Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Buzzbait on June 13, 2001, 06:43:00 PM
-
S! Hitech, Pyro and company
You can of course choose to ignore these comments. After all, I have never subscribed to AH, and I don’t nessesarily represent the type of clientele you are presently making your money off. On the other hand, if you instituted my suggestions, you could bet I and lots of people like myself would be willing to fork over a few dollars.
I’ve been waiting for the release of WWII Online to post this. I was curious to see how that Sim would turn out. As it is, my suspicions were confirmed, it has serious problems. Perhaps they will work them out, perhaps not.
But one thing which has been proven beyond the slightest doubt:
PEOPLE ARE WILLING TO PAY LOTS OF MONEY FOR A HISTORICALLY BASED ARENA.
LOTS OF PEOPLE.
What does this mean for AH?
It mean lots of money making opportunities are available out there if you and your design staff decide to take advantage of them.
Lets face it: You guys are the best. Your servers are stable, your flight modelling is accurate to the smallest detail, (well, 99% of the time, you still gotta put a paddle blade prop on that D11) and your graphics kick a**.
So what are you waiting for?
With additions, you could relatively easily have a historical Arena based on the June ‘44 Normandy Breakout. A few more and you could have an Okinawa ‘45 campaign. These are at least as interesting as Battle for France.
Probably a couple years of focusing on getting a correct set of units together would do it. Right now you are putting out lots of new units all the time, but the output is not focused. Planes from one era, tanks from another, etc. etc.
I’ve been watching the Bulletin boards for quite a while, and recently they are showing a DEFINITE lack of energy, excitement and new postings. Sorry to say it, but I think that Furball oriented Online games are running out of steam. I think you need to evolve or maybe you are going to go the way of the dinosaurs. Which would be a shame considering all the talent and skill which is obviously present in the AH design team.
So what am I suggesting? Well, since I am partial to the European Theater, I’ll give you my outline for a Normandy June ’44 Arena. This would be AFTER the invasion. (Trying to duplicate an invasion is much too complicated)
Outline for Normandy June ’44 Historical Arena
New Units required:
Aircraft
General Aircraft: (available to both sides)
Unarmed Artillery Spotting Plane
German:
Me109G6AM (remodel of existing aircraft)
Me 110G
JU88C (remodel)
British:
Spit IXLF (remodel)
Mosquito Mk VI
American:
P-38J (remodel)
Ground Units:
General ground units, (available to either side):
2 ½ ton truck
Unarmoured Prime mover Halftrack
German:
Pz Mk Vd Panther (75mm high velocity)
SPW 251/1 Halftrack
Wirlbirwind Quad 20mm Flak Vehicle
75mm AT gun (towed)
88mm Flak gun (towed)
4 gun 105mm Artillery Battery
2 tube 81mm Mortar Section
British/Canadian/Polish:
Sherman Firefly (17pdr/76mm high velocity)
Bren Gun Carrier
6lber (57mm with discarding Sabot Ammo) AT gun (towed)
4 gun 25lber Artillery Battery
2 tube 76mm Mortar Section
American/French:
M4A2 Sherman (75mm with Gyroscope)
M7 Priest 105mm Self propelled Artillery
4 gun 105mm Artillery Battery
2 tube 81mm Mortar Section
AT Guns would be towed by 2 ½ ton trucks, the Tracked Prime Movers, or in the case of the 6 lber, they could be towed by the Bren Gun Carrier. The 88mm Flak requires a Tracked Prime Mover.
Obviously British and Americans used each other’s Equipment. All the British/American Vehicles/Guns (new or existing AH ones) are usable by either nationality except the Sherman Firefly, Bren Gun Carrier, 25lber Battery and 105mm Battery.
