Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: molybdenum on November 16, 2022, 08:11:07 PM
-
Many reasons. Primarily:
1) They get shifted to other teams and the boats remain locked in the path the mercenary determined because they belong to another team now and no one can take control.
2) They don't have the team they temporarily belong to at heart. Several times I have asked such a player to release a CV or BB but he wanted to get an accomplishment by killing X # of fuel factories or whatever but wouldn't. So a critical team resource is usurped by a self-centered player.
3) And sometimes--this is anecdotal, I have not personally seen it happen but ppl I respect said it happened and I believe them--one player deliberately locks a CV into a path so he can later destroy it when he changes sides.
It ought to be simple? Deny TG control rights to side switchers?
I'm in favor of the side switch thing but some people abuse it. Make it less abusable?
-
Many reasons. Primarily:
1) They get shifted to other teams and the boats remain locked in the path the mercenary determined because they belong to another team now and no one can take control.
2) They don't have the team they temporarily belong to at heart. Several times I have asked such a player to release a CV or BB but he wanted to get an accomplishment by killing X # of fuel factories or whatever but wouldn't. So a critical team resource is usurped by a self-centered player.
3) And sometimes--this is anecdotal, I have not personally seen it happen but ppl I respect said it happened and I believe them--one player deliberately locks a CV into a path so he can later destroy it when he changes sides.
It ought to be simple? Deny TG control rights to side switchers?
I'm in favor of the side switch thing but some people abuse it. Make it less abusable?
#1 HTC Needs to fix that
#2 Play to win wherever I am at
#3 lets change rules over a rumor
How about improving your score and earn the rank
-
The Ops has a point I believe. While the side switchers, for the most part, do not abuse the TG control, there will always be at least that "one" individual that will take advantage of it. Prohibit their ability to take command of the TG solves that problem.
Just last week player X took command of Rook TG, then got side switched with him still in command. Now that he was switched sides, he can not access the TG to release command. Chan. 200 was full of demands he release command but he couldn't.
-
I'd take a wild guess that most of us auto switchers don't quite care about cv privileges. Removing then would only really effect the ones abusing it. +1
-
I'd take a wild guess that most of us auto switchers don't quite care about cv privileges. Removing then would only really effect the ones abusing it. +1
I doubt that auto-switchers are the problem, simply because we can't tell which side we'll get switched to. The abusers, to the extent they exist, must be the ones who deliberately choose a particular side to join.
The real problem with the auto-switchers, though, is as previous posters have described. If you're suddenly swooped to another side while in command of a boat, the only way for you to relinquish command is to disable auto-switching, move back to your original side, and release command. But then you're stuck there for the next six hours.
- oldman
-
I'd take a wild guess that most of us auto switchers don't quite care about cv privileges. Removing then would only really effect the ones abusing it. +1
Word
-
I try to shoot down bad guys. I look for bad guys to shoot. It is all about the fight. A good fight has little to do with the "war".
But that's just me and a handfull of pilots.
-
I'd take a wild guess that most of us auto switchers don't quite care about cv privileges. Removing then would only really effect the ones abusing it. +1
+1
-
I doubt that auto-switchers are the problem, simply because we can't tell which side we'll get switched to. The abusers, to the extent they exist, must be the ones who deliberately choose a particular side to join.
The real problem with the auto-switchers, though, is as previous posters have described. If you're suddenly swooped to another side while in command of a boat, the only way for you to relinquish command is to disable auto-switching, move back to your original side, and release command. But then you're stuck there for the next six hours.
- oldman
I relog after auto switch and it releases boat
I'd take a wild guess that most of us auto switchers don't quite care about cv privileges. Removing then would only really effect the ones abusing it. +1
I do care about cv privilege and until you prove RUMOR of foul play, I want to enjoy the privilege!
-
I relog after auto switch and it releases boatI do care about cv privilege and until you prove RUMOR of foul play, I want to enjoy the privilege!
I guess that's reasonable but it would be nice to have a vote function to kick off players that are abusing it. Regardless, when switching countries, you should lose control of the CV automatically. I am guessing that was an oversite on HTs part, or some sort of bug.
Maybe we need a timer for side switchers excluding them from taking control of a CV for a set period of time? Not sure what that should be but it will definitely discourage people from abusing the system.
-
My understanding is that CV control is based on overall ranking, so the better ranked player gets control. A better way of doing this might be to have ranks for each side, so the better ranked Rook gets control of the Rook CVs and so on. The idea is that a high ranked player who plays mostly for one side but then switches briefly to sabotage CV paths would find themselves outranked and unable to do so.
