Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: lazs2 on December 02, 2003, 02:20:31 PM
-
everything the same except that maybe no fuel below 50% but.... each country has a huge city instead of a HQ.... call it the "capitol"... the capitol is like a hundred building spread out over a sector...
You can "win" the war by either capturing all the bases or.... level the enemies "capitol"...
the fluffers and the "missun dudz" could organize huge raids on the capitol... if anyone cared about "winning" the war.... they could up to intercept... probly take 10 such raids to kill a capitol.
lazs
-
It's an idea. I'd go for it.
-
I'm in for a test.
-
I'd go for anything new right now.
-
Sounds like something a numbers game could win through suicide.
-
It might make Lazs happy, so I vote NO.
-
Hasn't this idea been presented before? By lazs too?
Like much said, anything new is a good thing. My only concern would be the frame rates. Tank town in Trinity used to be killer; imagine a whole sector full of that.
-
Originally posted by MetaTron
Sounds like something a numbers game could win through suicide.
Well, maybe/maybe not.
We've nothing to lose in any event, because right now we have a numbers game that teams could win through suicide.
;)
-
Originally posted by Toad
Well, maybe/maybe not.
We've nothing to lose in any event, because right now we have a numbers game that teams could win through suicide.
;)
Important phrase here:
We've nothing to lose
So why not try something...anything.
-
I like it...one addition...instead of just one super large capitol, make it three fairly large capitols....just think of the strat capabilities!
-
the buildings would be spread out over a whole sector say and maybe take a 500 lb bomb to knock em out... only real way to do it would be lots of flights of carpet bombers with some jabos ...
if people wanted to defend they could... if they didn't care about the "war" they could go on about their business without bothering anyone.
point is... with the short amount of time everyone is on per session... you need VERY simple strat that doesn't punish one group or another.... no, "such and such fighter unavailable" or such and such vehicle or rings of bases with only 25% fuel.... the "strat" needs to be simple and fast. or... faster.
lazs
-
sounds good...with that idea EVERYBODYS fun can be killed by fuel porkers
what would work better is to reduce the damage bombs dropped from attack planes do...and make it so if your scoring as fighter you cant take bombs...
or even worse...the furballers could send a couple people to protect there feilds there upping from...
-
not to worry sob... it won't make me happy... I won't have any use for this feature.
lazs
-
Lazs, you've already got your wish by getting HTC to make buffing not worth the effort, what more do you want?
I'd rather that they brought back the pin point bombing that we used to have. Yeah I know, that created some unrealistic and stupid porking of fuel, etc....but at least there were bombers in the arena.
How often do you see a real bomber at altitude nowadays?
I liked it better when there used to be a reason to fly way behind enemy lines and destroy infrastructure.
-
banana... not sure what yu mean.... seems that with my idea the talentless mouse weilders could .... could.... "win the war"!!!
They would have meaning to their sad little lives and everyone would be in awe of their war winning effort....
your ideas simply make people hang out with em. You want fluffs to affect fighters. I would allow them to affect the whole arena in a war winning and realisic manner.
lazs
-
Interesting idea, but I see a problem: how do you determine which side "wins"?
For example, both knights and bish attack the rook mega-city. Eventually it gets destroyed. Who gets the credit for winning since both teams were demolishing the tool sheds?
-
The city thing is a pretty good idea lazs. I like the 50% fuel suggestion too. I don't know if the City aspect will work if all bases are still capturable. It would have to tie into the capturability of the bases.
- The front line of bases is always vulnerable/capturable
- The second line of bases is only
- vulnerable/capturable when the town is >20% destroyed
- The third line is only capturable if the town is >40% destoyed.
- The town dropping below 80% at any time causes a reset
- Certain rear bases are not capturable (More than just a few).
None of the changes are really that major. There can even be certain buildings in the town that impact regen times and such... maybe even re-arm pads or something like that to simulate lack of parts.
MiniD
-
To build on Lazs and Rude ...
Instead of having what we have now with a "zone" base, move that notion to the "Capitol".
Each one of these "Capitols" will supply a certain amount of airfields that surround the "Capitol".
I don't know what the total amount of fields that are allowed on a big map, but lets say there are 240 total fields/VHs ... that would be 80 per country, so if a country has 5 "Capitol"s, thats 16 fields attached to each "Capitol".
With that, also move the "score-whoring" strats (ack/fuel/troops/etc) within and scattered about the "Capitol" area, so as the bombers come thru, they can weaken the supplies as we now have, along with trying to level the "Capitol". These supplhy strats WOULD NOT be identifyable with big shining icons, you have to find them and remember their position.
Now, each field is still capturable and if all 16 fields are captured, the "Capitol" is turned over to the country that owns all 16 fields.
The "Capitol" itself is capturable, and if you capture the "Capitol", you automatically take the 16 fields attached.
Taking a "Capitol" will be no easy task. Lots, and lots of ack and the closest bases are no more than 1/2 or 3/4 of a sector away.
To capture a "Capitol", you must land 30 troops at one or all of the 3 map rooms that are within the "Capitol" city limits. This necessitates the need for some serious organized destruction and capping to take a "Capitol".
The war is won when one country has no more "Capitols".
Fuel NEVER gets below 50%.
Rebuilding of the structures within the "Capitol" area (ack/buildings) are done by AI supply only. Strat targets (ack/fuel/troops) can be resupplied.
-
johny.. simple really... the country with the most fields(and a city) still "wins" once any country has it's capitol flattened.
deja... the idea is simple but I think it is very flexible... you could adjust values easily enough.
lazs
-
I made this suggestion a year ago in this thread (http://hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=62232&highlight=reset).
The bomber guys didn't seem to like it.
