it was baldEagle that was talking about how he was going after the VH and got frustrated and left because he couldn't get the capture. Well my answer is, BEagle YOUR OLD TACTICS didn't and won't work. If your a strat guy, start creating new tactics. Instead of getting all your numbers and going after one objective you should have created smaller groups and hit the fields where the defenders were coming from. NEW TACTICS!!!
Did you ever think to fight them where they were upping instead of fighting them at the base you want to take.
OK, so you're suggesting that if I broke my 6 man group into smaller groups and went to attack other bases we would have achieved our objective? Get real. We needed everyone we had to punch our way through the Rooks just to get to the capturable field and had we had a few more pilots we would have had the capture.
Originally posted by Quah!
Unfortunately he just took his ball and went home, sort of sad that he didn't rise to the challenge.
I didn't get frustrated and go home until I was the only one left being steamrolled by the Rooks. I want you to tell me how long you'de like to keep playing 1 on 10, 20, 30. If thats what gets you off then go for it. Like I've said in a previous post, I'm usually up for a challenge but this was ridiculous.
-
Originally posted by robjw1977
And this is bad because....?
...it makes it harder to capture bases.
-
Wow, I was afk for a few days and see that Twitchy has stopped whining via the wall-o-text posts and just keeps trying to get me to read the rules, mainly #4 and #5.
Okay I'll go read them, thx twitchy.
-
Anybody have the Cliff Notes version of this thread?
-
Originally posted by Grits
Anybody have the Cliff Notes version of this thread?
-something changed
-this is good
-this is bad
-the sky is falling
-what happeneded here?
-fighting is bad
-furballers are arcaders
-i'm quitting if i don't get my way
-whaaaaaa!
-see rule #4, #5, #2425123846
...I think that about summarizes things...
-
I just used you as an example Eagle don't get all bunched up. So yes if your country's resources are being overwhelmed because you don't have enough numbers to fight the other two countries that is a problem and why with this system I think 2 country's is the way to go.
If it's because your country was using all it's resources to play the old game of only hitting the other team where they are weakest with overwhelming numbers and wasted resources rather than just enough to get the job done and sending the excess to where you were fighting then it's your countries and the people on at that time's tactics that suck and need to change.
Or maybe you personally couldn't foster the people to join you, no dis intended, but that doesn't mean this change sucks.
-
Originally posted by Edbert
-something changed
-this is good
-this is bad
-the sky is falling
-what happeneded here?
-fighting is bad
-furballers are arcaders
-i'm quitting if i don't get my way
-whaaaaaa!
-see rule #4, #5, #2425123846
...I think that about summarizes things...
Sweet, thanks Ed. I have the Cliff Notes version of the "Arena split" threads and they are identical to this one so I'm good. :)
-
Originally posted by robjw1977
And this is bad because....?
It causes stagnant maps,
un-reaistic sized so called 'dog-gights'.
forces one style of play,
ends the strategic side of game ALMOST completely,
if this is fun to you, would you like air spawns and industructable fields, all in 1 gridsquare?
-
It causes stagnant maps,
No it forces people to think up new tactics and strategy. Just because you and the other so called strategerist can't see this doesn't mean maps will stagnate. Those that are true strategerist will come up with new, more fun and better tactics to make this work.
I have been here since 01 and seen this game go through many renditions. All your arguments were used when they introduced large maps, made the cites and fields bigger etc.
un-reaistic sized so called 'dog-gights'.
You mean dogfights you are not accustomed to and have not learned how to deal with maybe. Go read Peter Townsends Battle of Britain and let me know if you think the dogfights are unrealistic in size.
forces one style of play,
ends the strategic side of game ALMOST completely,
if this is fun to you, would you like air spawns and industructable fields, all in 1 gridsquare?
Again shows a lack of vision and creativity on your part that is all. Time will bear this out and you will see the silliness of many in this thread.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
No it forces people to think up new tactics and strategy. Just because you and the other so called strategerist can't see this doesn't mean maps will stagnate. Those that are true strategerist will come up with new, more fun and better tactics to make this work.
I have been here since 01 and seen this game go through many renditions. All your arguments were used when they introduced large maps, made the cites and fields bigger etc.
You mean dogfights you are not accustomed to and have not learned how to deal with maybe. Go read Peter Townsends Battle of Britain and let me know if you think the dogfights are unrealistic in size.
Again shows a lack of vision and creativity on your part that is all. Time will bear this out and you will see the silliness of many in this thread.
never try and tell a brit, about the battle of britain, especially when his family includes to RAF officers of that era ;) , just some advice ,,]
also, BOB was not just fighters flying around airfileds, they worked in groups of four picking off bombers, fighting 109's.
there is only 1 tactic available now my friend, carpet bombing the hangers, as there is little chance of you taking a field otherwise when half the country is there,
so frankly, that piont is in-valid, and shows dreamy, rose-tinted vision on your part.
Time won't bear this out for you, as you could sit in a black dotted furball for eternity, and not notice a base flashing form your 'lack of vision on your part'.
your happy, thats good, but some arent, so have some respect them, we all deserve our say, if you agree or not, you'll find this thread started for me, when i claimed unhappy with changes, and was burnt like charcoal, no-one canm have their say if it doesnt agree with the likes of certain people.
-
Lauri you know nothing about me, you made that clear in your initial post so don't stipulate what I do and don't, it just shows your age and ignorance.
So you are a Brit, congrats LOL, then you should know a little something about the size and breadth of those battles and the numbers the germans threw at your ancestors. Or are you telling me Peter Townsend was FOS and his book was complete bullocks???
You keep your head in the sand, there are other that will take up the challenge. You will learn someday.:aok
-
Originally posted by Laurie
incorrect sir, its 6, 3 on each country,
restrictive.
It enhances player per grid concentration, nothing else, nothing more.
Think creatively.... the bases that can be captured, suppression of any air support base nearby or veh base so you can capture the target base, so IF you have enough people, thats 3 maybe even 4 battles on just one capturable base...really depends on how creative the group your flying with wants to be.
Think outside the box.
-
Bingo Boomer, something tells me creativity is not some of these guys strong points and being impetuous is.
-
Originally posted by Laurie
there is only 1 tactic available now my friend, carpet bombing, as there is little chance of you taking a field otherwise when half the country is there,
so frankly, thta piont ois in-valid, and shows dreamy, rose-tinted vision on your part.
You are incorrect. The only capture mission I've seen succeed so far didn't involve bombing the hangars, and didn't even use bombers. Heavy fighters and a simplistic strategy still work, but you can't reasonably expect to sneak bases at peak hours with 6 guys anymore.
-
Originally posted by Laurie
never try and tell a brit, about the battle of britain, especially when his family includes to RAF officers of that era ;) , just some advice ,,]
also, BOB was not just fighters flying around airfileds, they worked in groups of four picking off bombers, fighting 109's.
there is only 1 tactic available now my friend, carpet bombing the hangers, as there is little chance of you taking a field otherwise when half the country is there,
so frankly, that piont is in-valid, and shows dreamy, rose-tinted vision on your part.
Time won't bear this out for you, as you could sit in a black dotted furball for eternity, and not notice a base flashing form your 'lack of vision on your part'.
your happy, thats good, but some arent, so have some respect them, we all deserve our say, if you agree or not, you'll find this thread started for me, when i claimed unhappy with changes, and was burnt like charcoal, no-one canm have their say if it doesnt agree with the likes of certain people.
Damn them sneaky Germans. NOEing those targets in england.
Where is the shake fist emoticon.
Bronk
-
Quah!
This week's twitchy.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
No it forces people to think up new tactics and strategy. Just because you and the other so called strategerist can't see this doesn't mean maps will stagnate.
Just because it's change doesn't mean it's good change. And just because people are forced to come to grips with it doesn't make that fun either. And yes it does cause the maps to stagnate more. It's inevitable.
It' easier to defend a base with one goon hunter than to take a base. Toss forty potential goon hunters into the fray, few bases to take...and you are going to have stagnation.
But I'm sure HTC has the number of captures in orange vs blue, normalized for arena population.
Those that are true strategerist will come up with new, more fun and better tactics to make this work.
Ah once again that arbitrary world "true" raises it's ugly head. I imagine that the "true" strategists could come up with a system to deal with an Aces High were the only vehicle selectable is the jeep.
Would it be change? Yep.
Would people adapt? Yep...some would adapt by quiting I'm sure.
Would it be fun? I don't think so.
For me AH is like hockey. I can appreciate wicked passing and plays, but in the end it's all about getting the goal.
-
Can someone who hates the system please describe, calmly and accurately, exactly what has changed in the game setup, and how it has made everything but furballing completely impossible? Maybe I'm just not looking at the new setup in the right light.
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
Can someone who hates the system please describe, calmly and accurately, exactly what has changed in the game setup, and how it has made everything but furballing completely impossible? Maybe I'm just not looking at the new setup in the right light.
No, you are just overstating the argument. Perhaps that way people won't take it as seriously.
For me it doesn't have to make anything but furballing impossible for me not to like it. Just reduce the availability of my being able to participate in activities that I have come to enjoy in AH. ie. taking bases.
-
The only solid conclusion I am drawing from this thread is that those who are against the change honestly do not believe they can take a base without sneaking it or having a huge numbers advantage. Taking a base that is somewhat defended is too hard? lol, please...
:confused:
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
Can someone who hates the system please describe, calmly and accurately, exactly what has changed in the game setup, and how it has made everything but furballing completely impossible? Maybe I'm just not looking at the new setup in the right light.
I'd like to see that too, as I've been involved in more base defense and 'mishuns' then I've ever been involved with since the change. Seems to have taken the 'furballer' right outa me :)
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
Can someone who hates the system please describe, calmly and accurately, exactly what has changed in the game setup, and how it has made everything but furballing completely impossible? Maybe I'm just not looking at the new setup in the right light.
sure thing hub,
basically, now there are only one or two fights to choose from, and there oversized,
also, a part of the game i find fun, defending, intercepting long range missions and attcking bases with elemnet of suprise is almost non-existent now.
I have no problem with guys who have diff opinions. just annoys me when you get flamed all the time. it means the game is nearly all in 3 grid squares, wich i personally dont like.
hope thats ok <>
-
Me too Corky, what gives...
:D
-
Originally posted by Stang
The only solid conclusion I am drawing from this thread is that those who are against the change honestly do not believe they can take a base without sneaking it or having a huge numbers advantage. Taking a base that is somewhat defended is too hard? lol, please...
:confused:
I think that says more about your ability to draw conclusions than the what is actually being said here.
Sure bases can be taken without huge numbers or sneaking. But regardless of method it because amazingly more complicated when the enemy know which bases you can take or even exactly which base you can take.
-
Thrawn:
For me AH is like hockey. I can appreciate wicked passing and plays, but in the end it's all about getting the goal.
You just hit the nail right on the head. Do you think hockey always had offsides or icing, or do you think those rules evolved for better game play?
HiTech
-
Yeah the Goal is good but its more fun to smack someone througfh the glass :P
-
I have no problem with guys who have diff opinions. just annoys me when you get flamed all the time. it means the game is nearly all in 3 grid squares, wich i personally dont like.