-
I'd take a wild guess that most of us auto switchers don't quite care about cv privileges. Removing then would only really effect the ones abusing it. +1
This
I don't even know how to make waypoints for the boats
Eagler
-
My understanding is that CV control is based on overall ranking, so the better ranked player gets control. A better way of doing this might be to have ranks for each side, so the better ranked Rook gets control of the Rook CVs and so on. The idea is that a high ranked player who plays mostly for one side but then switches briefly to sabotage CV paths would find themselves outranked and unable to do so.
Or...a code adjustment that neutralizes CV/BB command control priority by rank whenever players opt for auto side switching.
-
Or...a code adjustment that neutralizes CV/BB command control priority by rank whenever players opt for auto side switching.
Or, maybe disable the ability to control a task group for those on auto switch. That would also mitigate the antics of certain “Grand Admirals”.
-
Sounds like a code change...well theres that..
Eagler
-
I don't see the point of taking command if you know you could get side switched, that just seems like an unintelligent thing to do or you're just trying to be an a hole.
-
I don't see the point of taking command if you know you could get side switched, that just seems like an unintelligent thing to do or you're just trying to be an a hole.
DING! DING! DING! DING! DING! We Have A WINNER!!!!
-
Or, maybe disable the ability to control a task group for those on auto switch. That would also mitigate the antics of certain “Grand Admirals”.
Isn't that what I just said? Oh the Humanity! :banana: :old: :neener:
-
DING! DING! DING! DING! DING! We Have A WINNER!!!!
Basically the reason we have a side switch timer
-
I don't see the point of taking command if you know you could get side switched, that just seems like an unintelligent thing to do or you're just trying to be an a hole.
[/quote
Using that logic don't up you might get shot down! Whichever country I am on playing to win or stop an attack
-
Currently
7 AM PST
11 Bish
5 Knights
4 Rooks two are sites switchers
CV96 is in the reserve mode to protect a field
CV90 is being used as a radar picket
Denying side switchers use of boats doesn't seem like a good plan right now! :banana: :banana: :banana: :old: :banana:
-
Just noticed this thread. Did not know it was an issue. The better fix would be that anyone selecting auto change not be able to control a CV. Generally they are not on a team long enough to know where a boat is needed anyway.
-
I don't see the point of taking command if you know you could get side switched, that just seems like an unintelligent thing to do or you're just trying to be an a hole.
Using that logic don't up you might get shot down! Whichever country I am on playing to win or stop an attack
That analogy to what I said makes zero sense, it's like comparing apples to dildos. Which makes total sense why you think you need to command a ship knowing a auto switch will cause an issue when a simply setting a path for the cv will suffice. That's the discussion, if a auto switcher is willing to take advantage of the cv command issue, the bug needs to be fixed or auto switchers need to be denied taking command. I auto switch from time to time and support it being denied. Setting a path does not require taking command.
-
Just noticed this thread. Did not know it was an issue. The better fix would be that anyone selecting auto change not be able to control a CV. Generally they are not on a team long enough to know where a boat is needed anyway.
[/quote
Been Rook over 2 hours this morning. How about you must have 1 million damage points to control cv? There is more than one admiral with ZERO damage points who move the boats to see the pretty red course line in control of boats!
-
Using that logic don't up you might get shot down! Whichever country I am on playing to win or stop an attack
That analogy to what I said makes zero sense, it's like comparing apples to dildos. Which makes total sense why you think you need to command a ship knowing a auto switch will cause an issue when a simply setting a path for the cv will suffice. That's the discussion, if a auto switcher is willing to take advantage of the cv command issue, the bug needs to be fixed or auto switchers need to be denied taking command. I auto switch from time to time and support it being denied. Setting a path does not require taking command.
I think it's an oversight rather than a bug, but it really ought to be addressed. Some people abuse the privilege of rank as side switchers, either negligently or on purpose. It should be an easy fix, and imo it ought to be done.
-
Using that logic don't up you might get shot down! Whichever country I am on playing to win or stop an attack
That analogy to what I said makes zero sense, it's like comparing apples to dildos. Which makes total sense why you think you need to command a ship knowing a auto switch will cause an issue when a simply setting a path for the cv will suffice. That's the discussion, if a auto switcher is willing to take advantage of the cv command issue, the bug needs to be fixed or auto switchers need to be denied taking command. I auto switch from time to time and support it being denied. Setting a path does not require taking command.
I will concede point since you are expert on apples and dildos
-
And cane--the only person objecting to the idea, for whatever self-centered reasons he might have--tries to turn the thread into a pissing match. Let's stay on topic. Should side switchers have the ability to command CVs. Yea or nay?