Infantry Squad Units
German:
10 man Infantry Squad (including Tripod mounted MG42 Team, Panzerfaust)
5 man Medium MG Squad (MG42 on Fixed mounting)
British/Canadian/Polish:
10 man Infantry Squad (including Bren Gun Team, PIAT Team)
5 man Medium MG Squad (Vickers .303)
3 man Naval Artillery Spotting Squad
US/French:
10 man Infantry Squad (including BAR team, Bazooka Team)
5 man Medium MG Squad (.30 Browning)
5 man Heavy MG Squad (.50 Browning)
3 man Naval Artillery Spotting Squad
Rather than using a system like WWIIOL, where every single soldier has to be human controlled, I would suggest using a Squad based system whereby the player takes the part of a Squad Leader. He would see out of the eyes of the Squad Leader. All the members of the Squad would move exactly as he does, (including running, crawling, standing or adopting a prone position) if he fires, they will fire at the same target. There would be no AI for Squad members. If the player’s Leader (he would start as Squad Sergeant) is killed, he moves to the position of the second in command of the Squad. (Corporal) If both Leaders are killed, then the Squad is dissolved. (In effect, it routs or surrenders) The Squad would suffer causualties by individual men, if a heavy weapon holder is killed, another Squad member will automatically take control of that weapon if there is one remaining alive.
Squads could be transported in Halftracks or 2 ½ ton trucks. 5 man or 3 man Squads could be transported in Bren Gun Carriers. A Squad moving into a Vehicle, would be a passenger, although if the vehicle has weapons, then the Squad controlling player could fire the vehicle weapons if the player controlling the vehicle is not using them.
Artillery Batteries and Mortars could be controlled by any player controlling an Infantry Squad with a Leader remaining, or by any Spotter plane. There would be a set number of Artillery Batteries and Mortar units per side. Artillery Batteries could be moved once per day, and would be out of action for 2 hours during the move. Mortars could be moved 4 times per day and would be out of action for 30 minutes.
Naval Artillery Spotting Teams could take control of Naval Task Forces and control their Fire.
Additional ground units could be introduced later. These might include the following:
German:
Stu IIIG (75mm)
Stu G 105 (105mm)
Tiger MkVIe (88mm)
Pz A II 105mm Self propelled Artillery Wespe
PSW234/1 Armoured Car (20mm)
4 tube 120mm Mortar Platoon
10 man Engineer Squad (Flame Thrower and Demolition Charges)
10 man SS Infantry Squad
5 man SS MMG Squad
British:
Churchill VIII (95mm)
Cromwell (75mm)
25lber Self Propelled Artillery Sexton (88mm)
Ram Kangaroo APC
Staghound 1a Armoured Car (37mm)
17pdr AT Gun (76mm)
4 gun 5.5 inch Artillery Battery
10 man Engineer Squad (Flame Thrower and Demolition Charges)
American:
M4A1 Sherman (76mm)
M4A3E2 Sherman Jumbo (75mm with additional armour)
M4 105 Sherman (105mm)
M8 Armoured Car (37mm)
4 Gun M1A1 155mm Artillery Battery
10 man Engineer Squad (Flame Thrower and Demolition Charges)
Naval Units:
German:
E-Boat (remodel of PT Boat)
Destroyer (Single ship)
U-Boat
British/American:
British MTB Boat (remodel of PT Boat)
Destroyer (single ship)
Battle Ship Task Force (remodel of CV Task Force)
AI Units:
Flak Guns
Airfield Defence Weapons
V1’s and Flak defence (German)
Trains with Flak Cars (German)
Liberty Ship Convoy (Allies)
German Coastal Steamer Convoy (Including Flak Ships)
V1’s would be based in the Pas de Calais and would fire at targets in London, or in the Normandy Beach head. Trains would run from the Ruhr through the Paris area, and up towards Normandy. Liberty Ship Convoys would run between Southhampton and Normandy. German Coastal Convoys would run in the Scheldt Estuary region and perhaps south towards the Pas de Calais.
Other Targets
Factories (In the Ruhr, Paris, Antwerp, Brussels, Lille, London, Southhampton)
Ports (Antwerp, London, Southhampton, Invasion Beaches)
Cities (London, Paris, Ruhr Cities, Brussels, Antwerp, Lille)
Map:
The map would be a rectangular shape, wider North/South, running from the Cherbourg peninsula on the South to the Scheldt Estuary and Port of Antwerp in the North, and from London in the West to the Ruhr and Paris in the East.
It would be designed to allow all the current AH aircraft, ground and sea units, from the time period, as well as the new units to operate.