I have to assume this was pointed at me Lauri.
For one Lauri I never flamed you once and I only participated in the discussion replying to what you typed.
But I am sure this was meant by you as a flame:
Time won't bear this out for you, as you could sit in a black dotted furball for eternity, and not notice a base flashing form your 'lack of vision on your part'.
your happy, thats good, but some arent, so have some respect them, we all deserve our say, if you agree or not, you'll find this thread started for me, when i claimed unhappy with changes, and was burnt like charcoal, no-one canm have their say if it doesnt agree with the likes of certain people.
You can have your say, no where did I tell you so Shut it or stop typing, but if you are going to type something, practice what you preach and let others counter point it without getting yourself all wadded up. :aok
Now back to the thread.
Sure bases can be taken without huge numbers or sneaking. But regardless of method it because amazingly more complicated when the enemy know which bases you can take or even exactly which base you can take.
Yes more complicated, means the need for better tactics and more complex strategery. Isn't that what you guys have been clamoring for, for a while now?
-
Originally posted by hitech
Thrawn:
You just hit the nail right on the head. Do you think hockey always had offsides or icing, or do you think those rules evolved for better game play?
HiTech
Sure the rules changed but it didn't necessarily make the game better. I'm not against the experimentation in and of itself. If am against effects this particular experiment is having on my AH experience. As a customer I'm trying to articulate my feelings on a proposed product change. Some people seem to believe that just because it's an experiment, people should like the results, I don't agree with them.
-
Originally posted by Laurie
never try and tell a brit, about the battle of britain, especially when his family includes to RAF officers of that era ;) , just some advice ,,]
Yeah Quah...and since the invasion fleet left from the UK don't try and tell Laurie that the beaches of Normandy were actually defended.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Thrawn:
You just hit the nail right on the head. Do you think hockey always had offsides or icing, or do you think those rules evolved for better game play?
HiTech
lol please dont use hockey! they also watered down the game by making it less the physical game i remember and most of the league only full their stadiums 64%. im not saying ur watering down.. i thik the new stuff is great.. just dont use hockey is all im saying :aok
-
Yeah Quah...and since the invasion fleet left from the UK don't try and tell Laurie that the beaches of Normandy were actually defended.
LOL OK Lauri you were just flamed.
BTW Ed do you need my address so you can send me that fresh Venison Jerky. :D
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
Can someone who hates the system please describe, calmly and accurately, exactly what has changed in the game setup, and how it has made everything but furballing completely impossible? Maybe I'm just not looking at the new setup in the right light.
Hate might be a little strong but I'll try to explain from my viewpoint.
It's more about variety. For instance, go look at the orange map right now. I can't because I'm at work but I'll bet that
1. There is nowhere viable to become a lone defender at a port or CV base.
2. The CV's are currently useless in attaining the current capturable targets eliminating the use of 8" guns.
3. The CV's are not being attacked eliminateing the rest of the CV's usefulness.
4. There is no way to disrupt enemy supply lines by taking a zone base, only by striking factories. Once lost, there is no way to get your zone base back until it comes up on the line.
5. There are no enemy bombers, nor are any bases taken close enough to your 163 base to make 163's a viable option.
6. The vast majority of players are concentrated in 6 sectors eliminating the chance for 1 on 1's and killing frame rates for people with older machines (like me). In fact theres probably not a viable location to find a 1 on 2 or 1 on 3.
7. There are one or two milk-runners somewhere on the map unopposed as there is no need to oppose them, they can't "take" anything. This should make milk-running MORE prevelent in the future.
8. There may not be a viable option to use GV's at the moment (although there may be).
9. At least one front is facing insurmountable odds with no options to re-direct the attack.
These are just a few examples. I'm sure if I had time I could come up with more. This is clearly more restrictive than in the past. I agree that you don't lose everything and that some of what you lose you might get back as the line moves across the map but if you've lost your favorite part of play, then all you can do is hope that it's available when you are.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Thrawn:
You just hit the nail right on the head. Do you think hockey always had offsides or icing, or do you think those rules evolved for better game play?
HiTech
And how about more importantly, does the defending team in hockey not know where the goal is? Didn't think so.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
LOL Delta, I would think you of all people would be able to see the need for better tactics in this new system and be able to rise to the occasion rather than cry in your beer.
Where are all these great stratergerist that have been clammering for better more challenging tactics. Now you have them and you are all running for the door. What gives?
You guys have to open your eyes, accept the changes and see what new tactics you can dream up.
I think it's sort of sad, when you have dedicated furballers being able to understand, see the need, create and execute the new tactics while the bonafide strat guys are just sticking their heads in the sand.
Minus Flayed who has stepped up and is doing a great job trying to make this a better game for everyone.
Its a slugfest.
Horde vs. Horde.
How do you combat the hording mentality people decry?
Simple: force everyone into a huge horde. Problem solved.
I can say something good about it though.
At least now ALL the players who participate in the capture game are in one place working together as a horde should. And to that I say :aok
-
Originally posted by BaldEagl
Hate might be a little strong but I'll try to explain from my viewpoint.
It's more about variety. For instance, go look at the orange map right now. I can't because I'm at work but I'll bet that
1. There is nowhere viable to become a lone defender at a port or CV base.
2. The CV's are currently useless in attaining the current capturable targets eliminating the use of 8" guns.
3. The CV's are not being attacked eliminateing the rest of the CV's usefulness.
4. There is no way to disrupt enemy supply lines by taking a zone base, only by striking factories. Once lost, there is no way to get your zone base back until it comes up on the line.
5. There are no enemy bombers, nor are any bases taken close enough to your 163 base to make 163's a viable option.
6. The vast majority of players are concentrated in 6 sectors eliminating the chance for 1 on 1's and killing frame rates for people with older machines (like me). In fact theres probably not a viable location to find a 1 on 2 or 1 on 3.
7. There are one or two milk-runners somewhere on the map unopposed as there is no need to oppose them, they can't "take" anything. This should make milk-running MORE prevelent in the future.
8. There may not be a viable option to use GV's at the moment (although there may be).
9. At least one front is facing insurmountable odds with no options to re-direct the attack.
These are just a few examples. I'm sure if I had time I could come up with more. This is clearly more restrictive than in the past. I agree that you don't lose everything and that some of what you lose you might get back as the line moves across the map but if you've lost your favorite part of play, then all you can do is hope that it's available when you are.
keep in miind that this is a new system being implemented and it will take time to work out all the kinks. AH has been through many changes over the years and is still around tweaking today..
-
Its a slugfest.
Horde vs. Horde.
How do you combat the hording mentality people decry?
Simple: force everyone into a huge horde. Problem solved.
The hordes would never have been a problem if they fought each other. And yes if you are going to fly in a horde as the majority do, then they should be forced to fly against each other and it should be a slugfest.
IMH, your tactics back when you were doing your horde missions are the exact tactics you need to exercise now.
Breaking your massive horde up into hit squads with different missions rather than the usual orders you guys give, "ok everyone up fly to field2 and flatten it."
Now you need to send 4 or 5 guys to the supporting bases and suppress there while your main attack hits and suppresses fighters at the target field.
Why is this so hard for you to see?
Yes if one of the missions fail the potential for total failure is there, but that alone makes each persons role more exciting and fulfilling when you pull it off, no?
-
Originally posted by Stang
And how about more importantly, does the defending team in hockey not know where the goal is? Didn't think so.
I thought we were playing chess, not hockey.
Now I'm REALLY confused.
When do we start on World War II? :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by TW9
keep in miind that this is a new system being implemented and it will take time to work out all the kinks. AH has been through many changes over the years and is still around tweaking today..
I do realize this. I was just responding to hubsonfire's request for an explanation.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
Now you need to send 4 or 5 guys to the supporting bases and suppress there while your main attack hits and suppresses fighters at the target field.
Why is this so hard for you to see?
oh, so now toolsheding and vulching is ok?
-
Originally posted by Quah!
The hordes would never have been a problem if they fought each other. And yes if you are going to fly in a horde as the majority do, then they should be forced to fly against each other and it should be a slugfest.
IMH, your tactics back when you were doing your horde missions are the exact tactics you need to exercise now.
Breaking your massive horde up into hit squads with different missions rather than the usual orders you guys give, "ok everyone up fly to field2 and flatten it."
Now you need to send 4 or 5 guys to the supporting bases and suppress there while your main attack hits and suppresses fighters at the target field.
Why is this so hard for you to see?
Yes if one of the missions fail the potential for total failure is there, but that alone makes each persons role more exciting and fulfilling when you pull it off, no?
The organized squad hordes are a thing of the past since the split.
With the disintegration of the squads, organizing horde missions of the type you describe is now hit or miss and exceedingly rare.
I don't know if hitech captures the data, but I would love to see the number of missions launched since the split and now, with the introduction of this new schema. Would say something about the gameplay from a 'mission' perspective. Just curious.
But hey, I fly as Rook and we have been steamrolling bases. Guess our horde is bigger so whatever...
-
Originally posted by Laurie
sure thing hub,
My translations inserted.
Originally posted by Laurie
basically, now there are only one or two fights to choose from,
Some players would rather head to parts of the map where there are no large fights. They do not realize that doing so now is actually easier than before. If the complaint was that it was hard to find a fight they should be happy, if thier complaint was that they wanted to avoid a fight they should be even happier. The fact that they are not merely proves that the only real issue for many of the detractors is that they cannot capture an undefended base anymore.
Originally posted by Laurie
and there oversized,
Too many bad guys at the base they want to capture means they'll have to put forth too much effort, it was more fun against zero (or too little too late) opposition, but now that they'll have to earn it takes all the fun away.
Originally posted by Laurie
also, a part of the game i find fun, defending,
Defense is still an option, in fact now that the attackers cannot vaporize at the sight of some red icons and attack elesewhere... your ability tp play defense is better than ever.
Originally posted by Laurie
intercepting long range missions and
You can intercept anything you want to. Oh, there are fewer long-range missions now you mean. Well, talk to some of those bomber-only squadrons, I hear the BOPs have one. If you see fewer long-range missions up now than before you certainly cannot blame the fighter contingent.
Originally posted by Laurie
attcking bases with elemnet of suprise is almost non-existent now.
See above. If these missions aren't being run, then you and your long-range mission friends better get busy. Kind of silly to complain that other folks aren't doing something that you don't want to do either. You can still strike deep, you can still run NOE, you can still pork and auger, you can hit ord/troops/fuel, the strats are all still there. The only thing that has dampened the desire for long range missions is the capture thing. You can no longer sneak a base and take it unopposed and say on channel 200 that "Base A134 was taken by the 303453'd 1337 bumber skwad".
So yeah, if your primary source of fun in AH was to CAPTURE bases without having to defeat anything other than AI-ack and some sheds...I'll agree with you ...this game is less fun now. But if your fun came from any ot the things you listed (other than undefended base captures) your source of joy is still there. If you log on with the purpose of finding a human competitor in a cartoon airplane then this change is near panacea, it is very hard to NOT find a place to fight now. The only thing truly missing is the whack-a-mole game we've been playing for the last 3-4 years.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
...I think 2 country's is the way to go.