-
And cane--the only person objecting to the idea, for whatever self-centered reasons he might have--tries to turn the thread into a pissing match. Let's stay on topic. Should side switchers have the ability to command CVs. Yea or nay?
Take cv control away from auto switch, and code it with warnings similar to the ones you get when you turn it on currently, mentioning the loss of cv control.
Or, be the last on the waiver wire to control the boat if you are trying to balance teams, score potato, etc... win win
-
be the last on the waiver wire to control the boat if you are trying to balance teams, score potato, etc... win win
This sounds reasonable
-
Should side switchers have the ability to command CVs. Yea or nay?
Yes, but immediately lose command on the switch. :aok
-
I don't see the point of taking command if you know you could get side switched, that just seems like an unintelligent thing to do or you're just trying to be an a hole.
examples of when I took command of a boat.
First had vis on an enemy boat and announced his location and asked for Gunners. after engaging the boat someone decided to move it two sectors away in the middle of a fight. Took command of boat and reengaged enemy CV and sunk it.
Second Had started shelling shore battery. When someone decided to send boat sectors away. Took command killed SB and white flagged town
I believe Whiteman you don't know how to use the boats! Out of curiosity what is Your gunner score?
-
examples of when I took command of a boat.
First had vis on an enemy boat and announced his location and asked for Gunners. after engaging the boat someone decided to move it two sectors away in the middle of a fight. Took command of boat and reengaged enemy CV and sunk it.
Second Had started shelling shore battery. When someone decided to send boat sectors away. Took command killed SB and white flagged town
I believe Whiteman you don't know how to use the boats! Out of curiosity what is Your gunner score?
This thread never mentioned anyone by name, but yet here you are defending this the most.
That means you know what you are doing. I personally have witnessed you doing what was described in this thread.
-
As someone who uses the auto side switch, I am for the removal of Task group privileges or being lowest priority for taking control of a task group.
-
Yes, but immediately lose command on the switch. :aok
As it should be and for some strange reason still remains.
If you log off, you lose command…
-
The most effective way to correct and resolve everyone's is just to flag the Country's CV control to in country members only. i.e... If your auto switched, discoed, or log off CV control automatically releases. Easy coding seems like.
-
Many reasons. Primarily:
1) They get shifted to other teams and the boats remain locked in the path the mercenary determined because they belong to another team now and no one can take control.
2) They don't have the team they temporarily belong to at heart. Several times I have asked such a player to release a CV or BB but he wanted to get an accomplishment by killing X # of fuel factories or whatever but wouldn't. So a critical team resource is usurped by a self-centered player.
3) And sometimes--this is anecdotal, I have not personally seen it happen but ppl I respect said it happened and I believe them--one player deliberately locks a CV into a path so he can later destroy it when he changes sides.
It ought to be simple? Deny TG control rights to side switchers?
I'm in favor of the side switch thing but some people abuse it. Make it less abusable?
what does TG mean?
-
I believe it's Task Group.
:salute
-
This thread never mentioned anyone by name, but yet here you are defending this the most.
That means you know what you are doing. I personally have witnessed you doing what was described in this thread.
Sure wish you spoke up about the perceived wrong doing at the TIME,I will never know what you were talking about!
Have a strong opinion now equates to you being GUILTY .
-
Sure wish you spoke up about the perceived wrong doing at the TIME,I will never know what you were talking about!
Have a strong opinion now equates to you being GUILTY .
I did call you out. You just like hearing people cry about your shady game play.
I get it
-
I believe it's Task Group.
:salute
I'm so dumb! lol. I googled "TG aircraft carrier" and still didn't get it.
:)
-
I did call you out. You just like hearing people cry about your shady game play.
I get it
I don't know if cane did that or not, I haven't seen it personally. But three players have accused him of it that I know of. One of them I dismiss (he cries wolf a lot), one of them I don't l know (you), but one of them I respect a ton. If he says he saw it, he probably did.
As many posters have commented, the fix seems necessary and should be simple. Not just for the cane thing, but for the accidental continued control of CVs when a country switch happens, and the occasional misuse by mercenaries of a team resource for personal gain.
I hope HT takes care of it.
-
I think if we do this with the auto switch, we should do this with the six hour side change also. It effectively destroys the rank system over a rumor. I don't recall ever talking to Darkwood ,possibly in special events but never in the main arena. Osmium, Oldman and Max are the only names I recognize in the field gunner category. There's no nothing wrong with having an opinion but I think you should participate in what we're talking about and you end up talking about apples versus****** per Whiteman :bhead :bhead
-
I think if we do this with the auto switch, we should do this with the six hour side change also. It effectively destroys the rank system over a rumor. I don't recall ever talking to Darkwood ,possibly in special events but never in the main arena. Osmium, Oldman and Max are the only names I recognize in the field gunner category. There's no nothing wrong with having an opinion but I think you should participate in what we're talking about and you end up talking about apples versus****** per Whiteman :bhead :bhead
This thread was not about you, although you're responding to it as if it was directed at you.