-
I'd just like a better fuel attrition model.............
Lots more fuel targets at or near fields........and capacity rather than % fuel attrition for all AC.......
Wind up the importance of cities if you wish......its much the same thing............ destroying capitols never won any war...........land grab wins wars.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
johny.. simple really... the country with the most fields(and a city) still "wins" once any country has it's capitol flattened.
deja... the idea is simple but I think it is very flexible... you could adjust values easily enough.
lazs
Imagine the rook city is just about demolished. The bish and knights are doing the land-grab thing to secure their spot as "winners". The knights gain the edge, so they up one last sortie of carpet bombers to take out the rook hq...only to find it capped by the bish. LOL...the more I think about it, the more I really like this idea. Simple and effective lazs.
-
1 Capital would be too easy for them.
Link map resets to production. IE each side gets factories at full production = 100%
when 1 side is reduced to 25% production boom reset. Make large factories complexes and spread umm out. Make the structures hard and rebuild times shorter or so that it takes a reall effort.
Make it have no effect on the players though. None of this bomb the spit factory = no spits crap. If folks wanna fly bombers and jabos at these inanimate objects all day let umm. Just take the focus off of field capture and base porkage.
Incidentally up structure hardness for all objects on a field, add more fuel tanks and disperse them where they cant all be destroyed in 1 pass.
-
Fluffs would become a bigger part of the game if fighters werent allowed to carry anythin bigger than 500 pounders
-
The only people that should think this a good idea are the ones that could only hit a strat target if it were as large as a sector. The suicide that we see now is the result of futility in bombing and a system that fails to penalize death. Implementing lazs idea would only ferment the strategy as customary ritual.
Rather, we would be better off if resupply were enhanced for such things as fuel and degraded for the major targets of strategy. This would reduce the development requirements to code rather than the restructuring of all maps and would force more resupply missions from stricken countries.
Rather than voice discontent now, though, why not sit tight and see how AH2 turns out? I believe HT is wiser than you give him credit.
-
metavoss... I think the MA is not meant for elaborate resupply and long drug out "wars" ... all those things do is make it so that you allways start your day/session with a huge advantage or dissadvantage depending on what country you choose... it also means that most people... the people who only play an hour or two or even three per session... never see any real progress.
I don't see how having the buildings spread over a sector would encourage suicide bombing. You would need dozens of people willing to suicide bomb and... some buildings could allways be adjusted for hardness... It would be much more difficult for the tallentless to get wihin suicide range of a capitol.
batz idea is about the same... he just wants more targets but his idea is the same.. nothing happens to the fighters except and until a reset.
Ah2.. who knows. if it is so great that it makes the MA deserted then there is no point in improving the MA.
lazs
-
lazs... you would hate the MA if htc did what you suggest.
Your point is to seperate the ma into the furball region and the strat region.
Now we know that one of the most unpopular tasks in the MA is to create a defensive cap over a strat (city/factory etc). It is boring waiting for someone to show up if anyone does at all.
Your idea would create 1 large target that would be flattened in less than an hour. Resets would happen often.. probably just when things got fun for you. (and we wouldn't want to ruin Lazs's fun.. although you could run to the BB between resets)
And btw.. who would win once a country's strat target is ded? (rhetorical question.. I know your suggestion is just meant to wrile everyone up and provide some BB entertainment)
The only justice in this situation would be for HTC to impliment your idea... and force you to play it.
-
Your idea would create 1 large target that would be flattened in less than an hour. Resets would happen often.. probably just when things got fun for you. (and we wouldn't want to ruin Lazs's fun.. although you could run to the BB between resets)
You miss the point entirely. He doesnt care how many or how often resets occur. If it was with in his power I am sure he would set it up so a nice PM would be enough to "earn" a reset.
"Please Mr. Laz reset the arena and declare Bishnitroks the winner".
fyi the winner would be the side witht he highest % of their strat target (or highest production) in tact.
-
Originally posted by Batz
You miss the point entirely. He doesnt care how many or how often resets occur. If it was with in his power I am sure he would set it up so a nice PM would be enough to "earn" a reset.
"Please Mr. Laz reset the arena and declare Bishnitroks the winner".
fyi the winner would be the side witht he highest % of their strat target (or highest production) in tact.
Imagine a nice juicy 20 on 20 Furball between 2 bases, 1 sector apart.
Now imagine that furball being constatly interrupted by "The Bishops have won the war. The Map will be reset in 2 mins."
Could be a big problem for alot of people.
-
That already happens. Try not to over think it.
-
Go ahead and set it up. I will make good use of the perks. In order to stop me your furballers will lose assistance when people attempt to defend and your furball wont have time to develop.
-
Originally posted by Batz
That already happens. Try not to over think it.
Don't you think it would happen much more frequently?
-
More frequently then fuel porking?
No, weren't you a buffer? I remember 1 thread in which you said you were on a 3-hour bomber run and IIRC it ended in a few seconds after contact with the enemy. I will dig up that thread later.
Imagine all the 262s and 163s you would find hanging over the strat objects. Plus 90% of the people in ah can't bomb anyway.
You may see large raids but you will see a more concentrated defense by those who care about losing. Those who care nothing about win lose will be out fur balling. If a reset happens it all starts again in 5 min.
Beats 30 min of porked fuel.
-
Single, best, fastest change HT could make would be to make fuel have a minimum 50% limit.
It would put "preventing field capture" emphasis where it belongs, on troop sources.
It'd allow the early and mid-war planes enough fuel to operate.
But, hey...... fuel is easy to pork and I'm sure some people glory in their success at it.
-
Batz..
you would really prefer a game design by Lazs over a game design by pyro/hitech?