Well now Quah! - I agree totally with this.
Two countries - Allies vs. Axis with restricted planesets.
(allies only get to fly allied planes, axis flies axis planes)
yea, I know...but I'm keeping hope alive. :D
-
All your reply tells me is that your Mega squads are to big to organize so I say if that is the case then good riddens it was too big anyway. But your still steamrolling bases, so why the fuss?? I'm just glad you guys cant run to another base when you hit a formidable defense. :aok
2 countries good, rolling plane set no good.
-
Originally posted by Edbert
My translations inserted.
Blah bla blah Blah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blahBlah bla blah
The only thing truly missing is the whack-a-mole game we've been playing for the last 3-4 years.
well said Ed :aok
-
Originally posted by BaldEagl
Hate might be a little strong but I'll try to explain from my viewpoint.
It's more about variety. For instance, go look at the orange map right now. I can't because I'm at work but I'll bet that
1. There is nowhere viable to become a lone defender at a port or CV base.
2. The CV's are currently useless in attaining the current capturable targets eliminating the use of 8" guns.
3. The CV's are not being attacked eliminateing the rest of the CV's usefulness.
4. There is no way to disrupt enemy supply lines by taking a zone base, only by striking factories. Once lost, there is no way to get your zone base back until it comes up on the line.
5. There are no enemy bombers, nor are any bases taken close enough to your 163 base to make 163's a viable option.
6. The vast majority of players are concentrated in 6 sectors eliminating the chance for 1 on 1's and killing frame rates for people with older machines (like me). In fact theres probably not a viable location to find a 1 on 2 or 1 on 3.
7. There are one or two milk-runners somewhere on the map unopposed as there is no need to oppose them, they can't "take" anything. This should make milk-running MORE prevelent in the future.
8. There may not be a viable option to use GV's at the moment (although there may be).
9. At least one front is facing insurmountable odds with no options to re-direct the attack.
These are just a few examples. I'm sure if I had time I could come up with more. This is clearly more restrictive than in the past. I agree that you don't lose everything and that some of what you lose you might get back as the line moves across the map but if you've lost your favorite part of play, then all you can do is hope that it's available when you are.
1:Single defenders only dissuade the milkrunners. In a well planned and executed attack, even a handful of defenders are gun fodder. Same as before.
2:Stang's Uber Spit/38/CV mission used a CV to land the troop carrying LVTs, with the fleet providing both shelling of the town and base, and the ack protecting heavy fighters getting in to the field, and also keeping the defenders occupied, who were trying to simultaneously sink the boats, kill the lvts, and defend their airfield. That mission would have been a miserable failure without the fleet. I've seen numerous other attacks use the CV for those same things, with similar results (we were defending, so of course we sank the boats and won the fight, but not without a prolonged brutal fight.)
3:Not true in any of my experiences. CVs are still valid targets, for the reasons listed above
4: I don't think the zone setup is in use on any other maps, and therefore haven't provided those same opportunities anyway.
5: I'm seeing 163s in the North, and seeing people land kills in them, so I have to disagree here as well. There was never a plethora of 163s until the 'war' was effectively lost in the past, so again, this isn't really a change.
6:Before the changes, the vast majority of players were at 1 or 2 bases anyway, with the rest either milkrunning, or hunting other milkrunners. Numbers at those bases may be higher, but the number of defenders is also higher at times, so that is mostly unchanged as well.
7:Milkrunning should never have been the primary tactic employed, but it was, as has been stated, the path of least resistance. I cannot consider the loss of the ability to perpetually avoid any and all opposition to be anything but an improvement. I cannot help but think that HT realized that milkrunning would become ineffective with these changes. I don't think he made a mistake or simply overlooked it.
8: GVs are as useful, as they have ever been, if not more. The combined forces attacks I have seen stand a better chance of being successful than they did before. Again, Stang's mission used this approach with good results, and I've seen several bases fall when attacked in this manner. Gets the tank guys and the plane guys working together. This is bad?
9: This is unchanged since AH1. The path of least resistance has always been popular with a certain player type. This has nothing to do with the recent change.
I could probably come up with some more counterpoints. The only thing that's changed is attacking the enemy where he isn't, and can't effectively defend, is the only thing missing. That's it. With the current setup, you need teamwork, you need effective strategies, and you have to be prepared to slug it out. If facing a numerically superior defense, you had better be prepared to get creative. That means more and better strategies, right? I'm still seeing a lot of folks trying to fight the war the way they always have, and it doesn't seem to be working (with the obvious exception of when one country has as many players as the other 2 combined, and even that doesn't seem to work as well as it used to).
Those are my observations at this point. I don't believe it's perfect yet (the lack of action by HTC regarding the extreme numerical imbalance frustrates me, but I know that Rome wasn't built in a day, so I'm trying to be patient). I think they're heading in the right direction, even if they haven't struck the perfect compromise yet.
I guess I should also state that the lonewolf approach is, or seems to be, dead as well. IMO, that's a good thing, because it means all this teamwork and strategy stuff is now true. You can't wipe out an attack single handed (the milkrunners can't just drop everything, run away, and find another undefended target), you can't pork a base in one run, you can't really do much of anything (obvious exception being bomber formations, who can still blow **** up and desolate a field, but need to be at alt to avoid getting turned into meat puree' by the typically much higher number of defenders). So, yeah, no milkrunning captures, and no lone wolfing. Teamwork, coordination, strategy... all the things lauded by the milkrunners, are now requisites, and not just misnomers for avoiding the bad guys.
-
1:Single defenders only dissuade the milkrunners. In a well planned and executed attack, even a handful of defenders are gun fodder. Same as before.
2:Stang's Uber Spit/38/CV mission used a CV to land the troop carrying LVTs, with the fleet providing both shelling of the town and base, and the ack protecting heavy fighters getting in to the field, and also keeping the defenders occupied, who were trying to simultaneously sink the boats, kill the lvts, and defend their airfield. That mission would have been a miserable failure without the fleet. I've seen numerous other attacks use the CV for those same things, with similar results (we were defending, so of course we sank the boats and won the fight, but not without a prolonged brutal fight.)
3:Not true in any of my experiences. CVs are still valid targets, for the reasons listed above
4: I don't think the zone setup is in use on any other maps, and therefore haven't provided those same opportunities anyway.
5: I'm seeing 163s in the North, and seeing people land kills in them, so I have to disagree here as well. There was never a plethora of 163s until the 'war' was effectively lost in the past, so again, this isn't really a change.
6:Before the changes, the vast majority of players were at 1 or 2 bases anyway, with the rest either milkrunning, or hunting other milkrunners. Numbers at those bases may be higher, but the number of defenders is also higher at times, so that is mostly unchanged as well.
7:Milkrunning should never have been the primary tactic employed, but it was, as has been stated, the path of least resistance. I cannot consider the loss of the ability to perpetually avoid any and all opposition to be anything but an improvement. I cannot help but think that HT realized that milkrunning would become ineffective with these changes. I don't think he made a mistake or simply overlooked it.
8: GVs are as useful, as they have ever been, if not more. The combined forces attacks I have seen stand a better chance of being successful than they did before. Again, Stang's mission used this approach with good results, and I've seen several bases fall when attacked in this manner. Gets the tank guys and the plane guys working together. This is bad?
9: This is unchanged since AH1. The path of least resistance has always been popular with a certain player type. This has nothing to do with the recent change.
I could probably come up with some more counterpoints. The only thing that's changed is attacking the enemy where he isn't, and can't effectively defend, is the only thing missing. That's it. With the current setup, you need teamwork, you need effective strategies, and you have to be prepared to slug it out. If facing a numerically superior defense, you had better be prepared to get creative. That means more and better strategies, right? I'm still seeing a lot of folks trying to fight the war the way they always have, and it doesn't seem to be working (with the obvious exception of when one country has as many players as the other 2 combined, and even that doesn't seem to work as well as it used to).
Those are my observations at this point. I don't believe it's perfect yet (the lack of action by HTC regarding the extreme numerical imbalance frustrates me, but I know that Rome wasn't built in a day, so I'm trying to be patient). I think they're heading in the right direction, even if they haven't struck the perfect compromise yet.
And I thought I was bored at work LOLH
-
Okay then...it seems clear...we need a new kind of squad, a more focused and technically skilled force to surgically render target airfields impotent, break the enemy's will to resist and achieve total victory!
So lets do this...
NEW SQUAD NOW FORMING !
================================
SQUAD NAME: 'The Fun Police'
"What ya gonna do when we come to bomb you?"
(subject to change)
TYPE-PRIMARY: Bomber Squad (flying at least 2 bomber missions each evening)
SUB-TYPE: Fighters and JABO when not in Bombers.
OBJECTIVE: To destroy (completely flatten) enemy bases in the path of advance 2-3 bases deep into enemy territory.
SIZE: This squad will be limited to 50 players.
ORGANIZATION: 2 squadrons / 25 pilots each (75 bombers per squadron / per mission). Missions may be divided up with one squad flying bombers and the other as escorts.
The squad will be open to members from other squads. Formal membership in "The Fun Police" is not required and members of other squads will not have to withdrawal from their squad to join "The Fun Police."
Send me a PM with your in-game nickname and your e-mail if you are a Rook and are interested in participating.
David
-
Originally posted by Stang
And how about more importantly, does the defending team in hockey not know where the goal is? Didn't think so.
Yes, but they don't know if the shooter is going for the one hole or the five hole.
-
Edbert -
This has nothing to do with taking undefended bases.
It is to do with taking a free flowing game and turning it into a psuedo "boxed" arcade game.
You can't take X until you've taken Y, only if you've taken or achieved W first.
Sounds like 99% of all the other boxed games out there.
Lets be honest, if a base is taken undefended whose fault is it?
All this means is that the people who were too lazy too bring their map up to check for flashing bases, have even less incentive to do it now.
Only need to check map now when a base is taken, and see whats next down the line,,,,BORING.
Perfect example -
-- the map with the VBases that spawn into HQ
How many times have they been "snuck", usually fully up, when all it needs is one guy in an Osty to stop it.
Current idea is just a smokescreen/fix/band-aid (your choice) for the lack of small maps, nothing more, nothing less.
You can't compare AH to Ice Hockey, geez.
Ice Hockey -
2 even teams
2 goals
set time limits
Everything AH isn't.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
And I thought I was bored at work LOLH
No, you're boring at work. ;)
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
You can't compare AH to Ice Hockey, geez.
Ice Hockey -
2 even teams
2 goals
set time limits
Everything AH isn't.
u left out another thing AH isnt doing that hockey is..
losing its fan base
-
Originally posted by Boomer49
Think creatively.... the bases that can be captured, suppression of any air support base nearby or veh base so you can capture the target base, so IF you have enough people, thats 3 maybe even 4 battles on just one capturable base...really depends on how creative the group your flying with wants to be.
Think outside the box.