The ground Front would be the lines as they existed in starting June 7th 1944. So the fighting Front would be a relatively narrow area. (approximately 40 real miles by 40 real miles at it’s biggest expansion) This would be the only area where extensive terrain modelling would be required. The Campaign would end after the Allied player advanced the Front lines as far forward as St Lo and Falaise, stretching the German lines to breaking point, or the Germans eliminate the Bridgehead. Probably restricting combat to ‘Choke Points’, as in WWIIOL would be a good idea.
Terrain required would be two main types: Bocage, in the Southern American Front, and more open terrain in the Caen area with small hilltops. Types of terrain required would be:
Open fields
Wheat fields (blocking line of sight to infantry but not fire)
Hedgerows
Stone walls
Stone Farm Buildings at crossroads
Wooded areas
Villages comprised of multiple stone buildings
Roads
No City enviroments would be required. The only major city, Caen was bypassed on both sides by the Allies.
There should be limited numbers of certain unit types that can be on the server at any one time, or limited numbers allowed per day. Ie. Panthers, Flak 88’s, Sherman Fireflys, Ostwinds. First come first served, or if a player has a good kill/death ratio, then he would get priority.
The Map would have two sections where the Aircraft “Furballers” could have a good time. This would be the Pas de Calais, and the Normandy Bridgehead. Flight distances would be minimal. Otherwise the Map should be much more to scale than the existing ones already done for AH, as for example North Africa, which is a very much out of scale. Perhaps a 2.5 to 1 scale would work.
For those who love a Strat Bombing Campaign, there would be the Ruhr and the multiple Factories based there. To cut down on the flying time, players flying Bombers or Fighters escorting Bombers could start with their aircraft at 25,000 feet, already over the North Sea. This is the point at which the German Radar installations would get firm indications on the status of raids, and the point at which German Fighters would start to be launched. There would be a ceiling of 25,000 feet for B17’s.
I would like to see a system for heavy bombers whereby one player controls 3 Bombers. That is, he flys in the lead Bomber, and the other two Bombers in his flight mimic his movements exactly. If he is shot down, then he may jump to control one of the other bombers. If some of his bombers take damage, then he can slow the entire formation to allow them to maintain position. At a certain point, damaged bombers would break from the formation and coast down for a crash landing. All bombers would have AI gunners. This system would allow for something closer to the big formations which historically were present. 6 Human Bomber players could form an entire Group of 18 Bombers. It would also reduce the need for the overdone bomber gunnery which is nessesary now for a Bomber to survive in the present system. It would also reduce the need for the pinpoint accuracy seen now. With 3 bombers, the “drop on the leader” bombing system would more accurately reflect the historical type of bombing.
There would be NO possibility of Spitfires and Typhoons escorting B-17’s to the Ruhr.
There would also be the Medium Bomber campaign to eliminate the ‘Noball’ (V1) sites in the Pas de Calais. This was undetaken historically by B-26 units, assisted by P-47 and Typhoon Fighter-Bombers. This would be a short range mission.
There also could be the historical Anti-Shipping Campaigns carried on by both sides. JU 88’s and Mosquitos could attack the various shipping targets, both at night and in the day.
1 hour of the day could be set aside for Night missions.
German Subs, E-Boats, Destroyers could attempt night attacks on the Liberty Ship Convoys and could be counter-attacked by U.S. and British Destroyers and MTB’s. Anyone for combat by the light of starshell?
Strat bombing missions to the Ruhr by the Lancasters, could be countered by JU88C’s and Me110’s. Mosquitos could fly night intruder roles as well as bombing. The Allied bombers and night intruders could start at altitude over the North Sea.
B-17’s and Lancasters could do Carpet bombing missions in Normandy.
Destruction of Factories, Trains, and Convoys would affect the numbers and types of units available at the Front line. German V1’s could be aimed at Southhampton and the invasion Bridgehead and port facilities. (the Allies were concerned the Germans would do this but Hitler was fixated on London)
The Germans would have the advantage in vehicles on the ground, the Allies would have the best short range air superiority Fighter in the Spit IX, and better ground attack in the Typhoon and P-47. In the Strat bombing campaign the aircraft would be more evenly matched up with P-51’s, P-38’s and P-47’s versus 109G6 AM’s, G-10’s and FW 190A5’s and A8’s.