"Hate the game, not the player"
-
Sometime ago HTC (I suppose to try to further highlight thier AI strat system?), neutered the player resupply capability. Seems to me this is when our real trouble started, and the fix is pretty easy.
-
HT and Pyro didn’t have master plan for game play in the main. Things were added over time. As they were added AW'ers came over and game play began to shift out of balance.
I don't play ah anymore because main game play is terrible 90% of the time. It's the strat player that pork’s fuel, not HT or Laz. It’s the "strat" player that suicides cvs, fighter hangers not HT or Laz.
But (you can search my previous replies to check) as said before you can kill yourself 1000 times a day as long as it has no impact on me.
If want to be a war winning main "Hero" go ahead. BTW numerous folks have made similar suggestion to Laz in this thread. Search that as well.
Zanth re-supply was altered because strat once again complained how fruitless their efforts were. Search for those posts as well.
-
Originally posted by Batz
More frequently then fuel porking?
No, weren't you a buffer? I remember 1 thread in which you said you were on a 3-hour bomber run and IIRC it ended in a few seconds after contact with the enemy. I will dig up that thread later.
Imagine all the 262s and 163s you would find hanging over the strat objects. Plus 90% of the people in ah can't bomb anyway.
You may see large raids but you will see a more concentrated defense by those who care about losing. Those who care nothing about win lose will be out fur balling. If a reset happens it all starts again in 5 min.
Beats 30 min of porked fuel.
Batz-
I don't remember a 3 hour buff mission, but it is possible. I've done numerous 1-2 hour jobs, but 3 hours is heavy even for me. I get bored too, you know.
I'm not debating whether or not Lazs idea is a good or bad one. I honestly do not know the answer, and don't have much of a feeling either way.
I would be in support of anything that put Historic Style Heavy Bombing back in the game because this is one aspect I miss. The past few tours (When I was more active, my time was about evenly split between Fighter, Heavy Bombing and Jabo.
When I say historic, I mean med-heavy bombers flying at altitude, preferably with fighter escort. There's NOTHING, and I mean NOTHING in AH I hate more than guys who dive bomb in B-17s or fly Lancs on the deck.
My only problem is that I'm not sure this idea was presented with the best interest of people like me in mind.
-
Whereas I take it a general truth that AI should never have more impact on the game than players, and whereas ineffective resupply encourages porkers of all breeds, just make player resupply effective again (and give them points as well as perks for doing it).
-
Its been interesting to sit on the runway, see an enemy JABO dive, blow up gas and auger. Then 10 mins later, another does the same. Field now at 25% gas. No one complains about this. But if a bomber knocked down the fighter hangars after a long flight, careful sight alignment and defending itself from cons...we're ruining the game.
Someone suggested in the Gameplay forum giving solo buffs the old sight back...formations use the existing sight. I thought that was a good compromise.
The larger strat target sounds good...but that would require fighter guys, like laz...who get nose bleeds above 3k :) , to make an effort to intercept them. I dont see it happening. Most of the furballers hate the buffs because it requires them to go from chasing cons down low to anything strategic, like defend a base from incoming bombers.
It would just be the same old same old...all over again
-
Its been interesting to sit on the runway, see an enemy JABO dive, blow up gas and auger. Then 10 mins later, another does the same. Field now at 25% gas. No one complains about this.
LOL are you blind? This has be brought 1 million times. Even HT started a thread to explore ways to address this (well he could have started the thread to let the ideas flow so that folks would see that theres no clear way to deal with it but thats just speculation).
Search Suicide Jabos, pork and auger etc.......
You are living the past. Most would agree bombers have far less an impact on gamplay today then the old fluffers. But the same type of guy suiciding the fuel is the same guy that fluffed the FHS. He's a war winning impact playa......
The only guys who would intercept the strat resetters under laz's suggestion are those who care about being reset. I doudt any furballer would not give a crap. Anyway there would be plenty of metavoss's and widemouths in 163s/262s for defense.
-
Originally posted by Batz
You are living the past. Most would agree bombers have far less an impact on gamplay today then the old fluffers. But the same type of guy suiciding the fuel is the same guy fluffing that fluffed the FHS. He's a war winning impact playa......
You are incorrect, Batz.
I can speak from experience. I personally have always used level bombers from my first day in AH 2 years ago, to take out fighter hangars in an attempt to either take pressure off a friendly base, or prep an enemy base for capture.
I have never once, not once intentionally suicided any ground target.
I would venture to say many if not most dedicated bomber pilots are the same as I am.
A suicide Jabo dweeb and a Buff driver are 2 very different animals.
-
Originally posted by muckmaw
A suicide Jabo dweeb and a Buff driver are 2 very different animals.
Agreed.
-
people are complaining about the suicide fuel porkers just as they did about the talentless fluffer milkrunners who took out fighter hangers.
I don't really believe there would be resets every couple of hours with the capitol spred out over a sector either.... the idea is so simple and flexible in any case... just harden the targets or change resupply or regeneration time to adjust reset time.
sooo.... the idea is bad because.... lazs suggested it and everyone knows that he is a devious furballer with nobody but his own interest at heart? I would beg to differ... it is the "strat" guys who car nothing about the dozens of players they affect so long as they get to spoil peoples fun for very little effort.
It might even be fun to use some of my 12,000 or so perk points to 163 it into a bomber stream and escorts.... maybe not... just more options IMO.
A country that had a lot of bases would not be as vulnerable because they would put 4 or more sectors between attackers and capitol.... attackers would still need to capture bases to launch effective attacks.
lazs
-
oh.... a bunch of people hated my "bring the 163 to AH" idea for the same reasons.... Lazs suggested it so it can't be good for the talentless and attention starved...
have some confidence in yourselves.
lazs
Public Relations Officer for the BK's
-
seems the debate is widening.............