Jesus christ what is it with this think creatively bollox.
you cant think creativley or outside the box when the game restricts you into thebox. we did think creativley, but now you can't. get it in there, THERES NOTHING TO BE CREATED, it's physically impossible, you have two choices, not much room for creativity
-
Originally posted by Laurie
Jesus christ what is it with this think creatively bollox.
you cant think creativley or outside the box when the game restricts you into thebox. we did think creativley, but now you can't. get it in there, THERES NOTHING TO BE CREATED, it's physically impossible, you have two choices, not much room for creativity
Now that you have an objective, you have to figure out how to best go after it. This is where it becomes apparent that most of the talk of strategy, teamwork, and coordination was just that... talk.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Edbert -
This has nothing to do with taking undefended bases.
It is to do with taking a free flowing game and turning it into a psuedo "boxed" arcade game.
You can't take X until you've taken Y, only if you've taken or achieved W first.
Sounds like 99% of all the other boxed games out there.
Lets be honest, if a base is taken undefended whose fault is it?
All this means is that the people who were too lazy too bring their map up to check for flashing bases, have even less incentive to do it now.
Only need to check map now when a base is taken, and see whats next down the line,,,,BORING.
Perfect example -
-- the map with the VBases that spawn into HQ
How many times have they been "snuck", usually fully up, when all it needs is one guy in an Osty to stop it.
Current idea is just a smokescreen/fix/band-aid (your choice) for the lack of small maps, nothing more, nothing less.
You can't compare AH to Ice Hockey, geez.
Ice Hockey -
2 even teams
2 goals
set time limits
Everything AH isn't.
So how do you solve it Kev? Let's face it, much of this is a response to steam rolling of undefended bases by the team with overwhelming numbers.
What's the cure for the numbers game. You have folks determined that they'll never switch teams. You have folks determined that winning the war' is the only point of the game, which leads to people going with the horde.
At least in this situation the lower numbers team can mount some sort of defense.
People keep screaming about creativity. There is no creativity to a horde. There is a passion to reset the map as quickly as possible. Hiding in the guise of creativity is the large number team being able to send the resources it has to all kinds of undefendable places. Not undefendable because of ability, but undefendable because of lack of numbers.
This isn't about furballing or being anti 'toolshedding'. It's about creating the best environment for the most people to have the opportunity to have fun in the game.
For that to happen there has to be some sort of equalizer to the playing field. Horde warrior took the fun out of the game for lots of folks. There is no great joy in getting vulched and pounded the second your wheels are off the runway, and for those who don't see racing to the reset as the aim of the game, how do you accomodate their interests?
Asking seriously btw.
-
Okay then...it seems clear...we need a new kind of squad, a more focused and technically skilled force to surgically render target airfields impotent, break the enemy's will to resist and achieve total victory!
Bingo Delt, and seeing/Fighting your bombers runs I would think would be akin to those long and drawn out HQ runs only now you are in the fight.
Now you have attacks like the mighty eighth and if one of your runs fail, so may your attack. That's the spirit! :aok
-
I do see the good and the bad. For GV takes it will be imposable if we have no Air cover and the air Bs around are all enemy. Id still rather HTC got rid of the V bases add 1 more VH to the small AF 2 to the Med, AF possibly 1 in the town and 3 to the L AF, with 1 in the town. GV bases are not defendable enough against Air. Since the GVs are not able to hide due to icons and the big black dot problem and the unrealistic bomb abilities the V basses are just useless.
I like the Idea of forcing more teem play so far its not working but we will see. I hope it does work. But from a GV point of view SO FAR I’m not impressed.
:(
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
You can't compare AH to Ice Hockey, geez.
Ice Hockey -
2 even teams
2 goals
set time limits
Everything AH isn't.
Just because you can contrast two things, doesn't mean they can't be compared.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Lets be honest, if a base is taken undefended whose fault is it?
Why assign "fault" to anything? So a skwad can capture a base by defeating AI-ack and blowing up cartoon sheds...BFD!
Yeah, if the other chesspeice wanted to keep it they shold have defended...again...BFD!
I just cannot see why the taking of undefended bases is so much fun. Maybe doing it once or twice and seeing how stupidly easy it is might be entertaining for about 30 seconds or so, but to keep doing it after the first time, or after 3-4 years of it is silly. I'd have no problem playing more defense in the old arena setup without the blue-line is the attackers would keep trying to take the base. They wanted it real bad 5 minutes ago when they came over, so why do they give up and attack elsewhere now that me and two other guys thwarted their attempt?
Here's a question for the detractors of this change.
Which is more fun (and as a result worth the $15/month) to you;
A: fighting your way through a defensive CAP and capturing a base despite the best efforts of your opponent, even if it takes more than an hour?
B: capturing a base in 60 seconds with little or no opposition?
I am guessing most here know which they'd prefer. Notice I am not saying one is right and one is wrong or assigning blame to anybody. I would like to hear arguments in fvor of doing B over A though. I'd like to know why B is more fun than A.
-
Originally posted by 96Delta
Okay then...it seems clear...we need a new kind of squad, a more focused and technically skilled force to surgically render target airfields impotent, break the enemy's will to resist and achieve total victory!
So lets do this...
NEW SQUAD NOW FORMING !
================================
SQUAD NAME: 'The Fun Police'
"What ya gonna do when we come to bomb you?"
(subject to change)
TYPE-PRIMARY: Bomber Squad (flying at least 2 bomber missions each evening)
SUB-TYPE: Fighters and JABO when not in Bombers.
OBJECTIVE: To destroy (completely flatten) enemy bases in the path of advance 2-3 bases deep into enemy territory.
SIZE: This squad will be limited to 50 players.
ORGANIZATION: 2 squadrons / 25 pilots each (75 bombers per squadron / per mission). Missions may be divided up with one squad flying bombers and the other as escorts.
The squad will be open to members from other squads. Formal membership in "The Fun Police" is not required and members of other squads will not have to withdrawal from their squad to join "The Fun Police."
Send me a PM with your in-game nickname and your e-mail if you are a Rook and are interested in participating.
David
Umm see my avatar/nose art? :D In game squad name Birds Of Prey MERLINS (Fun Police)
-
Originally posted by 96Delta
The organized squad hordes are a thing of the past since the split.
With the disintegration of the squads, organizing horde missions of the type you describe is now hit or miss and exceedingly rare.
I don't know if hitech captures the data, but I would love to see the number of missions launched since the split and now, with the introduction of this new schema. Would say something about the gameplay from a 'mission' perspective. Just curious.
But hey, I fly as Rook and we have been steamrolling bases. Guess our horde is bigger so whatever...
Umm not a true statement BOPS are the same size we always have been and we actually have picked up a few more members. ;)
-
Not sure about the theory of whats supposed to happen --
but in real life applcation, I keep finding that I have to choose between getting horded, or being part of a horde. Its worse in Orange, but still a problem all over.
Since I dont like either, I've "arena surfed" for a bit to see if sides even out...and sometimes had to just log off. I cant recall doing that for a long, long time before all this.
So, consider that one side effect of having [EDIT FOR CLARIFICATION] a chain system with[/EDIT] too FEW attack points when there is no effective side balancing may be increased (and unstoppable) hordes.
Not griping, just observing.
-
Originally posted by Simaril
Not sure about the theory of whats supposed to happen --
but in real life applcation, I keep finding that I have to choose between getting horded, or being part of a horde. Its worse in Orange, but still a problem all over.
Since I dont like either, I've "arena surfed" for a bit to see if sides even out...and sometimes had to just log off. I cant recall doing that for a long, long time before all this.
So, consider that one side effect of having too FEW attack points when there is no effective side balancing may be increased (and unstoppable) hordes.
Not griping, just observing.
Even though you're not griping, in this thread you're going to get horded by the "I don't get why you don't like it" crowd. <-------- Joke (sort of)
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Lets be honest, if a base is taken undefended whose fault is it?
The country that far outnumbers the other two combined. Well, you wanted honest...
The bigger the imbalance, the fewer defenders to go around. Which means if you were the attacking force fewer people to interfere with the "strategy" of overwhelming force.
Nice when you have numbers to tie up the fewer numbers in one spot and use your spare numbers to hit somewhere that can't be successfully defended.
-
Originally posted by Lye-El
The country that far outnumbers the other two combined. Well, you wanted honest...
The bigger the imbalance, the fewer defenders to go around. Which means if you were the attacking force fewer people to interfere with the "strategy" of overwhelming force.
Nice when you have numbers to tie up the fewer numbers in one spot and use your spare numbers to hit somewhere that can't be successfully defended.
Doesn't need a hoard or superior numbers to sneak a base.
Seen the Vbases next to HQ snuck loads of time by the team with the lowest numbers.
2 main reasons for undefended base captures -
1) Lack of attention, always someone elses job to watch the map.
2) People too worried about the quest for the all important score.
Will put a caveat on point 1) -
Doesn't help that when you first logon bases that are currently under attack don't flash. Only ones that come under attack or are subject to a repeat attack. Bugs been around since AH1.
-
Originally posted by Flayed1
Umm not a true statement BOPS are the same size we always have been and we actually have picked up a few more members. ;)
No offense intended...but do you fly for Rooks?
I can't recall seeing you guys massed together....but then again, I am losing my mind so who knows...
-
Originally posted by Simaril
Not sure about the theory of whats supposed to happen --
but in real life applcation, I keep finding that I have to choose between getting horded, or being part of a horde. Its worse in Orange, but still a problem all over.
Since I dont like either, I've "arena surfed" for a bit to see if sides even out...and sometimes had to just log off. I cant recall doing that for a long, long time before all this.
So, consider that one side effect of having too FEW attack points when there is no effective side balancing may be increased (and unstoppable) hordes.
Not griping, just observing.
Orange has had a flat ton of Rooks since this started, and Blue has been the mainstay of the vast majority of Nits and Bish, who apparently prefer sending their hordes to undefended/lightly defended fields. If Blue goes ths way as well, LW's will even out. (MW has ALWAYS been dominated by Rooks, so nothing has changed there). Tonite (Monday) is squad for a couple Bish megasquads, lets see if we can get a good fight going in Orange:aok
-
Originally posted by BaldEagl
Even though you're not griping, in this thread you're going to get horded by the "I don't get why you don't like it" crowd. <-------- Joke (sort of)
not really, he is more pointing out that this test is doing nothing to curb hording. for myself i believe this test has less to do with the numbers game as it has to do with the type of gameplay...addressing milkrunning.
while i agree with that there is still hording, at least you can mount some form of defense to it. HT is trying to bring the game back to combat, imho.
-
Agree completely -- the goal seems to be getting combat going.
-
Who are you quoting in your sig there BJ?
-
Seems to have taken the 'furballer' right outa me
... ummm ... I had 4 captures in one night just a couple of days ago.
please don't tell lazs ... he will yell at me and make me cry.
-
Originally posted by KTM520guy
See Rule #5
Wow... my first edited post. I have now reached a new level in my AHIII career.
:)
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Doesn't need a hoard or superior numbers to sneak a base.
Seen the Vbases next to HQ snuck loads of time by the team with the lowest numbers.