Obviously this would require a huge amount of work, but it could also be introduced in stages. Creating a full line up of Ground units would be a logical first element on the agenda.
A similar Order of Battle could be planned for an Okinawa Campaign if that was a choice for a Historical Arena. (although the Japanese Tanks are no match for US models)
And if players know there is a plan, then they will be patient.
You wouldn’t even have to eliminate your MA. Keep it and phase this Historical Arena in on a part-time basis, perhaps 2 days a week.
The 1000’s of people attempting to get in on the WWIIOL experience is a clear indication that there is a huge appetite for this type of thing. Why not do your own version right, make bundles of money and make us historical types happy?
Cheers Buzzbait
;)
-
A very well thought out and spoken post Buzzbait. I think you're right and I think that it is something HTC could do easily. They've got 80%of it now. Land, air and naval (including amphibs). Add a more complex terrain, dynamic spawnpoints and some other features and instant "all out war" ala 194x!
-Westy
-
Nice work there Buzzbait. HTC already has most of the components, but they are being wasted on a furball game.
Maybe if HTC sees things your way they will quietly achieve the kind of sim that WWIIOnline has very loudly claimed to be.
ra
-
I forgot, the US/French should have the M10 GMC Tank Destroyer (76mm) too.
-
Historical arena -- I do not interested in it while it is only a restrictions of plane types for sides. What I really want some roleplaying and strategical component of it. Right now even best AH event does not give such feeling. I afraid that HTC does not have plans to add something like that even in distant future.
:(
Fariz
-
HTC hire buzzbait ;)
-
Outstanding post, Buzzbait! It seems like a sort of Combat Mission meets AH, with a first person view/control in the vehicles.
-
S!
By the way, I think the ground level Front lines would need a series of AI strongpoints so that the sides would not be entirely dependent on Human controlled entities.
The strongpoints would probably be best to have perhaps 2 AT Guns, and a number of Machine gun positions.
Strongpoints would be placed along the previous days front line, and would not be replaced during the course of a day. They would reappear after the night phase.
-
(http://home.coqui.net/dimitri/hack!.jpg)
-
Damn, I should have kept a screenshot of you getting shot down after you got target fixated on me and chased me for 4 minutes in through that furball. :)
But seriously, you're good Animal. Although I still don't understand how you zoom up, loop and then accelerate after me and catch up when I'm pulling zero G's and diving in a P-47.
-
And by the way... What do you think of my post????????
-
Buzz,
Nice post. I like the ideas presented here. It would definately change gameplay. I can see it making the game a little more immersive. You have obviously done a lot of work thinking this out and writting it. Kudos to you bud. Salute!
(http://home.att.net/~lmluper/markatsig.jpg) (http://www.jump.net/~cs3)
-
Yes, I did read your post.
You post some good points, but I believe HTC thought of all this long ago.
Maybe when they finish building all their vehicles it will be done. Maybe in a year or so.
They are not gonna stay idle.
-
<places bookmark 1/3 way thru post><will be back some rainy day to finish>
-
Excellent post, WTG. IMHO if AH is to survive in the coming years it will eventually have to evolve into a WW2OL type thing, otherwise AH will be swallowed up by the competition and die.
Lets hope HTC take notice of this
WTG Again :cool:
Sam
-
I also think this is the way things need to progress. Then again, HTC could buy out CRS and rebuild WWIIonline into something that works. :D . You havw to figure CRS will sell cheap soon :)
vati
-
WW2Ol is the wave of the future and the musket is still a viable part of any armed forces! (http://www.duhspot.com/users/smiley/s/otn/funny/rolling_eyes.gif)
-SW
-
Sounds good to me.
Two things to remember:
* Price. The majority of people playing WWIIOL will not pay $30/month for any game. Just my opinion.
* Ground war. The majority of people playing WWIIOL are playing everything but the air war. HTC has a long way to go on it's ground war if it wants to pull in the FPS-type masses. Just my opinion.
HTC would need to make a serious business decision if they chose to turn focus away from MA-style to HA-style.