Anti-field pork.
In my view poorly defended fields should suffer consequenses however I would prefer..............
1. Fuel attrition model. Based on capacity not %. Imagine that 125% fuel capacity each field has now is in effect a maximum fuel allowance of 1250 gallons per AC. At 25% thats 250 gallons.
What we would see is that gas gusslers and big bombers are more effected by fuel attrition and that the range of operations from the field is generally reduced. However (generally) most small fighters would still be able to operate on an offensive basis.
2. Fuel porkage model. There should be many more fuel objects than currently seen in std airfields.
3. Hanger attrition model. Either leave it as it is or link it to a field limit such that the field limit is reduced as the hangers are reduced. Field limit could apply to ride type ie Bombers, fighters and GV's
4. Hanger porkage model. More hangers.....particularly GV hangers.
Capture conditions
In my view dropping one batch of troops during a given period is a total misnomer..............
5. Capture conditions.Increase map room hardness to 30 troops allow formations for C47's
Suicide attacks
The cost of suicide jabo attacks or improper use of large bombers is not high enough
6. Perk bomb loadouts. Loadouts containing bombs over a certain weight should be perked. Points being redeemed with a successfull rtb. Attack planes pay for their bombs from their attack perks and bombers pay for bombs from their perks.
7. Bombs can only be released from F6 at certain angles of attack.
8. Level bombers. Are those that have no attack role, fly in formation and drop only from the F6 view.
From the above 7 & 8 suicide dives and low level combined straffe and drop passes by formations would be disabled.
9. Attack bombers (attackers). Are non formation bombers that may use F6 or not. Hence the A20, Stuka, Il2m3 are attack bombers and non formation Ju88's become attack bombers
10. Attack fighters (attackers). Are any fighter with bombs or rockets or cannon higher than 30mm. Removing the attack and fighter buttons.
9 & 10 ensure that attack and bomber perks are earned to pay for perked bomb and heavy ordinance loads. They also stop players earning fighter perks thru attack type missions.
massive missions
Missions can be fun. Massive missions (20 +) are IMO not fun, they are simply the attack version of milk running an empty field. As often or not the field under attck is given up for lost and not adequately defended. Leaving porkage as the only defence to land grab by massive missions. If massive missions are to remain then porkage shopuld remain also.
11. Field limit. Inhibit launch when number of allies within a certain range exceed a figure. In its most crude form this will apply to all allies. In a more sophisticated model it could be broken down into fighters, attackers, bombers and gv's.
12. Field limit attrition. as per 3 above.
strat
I was dissapointed when the depot system was replaced with the strat zone system. In fact the strat zones are a method of managing strat on very large maps. I can see that the depot system would have made server loading on such maps very heavy.
One way to pay some service to Laz's suggestion would be to make the zone master in each zone a very large depot. It would only have defensive capability (manned ground guns ). It would have many town objects and be capturable once all these were destroyed. You could then make all strat zone masters capturable (placing the "super master" adjacent to the HQ with a runway for Me 163's only). The super master could only be captured when all the other zone masters were lost but once a side lost all its strat zones a reset was incurred.
So what does all this do? IMO
It reduces the ability to win by porkage. Fighter jocks can still perform within a strat model. Bombers tend to reduce the capacity and range of opposing bombers or very heavy attack ac.
To capture a field the sky above it must be held by the opposing side. Fields could not be so easily sneaked by a couple of GV's.
However fighters must still take note of bomber activity or lose full attack/defence effectiveness if not the critical zone master.
Suicide raids are made far less effective or the suicide raider eventually less lethal.
Massive missions would be limited to launch from rear fields where the field limit would allow it. Rolling massive missions would be reduced.
Certain critical battles still take place where a mix of all ride types interface to attack or defend zone masters.
-
VEry well thought out post, Tilt.
I would have to re-read it a few times to really appreciate all the thought you put into it.
The one thing I disagree with, though, is the massive mission portion.
I occasionally plan large missions to attack 2 Strat targets at once, normally Fuel or Troop depot and the city which supplies it.
With 7 bomber flights per target and escort, my mission numbers usually go well above 20.
Not all large scale missions are to pork a single base.
Please forgive me if you addressed this issue in your post, as I may have missed it and am in quite a rush at the moment.
-
Tilt, Nice ideas. I was never really for perking a bombload, since buffs can be swatted down with relative ease...its just most opt not to engage them.
Let's talk about bombs for a moment...and the damage they cause. Can we finally have damage/craters? Its really amusing to see GVs fly thru a hole your 4000 pound bomb made and there are no penalties for it. If your wingtip hits a building, you suffer damage...if you collide with an enemy aircraft, damage...I know everyone is afraid some uber buff will plant the runways with 2000 pound bombs...well they did in real life, thus why fighters scrambled from the grass or undamaged runways.
I just think that if all these realism rules..bombsights calibration and stuff, are being applied to bombers, then the same should go to the targets they hit...if they manage to.
Im not sure perking the bombload will be the cure all for limiting the suicide bomers/jabos. It'll certainly reduce the amount to noobs doing it, if they have few to no perks.
I like your fuel idea. xx amount of gallons left...first come, first serve.
I agree with multiple GV hangars. Once the VH is down, its vulchfest then capture. GVs are what make many captures more challenging (when they arent hiding in the map room, ugh!). Much like there are multiple FH and BH hangars, perhaps 2 or 3 VHs?
Nice ideas, Tilt
-
I do not agree on one point, LePaul.
Cratering the runway could be a problem, as flight crews knew the runway was damaged before they attempted a take off.