2 main reasons for undefended base captures -
1) Lack of attention, always someone elses job to watch the map.
2) People too worried about the quest for the all important score.
Will put a caveat on point 1) -
Doesn't help that when you first logon bases that are currently under attack don't flash. Only ones that come under attack or are subject to a repeat attack. Bugs been around since AH1.
even if i believed that lack of attention is the reason why bases don't get defended, we are still left with the problem of bases not being able to be defended. HT can't make people pay more attention to what bases may or may not have a large noe raid going on. or what bases have 50 incoming planes, while only 20 people are on the ground and afk. there are people on all countries who would rather not defend. maybe score, maybe they would just rather go to an undefended base and attack it because it is easier. i don't know, but bickering about the reasons bases are not able to be defended, leading to absolute cake walks, does not address the problem that remains. maybe HTC should spread the fields out much much father so we can fly 30 minutes to get to target, so we have time to up a defense. i would imagine if a country took the time to build an airfield that would be able to at least mount some form of defense.
-
Originally posted by derkojote23
I do see the good and the bad. For GV takes it will be imposable if we have no Air cover and the air Bs around are all enemy. Id still rather HTC got rid of the V bases add 1 more VH to the small AF 2 to the Med, AF possibly 1 in the town and 3 to the L AF, with 1 in the town. GV bases are not defendable enough against Air. Since the GVs are not able to hide due to icons and the big black dot problem and the unrealistic bomb abilities the V basses are just useless.
I like the Idea of forcing more teem play so far its not working but we will see. I hope it does work. But from a GV point of view SO FAR I’m not impressed.
:(
Don't know where you have been playing, but as I said above ... I captured 4 bases (using M3s) myself in 1 night ... and had there not been a rolling GV offensive ... that never would have happened. Air cover helped, but the main punch to the capture was the GVs on the ground ... and the number of GVs on the ground.
I have see more "real" GV action, with intent, happening in the last week than I have in the last 2 years ... and I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it with my own 2 eyes.
GVs are far from dead under this new setup ... as far as I am concerned ... they will play more of a major roll in success than ever before.
-
Originally posted by bj229r
Orange has had a flat ton of Rooks since this started, and Blue has been the mainstay of the vast majority of Nits and Bish, who apparently prefer sending their hordes to undefended/lightly defended fields. If Blue goes ths way as well, LW's will even out. (MW has ALWAYS been dominated by Rooks, so nothing has changed there). Tonite (Monday) is squad for a couple Bish megasquads, lets see if we can get a good fight going in Orange:aok
We really need some squad run stuff in there.. Last night I was fighting rooks and thought I might have an idea to atleast supress the base so I posted a mission and I literally could not get 1 bish to respond. Was sad.:(
Most of the my squad dosn't like it so far but I think that it's more because the current setup is way to restricting and not that the entire idea is bad..
Some of us would like to have squad night on the new setup to really give it a go...
I was hopeing that HiTech would have been able to impliment the new lines today so we could test it tionight......:D Please please please ;)
BTW hows it coming? having any problems? Skuzz keep triping over the power coard to your comp? :D
I'll go back to Orange now and wait patiently for it.
-
Originally posted by Flayed1
Last night I was fighting rooks and thought I might have an idea to atleast supress the base so I posted a mission and I literally could not get 1 bish to respond. Was sad.:(
Flayed1, I feel your pain. I posted a mission on Sat nite, pleaded for 15 minutes for people to join and got 5 (Bish). I would have thought for you at least your squaddies would have joined.
-
There is not a lot of coordinated activity in the bish part of the world lately. For the most part, seeing the same tendencies as before- abandon the base under attack, find the base where the attack has already been repelled, or a base the bish are attacking, and fly there. While there have been a few notable exceptions- some unexpected recaptures of fields, and some epic defenses, it looks like a lot of folks are still stuck in the mindset of the old setup. "Go where we are most numerous, and the enemy is not"
-
Originally posted by Edbert
Who are you quoting in your sig there BJ?
Ann Coulter...I spose I ought fix that
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
There is not a lot of coordinated activity in the bish part of the world lately. For the most part, seeing the same tendencies as before- abandon the base under attack, find the base where the attack has already been repelled, or a base the bish are attacking, and fly there. While there have been a few notable exceptions- some unexpected recaptures of fields, and some epic defenses, it looks like a lot of folks are still stuck in the mindset of the old setup. "Go where we are most numerous, and the enemy is not"
I could, and was about to, rail on my Bish countrymen for a number of reasons but I'll refrain.
-
Should be able to have it up tommorow Flayed1
-
Originally posted by Edbert
Yeah Quah...and since the invasion fleet left from the UK don't try and tell Laurie that the beaches of Normandy were actually defended.
he ment UNDER-DEFENDED... jesus christ that was like 15pages ago.
and its the DEFENDERS fault for not defending, how hard is that not to understand?
-
Originally posted by 96Delta
The organized squad hordes are a thing of the past since the split.
With the disintegration of the squads, organizing horde missions of the type you describe is now hit or miss and exceedingly rare.
I don't know if hitech captures the data, but I would love to see the number of missions launched since the split and now, with the introduction of this new schema. Would say something about the gameplay from a 'mission' perspective. Just curious.
But hey, I fly as Rook and we have been steamrolling bases. Guess our horde is bigger so whatever...
have you played AH lately???? hordes are very VERY active now, since 60-70 players fight for one base. Fairly often we knits get close to 50 in ONE MISSION...
hordes are gone and rare.....LOL :rofl
-
Originally posted by Edbert
Why assign "fault" to anything? So a skwad can capture a base by defeating AI-ack and blowing up cartoon sheds...BFD!
Yeah, if the other chesspeice wanted to keep it they shold have defended...again...BFD!
I just cannot see why the taking of undefended bases is so much fun. .
(http://www.adamjwebb.aquiss.com/Pictures/Aces_High/trinity_the_oldway.jpg)
this........ the first base would have probably been undefended. the 2nd was probably under-defended.... and from then on its a BLAST trying to hold on to what you have taken, or try to take more.... once people WAKE up to the full scale of an attack, they start counter attacking. thats where i had my fun on those maps....
so yes, you can assign blame to the defenders...how hard is it to up a ostie or create a 5 player mission with some fighters to stop it being a undefended base?
the main issue is, no one wants to defend, so Hitech has to defend bases for them..... that means more ack, and now forced lines of advance...hoping to get the two sides to meet... however we seem to now have A attacking B, B attacking C and C attacking A.... still very little defending going on... Soon we will have to have AI fighters.... sure thats fun...
AHI only had a few acks per base, but whenever a call for defenders went out, people would UP and FIGHT. now, everyone sits there hoping the ack will do it for them.
-
Exactly Overlag.
When a map gets bogged down with little or no movement a good way to get things going again is to take a base away from the main fight.
So yes that may be undefended.
From then on the fun starts, you 'might' grab a second, then the other side wakes up and you then have two totally independent fronts.
Flayed has obviously put a lot of thought into his idea, but personally it's far too restrictive. Takes away the free flow aspect of the game.
I suspect it will lead to endless days/nights of very little changing hands and a basic stalemate, UNLESS one side has overwhelming numbers.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Exactly Overlag.
When a map gets bogged down with little or no movement a good way to get things going again is to take a base away from the main fight.
So yes that may be undefended.
From then on the fun starts, you 'might' grab a second, then the other side wakes up and you then have two totally independent fronts.
Flayed has obviously put a lot of thought into his idea, but personally it's far too restrictive. Takes away the free flow aspect of the game.
I suspect it will lead to endless days/nights of very little changing hands and a basic stalemate, UNLESS one side has overwhelming numbers.
in which case we need WWI planes.... since we are using WWI tactics now.....;)
-
Oooooo goody HT TY :)
Kev I agree that even the lines I have come up eith here are restrictive but I was more worried about getting the lines right for this TEST then worrying about other stratigic items that I fully plan on attemting after HT releases the editor for this system....
I really see many possibilities for this system and ways to put more of the type of thing you are talking about into these maps but first we need to get it working smoothly and then we can add things :)
-
Where are you located CAV?? sound close. I think Miss Sally's has closed down,
I am not far away from you.... I'm in Boise. To bad about Miss Sally's :cry (not that would go to that type of place.. :confused: )
But the next time your up by Boise look up me up... we have beer in Idaho too.... and a few places like Sally's too! :t
CAVALRY
-
I love the new set-up. Now to take fields you need some real strategy including co-ordinated fighter sweeps and close escort of bombers. No longer can five guys just waltz over to one of the 250 vacant fields, spank down the town in 2 min and drop troops.
I have real respect for base capture guys now with the new set-up, it requires alot of planning, co-ordination and intelligence, any bases they get are well deserved and earned...
New Set-Up base capture guys!
Zazen
-
so yes, you can assign blame to the defenders...how hard is it to up a ostie or create a 5 player mission with some fighters to stop it being a undefended base?
LOL ... yeah ... when the overwhelming country comes flying in with 10 or more 110s you barely have enough time to launch and hopefully find the goon and then kill all the 110s. By the time you enter a mission into the mission planner and get 5 guys to join ... the capture would be over and done with. Nice try.
the main issue is, no one wants to defend, so Hitech has to defend bases for them..... that means more ack, and now forced lines of advance...hoping to get the two sides to meet... however we seem to now have A attacking B, B attacking C and C attacking A.... still very little defending going on... Soon we will have to have AI fighters.... sure thats fun...
Bollocks ... if you are a member of the overwhelming country, you have no problem defending fields ... usually 1 or 2 alert calls and you will get a handfull to respond and more than likely repell the attack.
The problem lies with the overwhelmed country, not with the overwhelming country. You probably fly with the country that has the most players and only look at it from that myopic viewpoint. If you flew for the country that is getting ganged ... you would sing a different tune.
When getting trounched ... most people here don't know whether to watermelon or wind their watch ... resources are spread all over the place and it's hard to muster 2 or 3 guys to defend per milk-run attack.
AHI only had a few acks per base, but whenever a call for defenders went out, people would UP and FIGHT. now, everyone sits there hoping the ack will do it for them.
Bollocks ... the situation in AH I was no different in AH II ... the country that is getting banged ALWAYS has/had a problem mustering enough people to defend at all the bases that are under attack ... on 2 fronts.
Quit trying to paint the picture to bolster your personal agenda. You speak with forked tongue ... :D
All the pissin and moanin in this thread is laughable at best ... if some would just spend a few minutes and read the "Flayed1 Can you do me a favor?" thread ... digest what has been discussed in that thread ... all your little nightmare just might go away and rather than keep screaming ... THERE IS A PROBLEM ... you just might try and help solve the problem. HT has opened the door to his office.
Years ago, when I first got into software development, I went into my boss's office telling him about a problem ... I was probably whining.
He told to to get the fluck out of his office and never come into his office again complaining about a problem ... he said ... "Come in with a solution to the problem".
If you don't offer solutions to a problem ... YOUR ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM.