-
Very interesting ideas, but the development time would be well over a year for the small outfit that HTC is. Perhaps take some elements of your idea and work on them. Remember, Aces High wasn't meant to be a full scale war simulation. To turn it into one would take significant resources, both time and money. Not to mention the vehicles you're suggesting be added. Look how long it took for 1.07 to come out, with 3 planes and 2 new GVs.
Now, I'm not saying it shouldn't be considered, or that it's a bad idea. It's a good idea and should be considered, but I wouldn't be getting hopes up that this is the direction AH would be going in any time in the forseeable future.
Also, I don't see AH and WWIIOL competing directly. The games are in two separate niches in the same theme. WWIIOL attempts to combine everything into one game, while AH concentrates on the Air aspect first and foremost. Some might leave for WWIIOL, but not many, IMO. Most that want to play WWIIOL will do both, time permitting.
-
buzz... I think your post is more interesting reading than the arena you describe would be fun. Allied vs axis is custom made for stale, lopsided, boring drudge.
What you describe is basically limiting the planesets to only a few planes at a time and hoping that you can attract a bunch of guys interested in ground war and history.
Heck, with anything goes arena and maybe an RPS with a short early war, huge middle and short late war you have ten times the variety. without variety people get bored and worse... they begin to get so good at doing the same things over and over against the same enemies that they wander off.
you could still have a ground war without the historical aspect. We have it now. improving it has nothing to do with axis vs allied. I believe that Most people who log onto a multi player game are not interested in history so much as they are interested in having a good time. The more historical the less of a good time for most. Who wants to fight tigers in sherman's? Who wants to fight 190's in spit 5's. maybe some but.. Most want parity and variety i believe.
Sure... beef up the ground war add infantry and more vehicles and whatever.... Make the servers handle 1,000 players...that is still no excuse to go to the silly axis vs allied. What do most people care that they are shooting an mg34 while the guy next to em on the same team is shooting a Thompson or Garrand or SMLE? who cares if the green guys have a mixed bag of jeeps and tigers and T34's and so do the red guys? Sure beats the alternative.
I believe that when the new wears off WWII online people will notice the lopsided nature of the weapons and either gang bang or just quit. It's hard to balance anything historical but it's even harder to get any kind of variety.
lazs
-
<S> Excellent, well thought out post, buzzbait! But don't forget adding ground targets, such as: towns, supply depots, railroads, trains, rail stations, capturable factories, truck convoys, bridges, roads, and sea convoys.
For those of you who don't want an HA, just look at the 1000+ members of WWIIOL! That's how big the market is! And this is the perfect time to transform AH into an HA; WWIIOL is unstable, has a small selection of planes and vehicles, and the framerate sucks.
Let's do a little math. Ok, 1000 members @ 30 dollars/month yields $30,000!!! That's $360,000 a year!!! Look at the potential profitability of this setup, HTC!!! Clearly AH has the potential to be the superior game...by turning it into an HA, WWIIOL will be doomed!! And the sooner the better, since the makers of WWIIOL are working their a** off right now, trying to fix the errors!
Remember, it may take lots of time and money to make those changes, but as Reagan said, HTC can "grow its way out of trouble."
[ 06-16-2001: Message edited by: DocFalconer1 ]
-
Dont like the idea of restricted arean. But all the other stuff bring it on in thats what we need more stuff to kill and fly and drive.
need more stuff to bomb that impacts the game
(http://www.planettribes.com/hosed/smilies/s/s/otn/happy/cheers.gif)
-
Hmmm... interesting idea.
But it would seem that anyone who wanted to fly anything OTHER than the usual boring LW/US/RAF stuff would be well and truly left in the lurch. HTC would not have time to increase the Soviet, Japanese or Italian planeset - but hey why should that matter?
-
S! Dowding
The Arena would not be dull and boring. When people have clearly defined objectives, action focuses on those objectives and you get intense combat. Because of the complexity of a historical arena, the interactions become much more compelling, simply because there are more options tactically. Your opponent can succeed in multiple ways, and your choices to counter his moves are many.