In this game, there is no way to know if there is a single crater halfway down the runway, just waiting for you to drive your 262 into.
In regard to Tilt's post, is there any need to perk heavy bomber bombs if the other idea of being able to bomb from f6 mode only is in effect? This would eliminate many of the suicide heavys we have now.
If we perk the bombs on Jabo's, that would eliminate, or greatly reduce that side of the equation as well.
-
Originally posted by muckmaw
I do not agree on one point, LePaul.
Cratering the runway could be a problem, as flight crews knew the runway was damaged before they attempted a take off.
In this game, there is no way to know if there is a single crater halfway down the runway, just waiting for you to drive your 262 into.
Muck, pan around and zoom in the tower view.
Hey its war...lol..if you are upping a 262 at a base with bombers overhead, you're already taking your chances. And consequences. I've lost 262s simply by nosing the thing down gently ;)
-
Originally posted by LePaul
Muck, pan around and zoom in the tower view.
Does that show everything? Bird's eye view straight down might be better.
Originally posted by LePaul
Hey its war...lol..if you are upping a 262 at a base with bombers overhead, you're already taking your chances.
Well in war, there'd be flight crews too. I agree with Muck...IRL they don't test the runway by rolling 262s and seeing if they pancake. They just look at the runway. Also, there can be craters in the runway with no cons or dots visible in the air.
-
As much as I'd like to crater a runway, it would make it much too easy for a single bomber to take a base out of action.
Without really looking at field maps, 2 bombers could lay a set of perpendicular crater lines to take the entire field (Runways and non-runways alike) out of use.
And to make matters worse, anyone can do this. You really dont even need to calibrate your bombsight that well to take it out.
I think this would be unfair to alot of gamers, and put too much power in the hands of too few people.
-
One thing is apparent from this thread... the furballers would simplify the game while the "strat" sis.. er, guys, would make it more complex and convoluted.
The fluffers fear that anything that stopped them from affecting FIGHTERS is a bad thing... no one would play with them "intercept their missun" if the only effect they could really have was to "win the war"... they fear basically, that no one will play with them if HTC doesn't force em to.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
One thing is apparent from this thread... the furballers would simplify the game while the "strat" sis.. er, guys, would make it more complex and convoluted.
The fluffers fear that anything that stopped them from affecting FIGHTERS is a bad thing... no one would play with them "intercept their missun" if the only effect they could really have was to "win the war"... they fear basically, that no one will play with them if HTC doesn't force em to.
lazs
Hey Lazs, get a grip
You helped kill strategic bombing as it is. Hooray for you, you got what you wanted. Remember the Dueling Arena? Wasnt that something you wanted as well? Boy, how many pack that arena..
You've had it buff free forever, the "fluffers" you claim to see in the Main are no longer. You make some suggestions for input and this is the response you make? :rolleyes:
The Main Arena has room for all types. But in your eyes, only what you deem fit. Lazs wants strat, but no buffs. Get real.
-
No lazs, the point is that you see them as seperate entities when in fact they should be working together as a single force.
-
lepaul... no... I did not want the dueling arena.. I never asked for it. many strat players have suggested that I go there tho instead of concerning myself with the MA. You must be thinking of someone else.
Fluffers... where did I say I didn't want em to be allowed in the arena? granted... they hold no interest for me and I can't imagine what type would enjoy them but... I have never tried to get rid of em... I have asked that they not have such a huge effect on FIGHTERS.... OR DOZENS OF FIGHTERS.. for very little effort on their part.
I have said over and over that if they want to "win the war" and get the HTC war winning prize of the Hawiian vaction.... fine with me.. let em affect the way the war goes.
With my idea... if people really cared about strat they would organize "missuns" and escort on one side and intercept same on the other side.
Those who didn't care could continue to have air combat against other fighters.
where is the unfairness in that?
lazs
-
metavoss.... they will either work together or not... my idea offers the opportunity to do so... the rest would be up to the players....
What I offer is choice... what you advocate is the lack of choice. I allow the opportunity to play any way you like while you advocate adjusting gameplay so that people are forced to fly in ways that don't appeal to them.
lazs
-
The whole reason fighters were developed was to intercept and destroy bombers who were attempting to attack ground positions.
Why does it always have to be "Us against them" with you, Lazs?
I'm not out to ruin your game.
Personally, I have enjoyed all aspects of AH, and thats one reason they still have my subscription. If the MA was simply a dueling arena with tourist attractions, I would have ended my subscription after the first year. The game would not hold my attention without some diversity.
Unfortunately, with the MA becoming little more than whaat I described above, I find my time in it diminishing over the last few tours.
If the time comes where greener pastures can be found in another game, I'll end my time with AH. It would seem many who enjoy the same aspects of AH that I do are reaching a point where the game is not enjoyable anymore.
So who knows. If the day comes when all strat players pull out of AH, you may finally get your MA Fighter only Utopia.
-
Lazs
Let's clarify...there's a difference between suicide-jabo-dweebs...and those wacky buff guys who fly 50 minute long sorties, climb to alt and bomb strategic targets.
With the new bombsight, its a real b-i-t-c-h to hit 4 fighter hangars. And most of the base takeovers Ive seen are mass JABO raids to kill VH, city, supress cons and get goon/m3 into town...fighter hangars intact. Instead of fighter hangars being down on the front lines, its fuel. any night, check a front line base and most likely, its 25% fuel.
You seem to take issue that 3 heavy bombers can, and do, do damage to the targets they aim at. The sight was made harder, bombs dont detonate unless they are so high in the air, etc etc. What hit have the fighter guys taken? Nothing. Zip, nil, nada.
I dont understand the fluffer comment, since in your own words, you dont have problem with buffs for the most part.