-
Originally posted by Overlag
[IMG]the first base would have probably been undefended. the 2nd was probably under-defended.... and from then on its a BLAST trying to hold on to what you have taken, or try to take more.... once people WAKE up to the full scale of an attack, they start counter attacking. thats where i had my fun on those maps....
If that is how it plays out then as long as it was not a pummeling of the weaker numbered side I am appreciative of the skill and tenacity of the takers. I've never said that these events NEVER transpired, but in my limited time online I witnessed a heavy and steady decline in the tenacity and will behind base captures over the last few years. In recent experience, once that first base attack met with resistance the attackers regrouped and hit elsewhere, if we went there to defend the attack again would vaporize only to pop up elsewhere. I enjoy a bloody pronounced attack or defense, so far I've seen more of that in LW-Orange than I have in several years.
I think Zazen has a good point, look at it as all the more satisfying now when you actually take one, I think some branches on the tree-o-blueline will help a bit, as long as they still concentrate the attention of the combatants into a secotor or 4.
A 512X512 map was simply too large, too many places for those who sought vitory via "the easist path possible", this usually meant taking bases that were to use Laurie's term "underdefended like Normandy" which is a eauphemism for undefended would, at least in the long term, be anethma to an online COMBAT sim.
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
If you don't offer solutions to a problem ... YOUR ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM.
ive posted loads of ideas (hitech is the only one that can turn our ideas into solutions)... however they get lost in 18pages of whines, and anti- whines.
the only reason a lot of you anti-whiners seem to think this idea was made was to stop milk running of undefended bases... but really? 1 base? wow big deal. if its so important, defend it, if you cant defend it, get over it, and up to defend/cap the area.
the image i posted of how trinity used to work was a fantastic way to have some of the best fights I've had to attack there homeland, or defend my homeland. however all this has GONE...not even a slight hint of this is remaining. and that's why most of us have issues with this congo line of unimaginative ****. sooner or later theres going to be a random number generator that chooses what plane you fly, what fuel and what ammo load out..... wow what fun.
-
Originally posted by Edbert
A 512X512 map was simply too large, too many places for those who sought vitory via "the easist path possible", this usually meant taking bases that were to use Laurie's term "underdefended like Normandy" which is a eauphemism for undefended would, at least in the long term, be anethma to an online COMBAT sim.
a 512x512 map was fine with 700 players...... and that's why we moved to them. however with the loss of MA, we had to go back to those classic 256x256 maps from last decade, and since no new ones was made due tot he 512x512 only rule, AH had NO new 256maps for like 5 years..... hence this new "problem" hitech created now needed solving.
1 change, caused ALOT more issues than it solved, and that was caused by a lack of judgement, and a lack of understanding at what would happen..... but that's just my opinion and I'm warned about having that as if i was living in Iran or something.
(edit some comments self deleted :p)
;) :p
-
Originally posted by Overlag
sure, its trying to be fixed up now... but it only needed fixing once it was broken.......may 9/13 forever last in living memory.....
I was gonna say that c04d is never actually broken, but quickly decided better. But I can say that it is never actually "fixed" either. See a software product is and should be in a constant state of flux, the only other option is to stagnate. This game has been "tweaked" (or fixed if you insist) well over 100 times over the years, I'm sure someone over at HTC knows the exact number of releases have been made over the years. But this constant evolution (fixes to previous errors for you pessimists out there) is what will keep AH and other releases by this crew alive and profitable for the future.
-
Originally posted by Edbert
I was gonna say that c04d is never actually broken, but quickly decided better. But I can say that it is never actually "fixed" either. See a software product is and should be in a constant state of flux, the only other option is to stagnate. This game has been "tweaked" (or fixed if you insist) well over 100 times over the years, I'm sure someone over at HTC knows the exact number of releases have been made over the years. But this constant evolution (fixes to previous errors for you pessimists out there) is what will keep AH and other releases by this crew alive and profitable for the future.
adding or fixing bugs maybe
but removing features that creates more issues than it solves isnt very clever..... or is it??? I dunno.
all i know is that its been over 2 months now, and we still have 90% of players in LW, and we basically still have the same gameplay as before the change... only now theres less players around, so no one defends....everyone attacks.
limiting people to maybe 6-8 bases (3-4 per front) would have been good..... but 1?!?! what the hell?
-
Originally posted by Overlag
the only reason a lot of you anti-whiners seem to think this idea was made was to stop milk running of undefended bases... but really? 1 base? wow big deal. if its so important, defend it, if you cant defend it, get over it, and up to defend/cap the area.
i don't think any bases are important. what i do think is important is the fight. it's not the idea that we can't defend a base, we can. the point is when you are outnumbered there is a point where you have no hope of defending bases, leading to what has been known as milkrunning. you are assuming that everyone should care about every base, but then you would be telling me how to spend my time playing right? you can only defend so much, and once the horde starts rolling, the country with few numbers has little hope of fighting back. frankly this type of gameplay is very boring, or frustrating, for everyone else. (meaning those who are being steamrolled by the horde). maybe since we play in very different time zones we are seeing different things?
so now strat guys should be happy. they now have furballers fighting for them, so they don't have to go to some field and ruin a fight for the purpose of trying to get the furballers to fight where they want them. furballers will be happy because they can put up some sort of defense against the enemy and have more fun doing so. i would expect, as many strat guys have, to accept the challenge of the new system. for years we have been hearing about strategy and the importance of coordination, so now is the time to buck up.
-
Originally posted by Laurie
Jesus christ what is it with this think creatively bollox.
you cant think creativley or outside the box when the game restricts you into thebox. we did think creativley, but now you can't. get it in there, THERES NOTHING TO BE CREATED, it's physically impossible, you have two choices, not much room for creativity
Nothing is impossible.....go study WWII in depth, (Afetr all that is what this game...and I repeat game is patterned after, and you will see numerous battles in where the target base was not only hammered, but surrounding support bases were also hammered.
It seems to me that everyone, well almost everyone complains a little more, the more realistic the game gets, in where it makes it not so easy to win by pure numbers alone.
With communication and teamwork....there is plenty to be created.
Also, all this talk of Vulching, Toolshedding, HO and such....This is after all a game that is by Advertisement a "WWII Combat Experience". Review gun camera footage from the Bomber Escorts once the Escort portion of their mission was over. They went after "Targets of Opportunity" which included, Aircraft on the ground, Trains, Convoys, Troop Formations etc, etc.
The only fight that is fought "Fair" is inside 4 ropes and I don't see any ropes in Aces High.
-
Originally posted by Overlag
have you played AH lately???? hordes are very VERY active now, since 60-70 players fight for one base. Fairly often we knits get close to 50 in ONE MISSION...
hordes are gone and rare.....LOL :rofl
Sorry Overlag,
I'm afraid you misunderstood me.
I was referring to megasquad populated missions, not ad hoc missions.
-
Originally posted by 96Delta
Sorry Overlag,
I'm afraid you misunderstood me.
I was referring to megasquad populated missions, not ad hoc missions.
what is the problem with "megasquads"
-
Originally posted by Overlag
what is the problem with "megasquads"
They don't exist :)
-
Originally posted by Overlag
this........ the first base would have probably been undefended. the 2nd was probably under-defended.... and from then on its a BLAST trying to hold on to what you have taken, or try to take more.... once people WAKE up to the full scale of an attack, they start counter attacking. thats where i had my fun on those maps....
I'm opposed to these changes but personally I've always thought this strategy was a waste of time and resources. It usually results in an indefensable position that does nothing more than drain resources from where they're most needed; the front(s). People argue that it re-directs the enemy away from the front but if you can't beat 'em there your not going to do it here either. Nine out of ten times this strategy results in failure while the front moves forward into your territory.
No slam on anyone, just my opinion on this strategy.
-
Originally posted by 96Delta
Sorry Overlag,
I'm afraid you misunderstood me.
I was referring to megasquad populated missions, not ad hoc missions.
BOP'S LIVE!!!!!!! We had squad night in orange tonight and we had quite a bit of fun, at least for how it's currently set :)
We first porked a thorn i our side Vbase while some of our bombers went to the second base in the chain to kill hangers and the rest of us hit the currently capturable base though this was thwarted some by the 2 CV's just south.. So we went and sunk them then continued with the capture.. We continued on up the chain untill most had to log off for bed and we just didn't have the strength and organisation to continue though we had a good plan just not the man power.
Over all the system worked well though it will be nice to have more options. :)
Oh and I think I'm going to get a promotion from PR officer to Ambassidor for the BOP's LOL I think they were voting. All my squad mates were happy that I could have this level of interaction with you HiTech, Thank you.
I am soo looking forwasrd to tomorrow.......
-
That was a clever trick with the jeeps. That's the first time I've seen it made to work. ;)
-
I think the jeep idea was WT666's though don't quote me on that...
Wile they were taking that base and strarting on the next Vbase 3 of us drove to the town of the next Airbase and had it down and ready with an M3 parked in it so the second the Vbase fell we could snag the air base :D
Problem is most of the BOP's had logged and Bish arn't exactally organised.:furious so we couldn't clear the Vbase :)
-
Originally posted by Flayed1
Oh and I think I'm going to get a promotion from PR officer to Ambassidor for the BOP's LOL I think they were voting. All my squad mates were happy that I could have this level of interaction with you HiTech, Thank you.
dude - I told you guys that Hitech has been a BOP for over two years....one of those "shades" accounts that he flys under....
and I'm not telling who it is. :rofl
-
if its so important, defend it, if you cant defend it, get over it, and up to defend/cap the area.
Will you stop with this already ... geeeesh.
The milk-running (99% of the time) is always directed at the country with the least amount of players ... it's known affectionately as ... "Race to the Reset".
How many times and how many different people have to explain to you that the least populated country CAN NOT defend all its fields properly ... on BOTH fronts.
This too is the main reason for the new ack system. It's main intent was to help the overwhelmed and to slow down the milk-runners attacking the overwhelmed.
Whenever I have flown for the most populated country ... base defense is no big deal ... you can always get 3-4 people to come and help ... but this is not the case when you are on the least populated country.
So ... when base defense is discussed in conversations such as this ... think of it from the standpoint of the country getting ganged.
-
When I popped on last night there were very little air battles going on from wht I could see.
Cept for the horde running up our GV bases.
What idiot put the opposing GV spawns in exactly the same spot in some of these areas? LOL
Was fun for a while but got old and dull real fast
Up,kill,killed Up,kill,killed Up,kill,killed Up,kill,killed Up,kill,killed
Anyway. That is about the dullest part of the game.
Fun for about 5 min. Then gets old real fast
GV battles should IMO more about Manuvering for position , and using the terrain to your advantage.
Not whos connection lags enough to give enough tim to swing your turret around and blast an enemy before the enemy sees you materialise.
Which is about all these overlapping spawn points do.
Also noticed ther were more players in the Blue Arena then the Orange.
In fact after I got bored with the spawn and camp horde defence routine I tried to go thee but couldnt get in due to numbers
The other arenas were undernumbered so I logged off
-
furballers will be happy because they can put up some sort of defense against the enemy and have more fun doing so. i would expect, as many strat guys have, to accept the challenge of the new system. for years we have been hearing about strategy and the importance of coordination, so now is the time to buck up.