For example, the Germans can destroy the Allied bridgehead by either:
1) Conducting a land offensive which drives him back into the sea
2) Cut his supply lines through an Air Offensive by destroying the convoys between Southhampton and the Artificial Harbours through air attacks.
3) Do the same as 2) by destroying the Supply Convoys through Naval and Submarine attack.
4) Protect your V1 launch sites well enough to allow sufficient numbers of them to be launched into the Allied ports of Southhampton and the Mulberry Harbours at Normandy to destroy the Port infrastructure.
Plus any number of other combinations of the above.
And the Allies would have as many options.
As far as aircraft choices, the Luftwaffe, U.S. and British planeset makes up by far the largest percentage of the existing AH aircraft stable. Nearly all of those could be available. And you could use the Italian aircraft too. Because it was operationally possible for the Fascist Italian Air Force of Northern Italy to participate at Normandy if the German Command had deemed it imperative for them to do so.
Someone mentioned they wouldn't want to be fighting Tigers with Shermans. To start the Tiger wouldn't be available in any large numbers. The Sherman is definitely not as good a vehicle in a straight up fight in the open. (Although a Sherman Firefly will punch a hole in any German Tank, its 17pdr gun was actually better than the 75mm high velocity the Panther was equipped with) But Tank combat isn't just a question of bow to bow gunfights. A Sherman is a lot faster than a Tiger. The U.S. model with the Gyroscope was actually capable of firing on the run. And the Sherman was equipped in the second half of the campaign with what was called a Rhinoceros bow attachment which allowed it to burst through the Hedgerows. The German Tanks had no such device, and were restricted to the roads and any road entrances to the fields. The U.S. tankers were able to head off cross country and to bypass and cutoff, or come up behind German Tanks.
Actually my personal favourite historical arena would be the Malta one, which had tremendous air/naval interactions, both at night and in the day. But it doesn't have a ground aspect, unless it was extended into '43 with the fighting in Tunisia and the invasion of Sicily. But those weren't the most interesting periods as far as the siege of Malta was concerned.
AH could also do a Okinawa HA almost as easily as a Normandy one. Okinawa is a relatively small island, so the combat area would be manageable. A lot of the aircraft exist already in AH, but you'd need to build quite a few Japanese planes, plus of course all their tanks and the U.S. models, plus various ship types.
History allows you to design a layer of complexity into a game.
:D
-
Don't get me wrong, I like your idea - but this sort of thing is already covered to a certain extent by the Multi-frame campaigns already run.
They involve the persistent world concept and historical, resource-limited, match-ups.
The only thing they are limited by is the current state of AH - there aren't V2 sites for example, and not many ground forces. But HTC is already working towards more targets and a more fleshed out planeset as far as I can see.
With more improvements/refinements to the multi-frame design, including new tools to help them run smoothly and efficiently (= more fun), 'things can only get better'.
The CM Corps is working continuously to improve these things.
-
as you may have guessed... A lot of us like the air war. A lot of us like the Pacific air war. In an "historical" setting the only time there is any parity in the ETO in the air war is the Battle of Britan. How many times can you do that one? Unescorted B17's in daylight raids getting shot down in the 25% range? Escorted B17's having the mustangs slaughter the LW? Spit 5's against 190's (you could have mustang 1's they had a 2/1 k/d on 190's but there were only a couple hundred)? Sure, I would like trains and troops and truks to strafe... I wouldn't mind doing some ground work on occassion but if I wanted to recreate history I would join one of those re-creation groups. Historical fights were lopsided and unfair so far a a game goes. The ordinance was allways lopsided.
All historical matchups do is remove variety and parity. Any non historical matchups using the same resources will allways be 10 times better so far as parity and variety when compared to "historical" If we had an HA right now I bet I wouldn't get to fly my Hog or F6 and I wouldn't get to kill niks and zekes except for rare occassions. No thanks.
There is no advantage to HA except a percieved immersion. Gameplay allways suffers. I have too much imagination to ever believe that I am "re-creating" WWII... In fact.... I believe it is blasphemous.
lazs
-
laz you are of course totally correct in saying to call this or any other sim an accurate recreation of WW2 is blasphemy! :D
but what we can do is mimick certain aspects but essensially once 'mimicked'(spelling? :D) it will have a life of its own and become just another gameplay feature. if we add supply convoys and trains we may not have 'accurately' portrayed how the convoys worked but we would have a new target that would be fun to attack, will effect the enemy and should look great!.