The game is a strat game. You guys complain that buffs have too big an impact, taking down fighter hangars and ruining your fun. But one cannon equipped/rocket equiped fighter can down all of a bases fuels to 25%. What next will you fighter guys gets changed to keep your bases, which you opt not to defend, from loosing fighter hangars, fuel and other resources?
The ultimate answer is you put up a defense. But that requires effort. And your solutions, so far, are to insist everyone play your way.
-
For the first time in recent memory, we actually attacked a large base with 7 formations of B-17's.
Our mission was actually going to HQ when we learned it was taken out so we decided to attack a local base.
7 B-17's with fighter escort bombed this base and we STILL left 2 Fh's standing. (In other words, if you can't kill ALL the fighter hangars, you mission was pointless...which makes no sense to me)
Bottom line, most guys cannot use the bombsight. Most have not bothered to learn it, and have figured out that it's easier to take a base using jabos in the above mentioned method.
The way bombers are modeled now, they represent almost no threat to an airbase's fighter hangars.
-
muck and lepaul... it is u who are advocating animosity between the fighters and the fluffers not I..
Think about it... I am giving the fluffers targets that are not specific to fighters... in other words... with my idea they have a target that is "strat" that affects the way the war is "won" that has meaning.... you on the other hand well...
you guys continue to ***** because you don't have enough effect on the fighters! see the difference? you say that the fighters should be slaves to the fluffs... you feel that the only reason for fighters is to escort or intercept the fluffs..
believe it or not.... many/most players want to be flying fighters against other fighters... some like to fly fluffs and some like to escort/kill fluffs...
no way I can see what you want as anything but a plea to force people to play with you who would rather fight other fighters.... the fighter jocks like affecting gameplay one plane at a time. My style of gameply doesn't hurt you one bit yet you would make it so that I couldn't even take off from a field because some talentless mouse weilder managed to milkrun all the hangers.
lazs
-
Originally posted by MetaTron
No lazs, the point is that you see them as seperate entities when in fact they should be working together as a single force.
So folks that play to fight in fighters should have to play the way you want them to? Fighter sorties should be flown to accomplish a common goal of winning the war, escorting buffs, jabo, etc....no simple air to air for the sake of having fun?
-
Mouse weilder?
Hey man, X-45 here.
Lazs, we're all for trying your strat idea. Tilt had some good ideas. Your comments in the past sweepingly stereotype all who fly buffs as fluffers out to ruin your fun. I fly fighters a lot, I engage buffs and fighters alike. I also like the buffs to be able to put iron on targets to help the advance...of the strat game.
If I see a buff over a base or HQ, I intercept. Not run to the BBS and say how buffs ruin the game for you and should be weakened or lessened.
Muck and I are trying to point out that there are people who enjoy the bombers and fly them in the role they were envisioned as. We arent trying to eliminate or weaker your fighter roles. You come to altitude, we'll shoot back, guranteed.
Sure, let's try yuour idea out...how's your map coming?
:p :p
-
Muckmaw has made several threads on how hard and unappreciated fluffers are in ah. Lepaul has few oldie but goodies as well.
I was searching for thread where muck complained he had a long "bomber mishun ruined by a 163". I only looked through the 1st page of search results.
Anyway in this one thread just a few months ago he is going on about how he needs "meaningful targets". HT himself asks him to define what meaningful targets are and his reply
In my opinion, targets "mean Something" when they have a direct impact on the situation at hand, ie. Fighter Hangars at a base under siege, or an enemy CV that is launching attacks on a friendly base
That pretty much sums up all fluffers. They want to be impact playazzzzz.
If they can't impact the rest of us they aren’t happy. Anyone looking for a good laugh search some of these older posts.
there's a difference between suicide-jabo-dweebs
No there isn't. They both want the same thing. That is to have an impact on everyone else. They also want thing like "organiztion" and mishuns" etc... Fluffers were the suicide jabos of old.
Muckmaw can tell you about well meaning suicide mission dudes. I don't want to start another hate thread on one particular squad but I have seen them do it enough and i am sure muckmaw has as well.
With Laz's suggestion they fluffer may win the war but it would be a hollow victory if he is ignored.
-
Lotta truth here for the strat guys to try to accept, except they never seem to "get it".
I'm a pure furballer; admit it, like it, wouldn't have it any other way.
But I want YOU to have fun too.. do whatever you like, whenever you like. You're all just targets of varying degrees to me. ;)
Like they say about submarines: two kinds of naval vessels - submarines and targets. Same for aircraft: fighters and targets.
Yet, I absolutely don't care how convoluted and "deep" and "interesting" and "special" you make the strat and "war winning". Do whatever the bloody heck you like. Make it harder than a rich man getting into Heaven if that's what you want.
Just leave me enough freakin' fuel to fight in an early war plane! Let the minimum be 50% at all bases, no matter what. Bombout all the FH's... I'll move gladly. But let me MOVE to a place where's there's enough fuel to fly and fight.
That's it. Well.. one other thing.. get rid of the idiotic night phase. These are day VFR fighters and the airwar was PRIMARILY a day war.
Thank you, and good night.
-
"Muckmaw can tell you about well meaning suicide mission dudes. I don't want to start another hate thread on one particular squad but I have seen them do it enough and i am sure muckmaw has as well."
Batz,
As a past member of the squad in question, let me assure you that the MAW never ever attacks a base with the intentions of hit the target and auger.
Every MAW pilot, in a MAW mission, has every intention of striking the target and surviving. 40Dog nor any other CO in the MAW has ever given the order to run a suicide mission. at least when I was around and CO of the MAW Blacksheep squad. Suicide was not an option in my squad nor any other MAW squad.