Very true except this change in no way helps furballers. It does create an area where people have to fight and that helps the game.
A furball is usually between 2k and 8k and most do not climb much higher than 3k.
In base defense, much of your night is climbing to hit the cherry pickers or chasing running 51s and the like. It's not as good as a furball but it is better than milk running hordes.
So honestly for all those guys that say the furballers got what they wanted, you are full of cow pies. What we did get and the rest of the community got was a forced clash of the hordes which in turn causes more people to fight and is good for the game.
Also WTG Flayed for being creative and actually applying some strategery. Now if the rest of the nay sayers would take their heads out of the sand and follow your squads lead this game will pick up and fast.
Last night I noticed a lot of nights, ( I was flying nights ) using old tactics of just sitting around their base and defending and I soon realized that this old strategy no longer works. If you have no offense then you will have a weak defense. There were so many people doing circles that frame rates were bad. What the knights needed was a ring leader to take half of the defenders on the attack. I left before anything like that happened. My point is start getting creative guys. If your frame rate sucks, then there are too many wasted resources in one area, put a mission together and go on the offensive. :aok
-
Also noticed ther were more players in the Blue Arena then the Orange.
In fact after I got bored with the spawn and camp horde defence routine I tried to go thee but couldnt get in due to numbers
The other arenas were undernumbered so I logged off
Yep very few have a clue how to work this system because they are used to such simple strat and aren't thinking creatively. I just hope our strategerist are not so limmited that they cant make this system work.
I also noticed without some leadership things are still stagnant. Can the community rise to the occasion or will they keep their heads in the sand??
-
Too bad.... HT is trying but it's not the game that is the problem, it is some of the users inability to even sides. Nothing can fix that short of an IQ test to join AH. :rofl
-
Originally posted by Quah!
.
Last night I noticed a lot of nights, ( I was flying nights ) using old tactics of just sitting around their base and defending and I soon realized that this old strategy no longer works. If you have no offense then you will have a weak defense.
Those "old" tactics never did work to begin with.
Which is why Knights won so few resets.
All those defenc tactics ever do against a determined enemy is delay the inevitable.
that is untill someone went and took out the troops at the attacking base.
then the Bisk/Rooks would promptly give up on that base for a while and move on to a different area untill troops came back up
(I am sure it probably worked that way for the knights too.)
The best way to defend a base. Has and always will be to attack the offending base attacking it in some sort of force and not just one or two people running a delaying action
If all you do is sit over your own base defending. Its only a matter of time before the vulch light gets turned on at your base.
Its always been that way.
It always will be that way
-
Originally posted by Quah!
Yep very few have a clue how to work this system because they are used to such simple strat and aren't thinking creatively.
LOL that is almost exactly what I alluded to in this thread a few pages ago
-
Originally posted by Quah!
Also WTG Flayed for being creative and actually applying some strategery. Now if the rest of the nay sayers would take their heads out of the sand and follow your squads lead this game will pick up and fast.
Last night I noticed a lot of nights, ( I was flying nights ) using old tactics of just sitting around their base and defending and I soon realized that this old strategy no longer works. If you have no offense then you will have a weak defense. There were so many people doing circles that frame rates were bad. What the knights needed was a ring leader to take half of the defenders on the attack. I left before anything like that happened. My point is start getting creative guys. If your frame rate sucks, then there are too many wasted resources in one area, put a mission together and go on the offensive. :aok
TY and yes I think there will be more strat play as the system is developed but it's limmited right now because we are just learning what will work with the system and these are TESTS.....
And yes OFFENSE you have to do this. I'm not saying you should abandon all defense but some have to get organised and hit the next target some how or you WILL lose the baseyou are sitting on.
That old saying "The best defense is a good offense" applies so much to this system because if you take the next base the one you were at is now uncapturable and I don't think you can get a better defence than that. :)
-
don't worry , as soon as they figure out how to "work the system" you "fighters" will want more changes.
-
GRRRRRRR.....
I really wish people would stop trying to bame this group or that group...
If anything was responsible for causing this change it was how the entire community was interacting or not with each other....
I really like this because if you look at it we now have the furballers playing the capture game with the strat guys.. Now the furballers UBER LEET fighter skills have a purpose other than just furballing. Now it looks more like an attack/defense than just a randome furball and I them if this is so.
The system I think is about balaceing all types of play.
P.S. The tankers in TT on trinity should love this system as we would be able to make the TT bases some of the last captureable bases on the map. :)
-
Originally posted by john9001
don't worry , as soon as they figure out how to "work the system" you "fighters" will want more changes.
If they figure out a way to avoid fighting, you're probably right.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
Yep very few have a clue how to work this system because they are used to such simple strat and aren't thinking creatively. I just hope our strategerist are not so limmited that they cant make this system work.
I also noticed without some leadership things are still stagnant. Can the community rise to the occasion or will they keep their heads in the sand??
It's going to be hard to "think creatively" from a strategic perspective when a seemingly vast majority of players don't understand that if you don't attack you can't win. This has been one of my gripes with the Bish for a long time. Many just up and fly circles around our bases waiting to be attacked. I was in the Blue arena last night and the fight between the Bish and the Knights was fantastic along a front from 19 to 20 to 21. Knights were pounding 19 while Bish were pounding 20. Neither side could break through for the capture. Knights re-allocated resources and hit 21 en-masse. This allowed a short pause at 19 and since i had just upped there I flew south to slow them down off 18. Guess what. I was one of only 2 or 3 to do so. Soon I found my engine dead facing 1 on 10 or so odds. Not very favorable. I dodged until I HAD to bail. Back at 19 our guys were flying around in circles with no enemy dar bar. In their defense there were a few vehicles up but even at that, no one was smart enough to go take down the VH at 18. Thankfully we held at 21 but I had to log off.
If you can't convince these guys to attack in the regular small arenas how are you going to get them to coordinate an attack? Bish have just never really been good at premeditated teamwork and I think this also has to be taken into consideration.
-
It's going to be hard to "think creatively" from a strategic perspective when a seemingly vast majority of players don't understand that if you don't attack you can't win. This has been one of my gripes with the Bish for a long time. Many just up and fly circles around our bases waiting to be attacked. I was in the Blue arena last night and the fight between the Bish and the Knights was fantastic along a front from 19 to 20 to 21. Knights were pounding 19 while Bish were pounding 20. Neither side could break through for the capture. Knights re-allocated resources and hit 21 en-masse. This allowed a short pause at 19 and since i had just upped there I flew south to slow them down off 18. Guess what. I was one of only 2 or 3 to do so. Soon I found my engine dead facing 1 on 10 or so odds. Not very favorable. I dodged until I HAD to bail. Back at 19 our guys were flying around in circles with no enemy dar bar. In their defense there were a few vehicles up but even at that, no one was smart enough to go take down the VH at 18. Thankfully we held at 21 but I had to log off.
If you can't convince these guys to attack in the regular small arenas how are you going to get them to coordinate an attack? Bish have just never really been good at premeditated teamwork and I think this also has to be taken into consideration.
I agree BEagle, but I dont blame the guys as much as I blame what they have been used to.
Before that sort of worked, yes in the ultimate sense like Dred points out it really doesn't, but in the short term it allows for some action, albeit anoying wait for pork and auger types and hope to score kill while you fight half your countrymen for it.
I think as this goes from test to implementation, with the changes that Flayed and HT have been working on, and it gets installed in all the arenas the community mentality will change.
This mentality change will be more mission based. I remember the days when you would routinely see missions being posted and flown where the whole country had a chance to join or not. This has been lost in the latest horde mentality game. No need to create missions when all you had to do was follow the horde. In the horde mentality no real need for leaders and tactics other than everyone to base "n".
Now the game is being forced back to a mentality where in order to be successful you need leaders and coordinated tactics to go on the offensive.
Defense will always be a no brainer, up where they are attacking. The trick with defense is know when you have too many defending and not wasting resources that should be on the offensive.
Hopefully we will see a revitalization of sqaud tactics like the MAW, AKs, FBs, CHs, etc used to use before numbers became the primary tactic. Hopefully we will see more mission planners etc.
-
Imo it's not about Furballers vs Toolshedders. It's the ability to join the team that has a numbers advantage. Env was a great idea but should be used on members and not planes. I believe overlag/slapshot came up with some great ideas about limiting what side u can join. Especially when one side has a big advantage over the other two countries. We will still have the same problem, members joining the side with the numbers.
Funny how we talk about community but are unwilling to give up the chess piece. Whenever the arena is balance we have no problem. The only problem we have imo is each map ends up let's gangbang the weaker country to a reset. Kind of the concept, you would'nt say that to my face. When you fly and wing with someone you treat them different. We need to start blending more by joining different countries.
-
If you can't convince these guys to attack in the regular small arenas how are you going to get them to coordinate an attack? Bish have just never really been good at premeditated teamwork and I think this also has to be taken into consideration.
As Quah pointed out ... I believe in time, existing squads or newly formed squads will rise to the top and lead countries forward.
Squads like the MAW, USMC, Arabian Knights, CAF, FreeBirds, etc ... were predominate back in AH I ... they took on the responsibility to bring the fight, and in time, we will see these types of squads again within each country.
I remember back one night in AH I when I flew with the MAW ... the Knights were down to 4 bases ... 40DogMAW logged on ... he took the bull by the horns and started an offensive. People respected the MAW and 40Dog so all joined in whatever 40Dog asked for.
The Knights ended up resetting the arena within 4 hours ... after being down to just 4 bases ... never seen anything like it since.
The same was true for Grim (CO of the USMC) ... all he had to do was ask, and people jumped to make it happen.
I forget who was running the AKs back then (AKNimtz ?) ... but he got the same respect from the Bish.
-
Originally posted by john9001
don't worry , as soon as they figure out how to "work the system" you "fighters" will want more changes.
Who are you and what have you done with 44Mag? :)
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
If you can't convince these guys to attack in the regular small arenas how are you going to get them to coordinate an attack? Bish have just never really been good at premeditated teamwork and I think this also has to be taken into consideration.
As Quah pointed out ... I believe in time, existing squads or newly formed squads will rise to the top and lead countries forward.
Squads like the MAW, USMC, Arabian Knights, CAF, FreeBirds, etc ... were predominate back in AH I ... they took on the responsibility to bring the fight, and in time, we will see these types of squads again within each country.
I remember back one night in AH I when I flew with the MAW ... the Knights were down to 4 bases ... 40DogMAW logged on ... he took the bull by the horns and started an offensive. People respected the MAW and 40Dog so all joined in whatever 40Dog asked for.
The Knights ended up resetting the arena within 4 hours ... after being down to just 4 bases ... never seen anything like it since.
The same was true for Grim (CO of the USMC) ... all he had to do was ask, and people jumped to make it happen.
I forget who was running the AKs back then (AKNimtz ?) ... but he got the same respect from the Bish.
I think there's a distinct lack of respect overall in the LW MA's these days. Could be a product of 'generation Counterstrike', a flood of squeakers, the sheer number of players, or something else entirely.