I say to call it an historial arena would be wrong what it would be is a more complicated game with more choices of things to do.I can only imagine that as a good thing.I personally like the realism angle but im not a total 'anorak' :D. I want challenge but concessions in detail. by that i dont mean irregular behaving craft like super speed tanks or super planes.I mean i dont want to spend all my time just flying, with no clipboard info or true engine management.
(sure give those that want it(real) a chance to have it, with a choice in the setup, much like auto takeoff.)
This is where i think HTC is very confusing in their direction.I understand they are attempting to create a very realistic FM and aircraft/weapon behaviour but at the same time they have allowed gamey aspects like tanks that can roll at 200mph, areas of the map that can be used to hide from veiw.An enjoyable but very simplistic game of base checkers.The 'war' is one part of the game that has seen very little added features.
I just think its about time HTC put something in that delivered something new again to the 'game' not just the simulation with another aircraft.The shore batteries were as far as i could tell a great new feature but then the map changed and they were not there! why use that islands map if its now out of date? baffled me.
As you know HTC are putting in new maps.You can see they are trying to address this sort of thing but like someone else pointed out they are a small development team and it will take time.
This suggestion(buzzbaits) doesnt have to be done all at once though!, but it would be better for everyone i think, if we knew this, or something similar, was the penultimate design for the game or the direction the programmers want to take.We could accept the longer development time then easily, knowing that the game we crave for is being attempted rather than second guessing and just hoping the game will come close to what we would like to see.
keep plugging buzzbait! <S>
[ 06-17-2001: Message edited by: hazed- ]
-
Agreed, hazed.
Lazs: the main reason why the LW was shot outta the sky was because most of their experienced pilots were killed.
[ 06-17-2001: Message edited by: DocFalconer1 ]
-
What your asking for, Buzzbait, is the virtual battlefield.
WW2 Online was supposed to be that, but it's in the hurt locker right now. It technically has been released, but if you ask me right now it is actually the open beta, with player pre-paying for their CD keys.
I very much agree that Aces High could be a virtual battlefield light, or even a more hardcore virtual battlefield with Axis vs Allies. The problem is I think Pyro and HiTech don't want to go that route. I beleave their vision is to be flightsim only. No diluting the air combat with neccessary ground or sea combat. Topic specific simulations would work better than broad topic simulations, and are easier. Mixing them, yet making them all work would bring down the quality in all the different branches.
I don't agree myself. I think you could do it, but you would have to market the product that way. Right now Aces High doesn't even do marketing, just word of mouth. The word is that Aces High is a flightsim.
Hotseat and crew over at WarBirds 3 on the other hand, they've been vocal on the AGW forums and have specifically said that YES....WarBirds 3 is not going to be just airplanes. It will not have infantry (too difficult to intigrate...just ask the WW2OL players), but it will have a full vehicle stable to play like tanks, artillery, submarines, aircraft carriers, all that. Right now they only have 1 ground vehicle, another M-3/M-16 AA halftrack, but it is well done (better than the Aces High M-16 in my opinion).
WW2 Online probably will not cave. I do think it will work, but they've got to do alot more work. They've definetly got the head start over WB3 or AH, but it remains to be seen how long it will take them.
I'm going to go out on a limb and predict that Aces High will be a flightsim, will always be a flightsim, and will not try to get too deep into anything else other than as a side diversion once in awhile. I don't want it to be, but I don't run things.
Hans.
-
S! Lazs
No one, least of all I, says by the way, that the existing MA should be eliminated. There you can fly your ahistorical plane and vehicle matchups as much as you want. You guys have what you want, let us history buffs have ours. I am suggesting AH should introduce a HA with a real detailed battlefield. I think this would be a financial success for them. But of course we, and they won't know unless they try it.
What I do know, is that a HORDE of people bought copies of WW2OL in hopes of getting just what I am suggesting.