-
I believe you and I and several others argued about this subject before and lets just say you guys see/saw one thing and me/mine saw something else.
We can chalk it up to 15 + accidental augers chasing after those illusive fighter hangers. :p
Anyway, I spent my load sometime ago in these threads. I dont know why I continue to reply. HT will address it or he won't.
-
Originally posted by Toad
That's it. Well.. one other thing.. get rid of the idiotic night phase. These are day VFR fighters and the airwar was PRIMARILY a day war.
Yeah I agree. WTF is up with the night stuff. You can't see a damn thing, except for the icons...but of course icons destroy the whole point (if there was one at all). Lose the night, I say.
-
Batz-
I'm flattered you spent so much time looking up my past posts.
Meanwhile, Slapshot, who is an ardent and skilled fighter pilot, and former MAW can attest that suicide's simply are not what we do. You can believe whatever it is you like, but it's simply not the case.
MAW auger on one occasion, and one occasion only. If it's squad night, and the pilots are spread out all over the map, we are asked to auger our rides if a mission we're supposed to be in is about to launch.
We have had "Unintentional Augers". Here's a funny story. 40 set up an HQ run with about 25 MAW fly D-25's. (Not my first choice.) Anyway, we fly for about 45 mins, fully loaded, climbing to about 25K. We fly formation all the way, and at the HQ, we peel off with great precision to begin the dive bombing run. Apparently, myself, and about half the pilots were not all that familiar with dive bombing in this plane. Perhaps we got too excited and we're not watching out airpseed indicator.
At any rate, you can imagine what happened next. 10 planes came in like meteors.
So to someone on the outside, that would look like a mass auger. In reality, it was just an occurance of mass stupidity.
Understand what I say about my game. I've no axe to grind.
When I'm flying a long buff run, I like to be intercepted by fighters. It makes the run more entertaining and challenging, and more of what I imagine WWII was like for bombers.
I do not like getting swarmed by a horde of 163's because it's not realistic. How many of those were in service? It seems silly to have every plane over the target being 163's. I'd much rather see 190's or 109's.
I really do not care to interrupt the fighter duelers. Half the time, I'm one of them, for god's sake.
So how do you make level bombers more useful in AH without affecting the fighter duel thats going on?
It's pretty dull just going to a strat target when your unopposed, and the only thing you get for your efforts is a message saying "blah blah won the war".
It's not winning the war that matters to me. It's teamwork. It's running a mission that everyone enjoys, and that mission resulting in either a devastating defeat or SOME type of affect on something.
This is a tough situation. I really do not know what the answer is.
-
Thier just jelous Muck cause yu guys still havin fun
-
Sax-
Saw you in the MA on Tues I think it was. Always a pleasure.
I'm just getting back into the game after 2 months off.
We had one nice mission on Tuesday that relighted my passion for the game. Not 100% back yet, but getting there.
All I need is maybe one really tough drawn out 1 on 1 dogfight (Where I win for once) and one really great bomber mission and I'll be hooked again.
-
Originally posted by muckmaw
So how do you make level bombers more useful in AH without affecting the fighter duel thats going on?
I think the answer to this question is that we don't NEED to make bombers useful in order for it to be worthwhile. Escort, interception, buffing, and turretting are all fun in and of themselves, without serving a goal of winning a war. In fact these things can be more fun than air superiority melee. Variety is the spice of life. So bomb or escort for it's own sake, and those who like to intercept will do so. There are plenty who like to intercept, I think. Hell, I think the best thing to do is get a bunch of buffs/scorts together and announce a raid on the city on ch 1. Then the interceptors have some time to get up and you have a fun fight.
As far as strat goes...well I like strat games too, but it seems to me that there is not much strategy in any MA CTF game. It seems to me that tactical plane/GV skills have a much greater impact on the strat winner, than any military strategy. Is there really any military strategy involved here?
-
If you build it, they will come.
-
Hmm... I noticed tilt advocated perking bombs over a certain lbs.... I was probly the first to do so. I believe my suggestion was met with great animosity from the suicide jabo folks and "chessmasters of the sky" who wanted to have more effect on the figh... er... game.
lazs
-
You will not have true military strategy in any game where attrition is not considered and respawning in an entirely different location is allowed. It's not chess when your pieces can suddenly appear anywhere on the board or reapear after they've been taken. This is not for the MA. ToD may help, but to be honest, we'll just be thinking tactically there too. The strategy will be dictated from someone else... as it should be.
We do, however, have game strategy in the MA. That's where you take the rules of the game and figure out how to make them work in order to win. This is not really the problem with the game. The problem is that people don't really do things to win the game... they do things to get instant gratification. Lazs is just as bad at this as any of the suicide jabo. Suicide furball is no better.
It's just funny to see one stupid behavior criticizing another stupid behavior. It's like watching a "furballer" that won't leave his CV ack typing insults on Channel 1 to any "strat" guys that try unsuccessfully to bomb it.
MiniD
-
I don't know deja.... I think the largest part of the blame should rest on the people who want to force people to play their way.
I also believe that my idea would allow for everyone to play the way they wanted. Your example of the cv is perfect. The fact that the cv is so easily sunk with so little effort is the proiblem. Why should those who don't participate in a strat game be forced to defend? Or, in this case, defend only. In order to defend the overly fragile cv's... you would have to "cap" the cv.. a person who enjoyed furballing or fighting would be in hell circling around doing nothing waiting for some talentless suicide jabo jock to come over... even killing said talentless jabo guy would not be very satisfying... no real fight in those guys... no sa involved no acm involved... on the other hand... the strat boys would be in heaven.... people are forced to play with them.... they can't be ignored.
with my idea... the furballers could ignore the strat guys if they didn't care who won the war and the HTC Hawiian vaction that goes along with that. those who wished to win the war could ignore the furballers areas and battle toolsheds or like minded "chessmasters of the sky" much backslapping and "we kicked your butt" BB posts could be generated.
everyone wins.
lazs
-
You are biased lazs. Sorry to break that to you yet again. But it's true.