-
Ok...Gonna hang my six out in the breeze here........
It is time to stop the whining, grumbling, name calling, pitty pot sitting, bashing, poor me syndrome, wah wah wah and S*** or get off the pot.
Get together with your Countrymates, Squadron Mates and plan, come up with strategies, use some tactics and win a war or two.
"Attack, Attack, Always Attack". (Gen. George S. Patton Jr.)
I was in orange last night and by the looks of the map, things were getting hot over a base. I upped in B26's and called 3 different times for status over the base w/ no answer, well when I got in visual there was this great big cluster you know what going on. There is more to this game than flying in a circle and shooting other planes. Well, if all your interested in is how many points you can get, then maybe there isn't more to the game.
Has anyone in here ever heard of Foward Air Control? It's amazing what can be done CREATIVELY with that concept.
I tell ya, if one of the countries, either Bishop, Knight or Rook ever get organized and use ALL components of Combat Tactics........well......no one else would have a chance.
So, those of you who wish to rip me apart for the preceding, go right ahead. But think about it, there is more to war then shooting bullets at 300 mph.
-
Overall I like the changes, however I do feel that alot of the analysis is over simplified. If you look at historical realities the Allies simply "horded" the germans. Allied forces simply put the Axis in a meatgrinder and didnt let up....
Yes you can alter the flow of play with missions etc....but one you reach a point where the knights are (or were as of last night) you have no radar no ords and no base close to your "capture" base except the one your defending. Yes you can launch "strike missions" from longer range bases....but you are then fighting two issues....1st your taking away from your defense (which is already outnumbered) and your flying into an enemy that is already projecting a forward area of operations....so in effect they are meeting you over your "territory" at combat alt's....so while your trying to "attack" they are dropping your FH's (exactly what happened) and intercepting your attack with their "excess" forces...
Truthfully when the balance gets that tipped your not getting it back with a "mission"...no matter how uber. I couldnt get with in a 1/2 sector of the rook base (A3??) without running into multiple 20k cons...
Basically tactics and stratagy will be more important and have a greater impact during the early parts of the "struggle" however once things reach the "meatgrinder" stage "recovery" will be more difficult and more map dependant. Here it seemed the only field to "stage" from was on the existing rook line of advance....so it didnt help much....
could "we" do/have done a better job....sure. But realistically I think you have a reenactment of the airwar over germany in Jan 45....yea I could snipe a few and land....or mix it up and die.....but "Berlin" was gonna get hammered either way.
-
Originally posted by Waffle BAS
dude - I told you guys that Hitech has been a BOP for over two years....one of those "shades" accounts that he flys under....
and I'm not telling who it is. :rofl
Skuzzy was a BK too.
:lol
-
Originally posted by scottydawg
I think there's a distinct lack of respect overall in the LW MA's these days. Could be a product of 'generation Counterstrike', a flood of squeakers, the sheer number of players, or something else entirely.
I don't know that it's any different then my AW days. Certainly there are more players overall so an arena getting to know each other, doesn't happen the same way as it did back then.
Ultimately I think it's still the 'race to the reset' mentality at any cost that sets the tone. Winning the war takes consideration over gameplay. No one likes to lose, and when the ultimate goal is seen as resetting the map, then being on the winning side means going with the largest crowd and sticking in the middle of it to be a part of the 'success'.
That's not unique to AH obviously, but for whatever reason it's evolved here to the point it's changed the game from combat to speed.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
I don't know that it's any different then my AW days. Certainly there are more players overall so an arena getting to know each other, doesn't happen the same way as it did back then.
Ultimately I think it's still the 'race to the reset' mentality at any cost that sets the tone. Winning the war takes consideration over gameplay. No one likes to lose, and when the ultimate goal is seen as resetting the map, then being on the winning side means going with the largest crowd and sticking in the middle of it to be a part of the 'success'.
That's not unique to AH obviously, but for whatever reason it's evolved here to the point it's changed the game from combat to speed.
If you were around in AW 1 you couldn't even capture bases. All you could do was temporarily disable them.
The "race to the re-set" mentality is fueled by the perks alloted to the winning team and especially if your a newbie or just not that good then this is a strong motivator.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
I don't know that it's any different then my AW days. Certainly there are more players overall so an arena getting to know each other, doesn't happen the same way as it did back then.
Ultimately I think it's still the 'race to the reset' mentality at any cost that sets the tone. Winning the war takes consideration over gameplay. No one likes to lose, and when the ultimate goal is seen as resetting the map, then being on the winning side means going with the largest crowd and sticking in the middle of it to be a part of the 'success'.
That's not unique to AH obviously, but for whatever reason it's evolved here to the point it's changed the game from combat to speed.
Maybe I'm casting a rose-colored sheen over my memories of AW, but I don't really remember the kind of rancor I've seen here.
I can't say I disagree with you re: the reset. I'm not sure why this is happening but as soon as a side starts to gain momentum, it seems they just keep steamrolling with more and more players, maybe from other arenas?
-
Originally posted by BaldEagl
If you were around in AW 1 you couldn't even capture bases. All you could do was temporarily disable them.
The "race to the re-set" mentality is fueled by the perks alloted to the winning team and if your a newbie or just not that good then this is a strong motivator.
What is it, like 25 perk points?
/no idea.
-
Originally posted by scottydawg
Maybe I'm casting a rose-colored sheen over my memories of AW, but I don't really remember the kind of rancor I've seen here.
I can't say I disagree with you re: the reset. I'm not sure why this is happening but as soon as a side starts to gain momentum, it seems they just keep steamrolling with more and more players, maybe from other arenas?
I still have those rose colored glasses too :)
But I do remember when it went from the AW1 set up where there was limited base capture, to unlimited capture, things started to change there as well.
Seems like I remember being there the night folks decided to see if it was possible to eliminate one country by taking all the bases. It took big numbers of people vs smaller numbers to make it happen.
It's been downhill ever since :)
-
Originally posted by BaldEagl
The "race to the re-set" mentality is fueled by the perks alloted to the winning team and especially if your a newbie or just not that good then this is a strong motivator.
Nobody in right mind will waste lots of time for silly 25 perks he can get for single sortie. Even 2 day noob can get them far faster just flying any HO-machine.
Ppl want to win war, not to get few perks for it.
-
Originally posted by scottydawg
What is it, like 25 perk points?
/no idea.
I don't have any idea either. I saw someone on text channel one night say 45-45-45 fighter, vehicle, bomber but I don't know if that's true or not.
-
Originally posted by Oleg
Nobody in right mind will waste lots of time for silly 25 perks he can get for single sortie. Even 2 day noob can get them far faster just flying any HO-machine.
Ppl want to win war, not to get few perks for it.
Most single sorties are more like 2-4 perks unless I REALLY suck. Base captures are in the 25 range I think.
-
Originally posted by BaldEagl
Most single sorties are more like 2-4 perks unless I REALLY suck. Base captures are in the 25 range I think.
Try planes with ENJ <= 20.
-
Reset winners are given 25 perks per category.
A capture is 12 perks ... if you don't have an ENY penalty.
-
Originally posted by BaldEagl
Most single sorties are more like 2-4 perks unless I REALLY suck. Base captures are in the 25 range I think.
Fly an FM2 ... you will have more perks than you know what to do with.
Currently I have over 25,000 fighter perks ... and no where to spend them ... ;)
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
Fly an FM2 ... you will have more perks than you know what to do with.
Currently I have over 25,000 fighter perks ... and no where to spend them ... ;)
Yup kill 1 low eny AC in a fm2, get shot down and still 2-4 perks usually.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by BaldEagl
Most single sorties are more like 2-4 perks unless I REALLY suck. Base captures are in the 25 range I think.
If you are only getting 2 to 4 perkies there are 3 possible reason
You real do suck
You are an Lgay7 rider killing low ENY planes
You fly in a country that consistantly out numbers all other
Reset perkies are 75 total 25 perkies per catogaory. Perkies are no motivator for reset. None at all. You are deluded if you believe this to be the primory reason to reset.
Reset is about winning. Reset is about defeating the other team.
Quick ways to perkies as follows 5 landed kills in a Mossie , p47, c205, a6m or any othe low ENY valued plain. 1 sortie takes 15 to 35 min max.
Drive a Gv to a factory and use every bit off ammo you have. Takes 20 min.
Drive supps into a base thats been really hammered.
Dry spawn LVT's with sups.
Drive m3 for capture.
Take bombers to a factory or city. Takes 20 to 2 hour depending how much of meal you want to make of it.
Fly sups to a reall hammered base.
Fly troops for capture.
Any combination of the above will yeild 25 to 48 perkies in little over 1 hour depending on ENY values. .....
Say you land 3 mossie kills 10 to 15 perkies. Then you do M3 capture 6 to 16 perkies. You do 1 m3 resup 3 to 5 perkies. Another fighter sortie in p47 again 3 landed kills 6 to 12 perkies.
You can earn perkies easier than waiting for reset.
-
Originally posted by LYNX
If you are only getting 2 to 4 perkies there are 3 possible reason
You real do suck
You are an Lgay7 rider killing low ENY planes
You fly in a country that consistantly out numbers all other
Reset perkies are 75 total 25 perkies per catogaory. Perkies are no motivator for reset. None at all. You are deluded if you believe this to be the primory reason to reset.
Nope, not an LA7 but mostly the next lowest perk scorer, Spit 16. I also regularily fly in approximate descending order of frequency FW190A8, F6F-5, Seafire, ME163, FW190D9, TA152H. I've always been and will probably always be primarily a Spit jock but I always try a few other planes each camp (recently BF109's and P38's). To be honest I don't really pay attention to perks much because the only things I use them for are 163's and Tigers and I rarely lose those so I rarely lose the perks I'm using.
I was just citing perks as a possible reason why there might be a "race for the re-set" mentality. It's really the only major change I can think of since AW2.
-
Originally posted by BaldEagl
Nope, not an LA7 but mostly the next lowest perk scorer, Spit 16. I also regularily fly in approximate descending order of frequency FW190A8, F6F-5, Seafire, ME163, FW190D9, TA152H. I've always been and will probably always be primarily a Spit jock but I always try a few other planes each camp (recently BF109's and P38's). To be honest I don't really pay attention to perks much because the only things I use them for are 163's and Tigers and I rarely lose those so I rarely lose the perks I'm using.
I was just citing perks as a possible reason why there might be a "race for the re-set" mentality. It's really the only major change I can think of since AW2.
With the exception of the F6 every plane is a high ENY valued plane. You need many kills. Spits are my primory.... check out KI61.
AH1 also had perkies at reset. I maintain the reason for reset is in the win over / deafet of enemy.
-
Originally posted by LYNX
AH1 also had perkies at reset. I maintain the reason for reset is in the win over / deafet of enemy.
I said AW1 (Air Warrior 1), Not Aces High 1. Thats what we were discussing ealier in this thread when I mentioned this as a possible reason for the change in mind-set understanding that that change has been over a 10 year period since then.
-
Time for a new thread on the revised system.