So, you know damn well what you're doing.
-
I have not had a thread about me since the 2003 thread about flying naked.
-
This thread was not about you, although you're responding to it as if it was directed at you.
So, you know damn well what you're doing.
This.
I have personality witnessed Caine on one side of a fight sink our boat then switch to our team and monopolize a task group (that had been headed for over an hour into the already active fight) so he could steer it all the way across the map (for five hours) just to get it sunk. He ruined an incredibly fun battle because he's a ............ .
-
:neener:
This.
I have personality witnessed Caine on one side of a fight sink our boat then switch to our team and monopolize a task group (that had been headed for over an hour into the already active fight) so he could steer it all the way across the map (for five hours) just to get it sunk. He ruined an incredibly fun battle because he's a ............ .
On the same day Mr V had two CV's on one front . I HAD taken control of CV97 and sent it A42 where it was sunk in the battle trying to take the base. I can't explain why Mr V chose to take CV99 and send it to a 42 where it was sunk with no fite and left our Western Front naked. Classic example of the pot calling the kettle black. Someday I hope to be as great of a ******* him
-
:banana: :banana:
[/quote]I have not had a thread about me since the 2003 thread about flying naked.
now I gotta worry about a naked 38 above my head
-
On the same day Mr V had two CV's on one front . I HAD taken control of CV97 and sent it A42 where it was sunk in the battle trying to take the base. I can't explain why Mr V chose to take CV99 and send it to a 42 where it was sunk with no fite and left our Western Front naked. Classic example of the pot calling the kettle black. Someday I hope to be as great of a ******* him
Don't make up BS. You sideswitched and stole the boat our country was using to fight YOU. We were cycling boats to the same area and generating a great battle--something I had been doing all week to great applause by everyone involved--until you switched sides and took our CV away from the fun. You killed the fights that boat could have had for FIVE HOURS (because you are on the spectrum and can't imagine two boats hitting the same target at intervals--higher cyclic rate).
So since you took our boat we sent you the other one. You got yours sunk and rather than use the one right behind it to continue your FAILED raid on 42 you wasted two hours driving the regenerated boat north again.
Basically you monopolized & wasted 7 hours of CV use, ruined one awesome battle (and the extended fun 50 players were having), got three boats sunk while falling to take a single base, and then logged off smug in your delusions of grandeur.
Someday I hope to be as great of a ******* him
When people call you "admiral" it's NOT a compliment. Your actions are a disgrace.
-
Don't make up BS. You sideswitched and stole the boat our country was using to fight YOU. We were cycling boats to the same area and generating a great battle--something I had been doing all week to great applause by everyone involved--until you switched sides and took our CV away from the fun. You killed the fights that boat could have had for FIVE HOURS (because you are on the spectrum and can't imagine two boats hitting the same target at intervals--higher cyclic rate).
So since you took our boat we sent you the other one. You got yours sunk and rather than use the one right behind it to continue your FAILED raid on 42 you wasted two hours driving the regenerated boat north again.
Basically you monopolized & wasted 7 hours of CV use, ruined one awesome battle (and the extended fun 50 players were having), got three boats sunk while falling to take a single base, and then logged off smug in your delusions of grandeur.
When people call you "admiral" it's NOT a compliment. Your actions are a disgrace.
Well, there you have it. Cane is not the reason (merely A reason) I started this thread. Should be an easy fix to deny TG privileges to mercenaries. Here's hoping HT cares enough to do it.
-
nvm, i said to much.
-
Well, there you have it. Cane is not the reason (merely A reason) I started this thread. Should be an easy fix to deny TG privileges to mercenaries. Here's hoping HT cares enough to do it.
The whole fracas started with Vraciu, When I had been auto switched from knights to rook. I saw something I wanted to do and made the 6 hour change to Rook.I took control of a cv that was not controlled by anyone.
So this incident occured after I was a Rook and was playing under the rules of the game.
If Vraciu wants to control two boats get someone to take control of second boat I didn't bump anyone.
So if you change rule for auto-switch change rule for 6 hour also
I did not pull CV99 out of a fite to chase CV97 to A42 but I do like the idea of controlling more than one CV group! :banana: :banana: : :banana:
I controlled one boat they where free to do what they wanted with there boat !I didn't monopolize crap!