I liked the original idea. Too bad I had to read through your sorry assed bias rhetoric that has simply destroyed the rest of the thread.
You can't demand that the game be available to you in a very specific way every time you log on and insist that it not be the case for everyone else. Time to stop insulting those that don't believe the same way you do.
Same goes for those that instantly dismissed the thread because lazs suggested it.
MiniD
-
well of course I'm biased deja. the trick is to be fair and biased... I would be unfair and biased if I thought I could get away with it but... I will settle for fair and biased.
lazs
-
didn't say fair and biased lazs... just biased.
MiniD
-
what is unfair about my idea?
lazs
-
Well since Lazs cant resist belittling the straters, bekieving his style of play is more important than anyone elses, I'll vote no just to piss him off. This whole continous bickering between the furballers and the straters is BS. Nothing will ever be resolved.
-
the one assumption that the furballer crowd (i.e. Laz) makes is that there are only 2 sides here..in fact, there are 3. Buffs, furballers, and the tiff-drivin, heavy-51-drivin base killers. Buffs have SUCH a minimal impact as is that there isnt any reason fro anyone to be *****in about em. If ONE base outta 10 was captured with the help of level bombers, id be fediddlein surprised. As was previously stated, its REAL hard to take out particular buildings with buffs---Im pretty good at it, and even if im not messed with, takes 2 perfect passes to kill all 3 fh's at a small base, with 5 minutes minimum between passes---hangars only stay down 15 min, so at most, the mission, if sucessful, keeps fighters on ground for like 10 min. Tiffies, etc---get 3 of them in there, hangars are UP, base is wrecked, and NObody is uppin from there for 45 minutes. There are so few buff drivers to beGIN with, and even fewer that can hit anything, I dont see why this discussion is taking place. If ya wanna ***** at someone, ***** at the jabos. (And EVERYone wants to make an impact, whether it be blowin up other people's stuff, killin their planes, or just makin airplane-shaped hole in ground;)
-
don't worry bj... there are only two sides.. anyone who kills toolsheds and those that fight other players.
If anyone is odd man out it is the GV guys.. they shouldn't even be in the game the way they are modeled.
lazs
-
hmm, cant argue about gv's....anyone notice lately that AP rounds, even fron Tigers, barely harm Ostis? Arent Ostis based on Panzer frame?
-
The answer is simple.. play H2H , create YOUR own server with YOUR own settings, and stop these condescending threads please. You'll never be happy in the MA.
-
This is actually a great post though I'm sure it's been brought up a million times in the past. I would also like to see Strat targets being a bigger factor in how the war is won.
Here's my input to the whole subject. Much of it is no different than folks have already stated. This is mainly for strategic game play and not necessarily "fun" gameplay.
Bases in General:
Runways: Bombing should have more of an affect. Not necessarily how much you bomb it but in what areas you bomb it. An indicator can be added for folks to know where it's been hit and how damaged it is % wise. Typically it only took a few shifts to repair the runways so this can be simulated using some kind of time.
Field Ack: Around bases field ack should be extremely difficult to penetrate. None of the low level fly by's that are currently possible which would eliminate vulchers if ack is still up. Also need high level ack to defend against bombers. I've rarely seen flak up at the higher levels when flying over bases only over CV's.
Barracks: This should be highly defended or even somewhat masked as to there exact location.
Fuel: This should be on a consumption rate. So many planes have left leaving it with only 75% fuel left. As an example: Fuel resupply in 30 minutes and status back to 125%. With the addition of stronger ack this could be implemented and have an affect on overall game play. With the addition of someone daring enough to take out actual fuel cells would affect it even more. That would then change the calculation of how much fuel is there and how long it will be before it's resupplied/repaired to 125%.
Availability of Planes/Vehicles: This is something that many may not agree with but is more on the realistic side of the house. Only so many planes/vehicles should be allowed from any one base. It would also get folks to think more when building missions. You dont' wanna consume all of your front line fighter bases assets so you have to coordinate rally points from rear bases. Then Furballers still have there front line immediate action and the stratedgy folks will have there mission based gameplay. Overall it would still workout and more than likely use Furballers in the alert type fashion.
Town: As of right now with the shift to AHII coming the towns would be left as is. Due to the fact the new towns are larger and probably won't go down as easy as the current towns.
Major Strat Items: For starters all of these should be placed behind your front lines and should be able to be captured but only with overwhelming force. They should also play a bigger role in the overall arena. Each sets of factories should be allocating so much production for so many bases sectors around it. In the event our so called milkrunners level a factory supplies would still be received at the surrounding bases from far out factories but at a time cost. Overall they should have more of an affect on the arena. So the defense of factories should be a high priority for every side not just the winning or losing of main bases.
Radar: Now this is something I've heard is more realistic in the SEA. It'd be nice to see realistic implementation of early warning radar systems. In sectors where mountaineous areas are there should be radar dishes at there peaks(on a limited bases ofcourse). Shorelines should have so many EWRS strategically placed. So the destruction of radar stations would play a role in mission planning. This would add even more to mission planning as waves would be required to ensure mission effectiveness.
Well I'm done...Even though I'm sure I can think of more later and put more details in to them.
-
I LIKE IT!
kinda like a tank town with a reason :D
-
Originally posted by lazs2
Hmm... I noticed tilt advocated perking bombs over a certain lbs.... I was probly the first to do so.
You were........... I like it.....