Cheers Buzzbait ;)
-
buzz and HB... I don't think I'm getting across. You can have every single feature that buzz suggested.... You can then make those features usless gameplay wise by trying to "recreate" or "mimic" things that happened in WWII. Take those same features and make it red or green... no blasphemous half bellybutton attempts to please the guys with no imagination or historical sense.
sure... I wanna strafe convoys but... I don't care if they are a mixed bag of GMC 1 1/2 tons or german trucks (horse drawn wagons). I don't care if the infantry is a mixed bag of mg 42, BAR and garrand or mausers.
If you want to "mimick" WWII then where do you stop? should everyone have a script? should 190 plane availability be limited (sorry to many 190's you gotta fly a 109)? And yes.... should LW numbers and pilot skill be limited in the late war (sorry your K/D is too high you can't fly)??? Anything less is comprimise.... And for what?
That's the real question. What do you gain with this comprimised hashed up recreation? Nothing. Maybe a little imersion for the dull witted. What do you lose? Any chance at parity and variety. Who will willingly even up the sides when the real lopsidedness of ordinance is "simulated"??
No... let the features evolve but let's not get caught in the "historical" trap. All the features would still exist and you could practice in the MA but if you wanted to pretend (and were dumb enough to believe it) that you were somehow recreating history then.... You could use these features in an "historical" setting in scenarios where the scripted nature of things would work better.
lazs
-
Thing is: People bought WWIIOl for the ground aspect, so they can be l33t 5n1p3rz...
The flying aspect is a whole different thing.. and it ain't working there.
Here we concentrate on flying, ground crap is there for whoever wants to dweebify themselves to the level of ground weenie... otherwise, it concentrates on flying first... so therefore your theory is flawed..
Of the, let's say, 20,000 people that bought WW2Ol... how many bought it for the flying aspect (and expecting a very difficult flying experience)... maybe 10%? That's about 200 people... And most were already playing WB or AH or AW...
So, despite what you may think... WW2Ol is not a good game to compare to AH... one focuses mostly on one area, while the other focuses on another.
-SW
-
S! Lazs
I am primarily a flyer in Online Sims. That is where my interest is. If my proposed Normandy Front was instituted, you would see me either flying a P-47D Razorback escorting B-17's to the Ruhr, or you would see me in a Typhoon taking out German Armour, or flying a Mosquito going on Convoy busting missions in the Scheldt Estuary. Your statement that only Ground pounders would like a detailed HA is totally wrong.
It takes a whole enviroment to attract the thousands of Simmers who love both their history and their Sims. :D
-
Originally posted by SWulfe:
Of the, let's say, 20,000 people that bought WW2Ol... how many bought it for the flying aspect (and expecting a very difficult flying experience)... maybe 10%? That's about 200 people... And most were already playing WB or AH or AW...
Who taught you math? :)
-- Todd/DMF
-
Originally posted by DocFalconer1:
Lazs: the main reason why the LW was shot outta the sky was because most of their experienced pilots were killed.
[ 06-17-2001: Message edited by: DocFalconer1 ]
How do you think they got killed?
-
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying:
Who taught you math? :)
-- Todd/DMF
I missed a zero when I was typing... oh well. But My point still stands!!!!
I'm right, I know I am!!! ;)
-SW
-
Ok.... let me make it real simple...
If you add enough comlexity to a "war" then a "historical" aspect will take that much longer to get boring.... That much longer before people notice how unfair it is..
For every level of resources (complexity) given us... A non "historical" (no allied vs axis restrictions) setup will have at least ten times the variety and 100 times the parity.
I don't think the average guy that signs up for a game using simulated weaponry wants anything more than to kill stuff. If he (when he notices) is outclassed (his stuff weaker than the other guys) he will be pissed. He will either leave or join the side with the best "stuff".
It works that way at every level.... At AH's current level of complexity variety and parity would be allmost nill with an "historical" planeset. Idiotic perk points are simply a way to maintain parity while having some variety. I would not mind an arena with a RPS that had a short early war, a long mid war and a short late war. No perks... Adjust time periods to peoples taste ( i like early war) but no silly and restrictive axis vs allied. Course... my solution would be to have seperate early, mid and late "areas" whithin the same arena but..
lazs