Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Furball on September 07, 2004, 03:27:24 PM
-
with regards to ENY debate
Originally posted by hitech
While what your asking for would be extreamly difficult to implement. One thing I had been thinking about over the week end is changing the hardness of all targets with the balance ratio.
And adjusting Ack lethality based on numbers.
HiTEch
-
aww jeez. The whineometer wont beable to handle this now.
-
that sounds great!
hoards would be able to vulch easily, and defenders could pork ord troops easier.
where did HiTech post this?
-
Originally posted by Furball
with regards to ENY debate
And adjusting Ack lethality based on numbers.
HiTEch >>
LOL ack is leath now? lol
i see single planes making 5 to 10 passes over fully acked fields
and keep flying to rtb.
thanks for more ack, but it needs more accuracy, single plane can still deack a field, field/CV acks a joke as it is now.
-
Originally posted by JB73
that sounds great!
hoards would be able to vulch easily, and defenders could pork ord troops easier.
where did HiTech post this?
clicky clicky (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=129578)
-
I actually like the idea of making buildings harder. I don't like the idea of making ack more lethal to one side or another though, I think that's just a little too 'out there' realism-wise. But, from a realism point-of-view harder buildings could abstractly equate to the side on the defensive 'digging-in', re-enforcing critical structures and hard-points. This would also making flying Bombers more meaningfull as alot more ordnance would need to be delivered. As it is now the entire MA is and has been VERY Jabo-centric in this regard.
Zazen
-
oh no.. i just had a terrible, terrible thought...
what would that do to AI 88's?
go above 3k anywhere on map tower.
-
I really don't like this idea. All the players should be working with the same numbers. An ack is an ack is an ack. A P-38L is a P-38L is a P-38L.
-
Manned 88's would do the trick against vulchers. Say 3 per field?
-
I still prefer the logistics ideas as they would be more based on realism But.
Hmm interesting concept. Might even have some merit gameplay wise.
Wouldnt stop the hordes from ganging but would more then likely slow down the steamroll to some extent.
Might be worth a trial test.
-
I'm not shure about more leathal ack although I think the ack is very inacurate especially for the amout of it flying tward my plane, I have been able to deack an entire medium base with a P51D with only the 50 cals.
But hardening biuldings could help. I for one would love to see more bombers flying over to take out a base, rather than the normal jabo only raid that we see now. A good bomber jabo combo would be nice to see as well as to fly in.
-
Have to agree with Karnak on this one. A hanger, etc... should take a certain llbs of bombs to knock out period and an ack should have the same killing power / distance no matter what side your on.
-
I dont know,
Why not add things to make it fair.
Like maybe a Rook Freeze Ray Tractor Beam to steady the warpy targets.
or
A Bishop Altitude inverter, It switches the altitude of the enemy in relationship to yours, Always be higher.
or
A Knight Multiplier, It creates extra of yourself so you can be several places at once saving the empire from the hordes.
or
A HTC Lighting Bolt Generator, It strikes down pesky BBS Guys as they Ty...... BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ....
;)
-
Originally posted by Grimm
I dont know,
Why not add things to make it fair.
Like maybe a ...
Ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner!
-
Just a question - is any of this really designed to stop the hoardes from ganging or to give the grossly out numbered side a better chance against the horde? I didn't think the idea was to get anyone to switch sides and I'm sure this idea won't either. It will adjust game play to try to balance the fight when one side has superior numbers.
Okay so you have 30+ pilots log off before your bombers drop ord - once that's done they can log back on and take the field?
I do like the concept - this is a program after all, with a number of variables. Need more ideas.
-
Maybe it could be set up so that when any Rook merely logs on, it causes an instant Rook reset with 100 perks immediately awarded to Knights and Bishops.
-
Is this what they mean by "Gaming the Game" ?
-
what about.. those not assigned to any squad, get auto - assigned to a country every time they log on depending on numbers?
sux for them but that seems the only rational way of doing it.
-
Originally posted by Furball
what about.. those not assigned to any squad, get auto - assigned to a country every time they log on depending on numbers?
sux for them but that seems the only rational way of doing it.
why not simply have a program research squads (and #'s in them) and the do a routine each month to auto-assign (and lock-in) each squad to a differernt country for at least an overall balance.
each month... no guarentees squads would remain in one country from month to month.
sux for them but seems like the only rational way of doing it since there are more squad members than lone wolves/noobs.
mmmkay?
:)
-
Originally posted by Shane
why not simply have a program research squads (and #'s in them) and the do a routine each month to auto-assign (and lock-in) each squad to a differernt country for at least an overall balance.
each month... no guarentees squads would remain in one country from month to month.
sux for them but seems like the only rational way of doing it since there are more squad members than lone wolves/noobs.
mmmkay?
:)
Sounds good to me. Although i know a lot of squads are very country loyal (i'm in one of them) because some of the members would never change.
I like the above idea tho, but if it assigns it on a monthly bases, it would cause probs when squads based elsewhere (such as the puni's) being sent to a country, and then rarely being on in US prime time etc.
-
awww man, i guess i forgot the sarcasm tags. but if you want to take it further, the balance routine could also take into account usual log-in times.
:D
personally i think the whole thing should have been left alone for the lemmings to work out - but that wasn't happening for too long i guess as #'s beget #'s. failing that, i think the general eny idea is a good one, but overly harsh.
levi started a thread in gameplay to encourage constructive tweak ideas for the current eny system. surprising how few have posted in it. whining is much easier i guess (no, not directed at you furby).
-
sorry... i wondered why that big stick with "sarcasm" written on it was hitting me.
i was up early for work this morning.. yeah.. thats why i missed it.. :D
-
The problem AH has isn’t with players doing what they want to have fun, it’s with how the game is designed to be played in the first place. The game play model sets the perimeters; folks then adjust their style with these perimeters. Wouldn’t a better way to get “balance” be to adjust how the game is played rather then target a specific section of players because of the way they currently play the game under the existing rules?
All the current fixes like the fuel pork fix and eny values do nothing to address the flaw of the current game play model. Neither will making object / structure hardness higher. This will only make the horde more necessary to capture a base. Capture the flag works in an arena of 200 folks, with 500 its just silly.
A lot of the current fixes remind me of Warbirds to a degree. Just messing with the most obvious symptoms without addressing the real issue. There needs to be a balance between those who prefer the more organized / team work / war winner / building battling i.e. strat and those who just want to jump in for a few good fights.
With the reset trigger based on field capture and field capture requiring that one side deny the other the ability to just fly then the current set of "fixes" do nothing to address that. The horde is only a problem when 60 roll up on one base after another. At this point the side with lesser numbers or the one being rolled up on can barely get into the air.
Forcing folks to fly aircraft they don’t like (for the most part with lesser ord loads) and if HT goes ahead with the suggestion above it will mean more horde will be required to capture a field. The harder field capture becomes the less fun it is for the side being rolled up on. If anything make it easier so the reset comes quicker and folks don’t have to suffer through it.
I suggest a new dot command .gimme field XXX. Anyone who wants to "win" doesnt even have to bother with those pesky hard to learn aircraft.
It seems to me it just gets more ridiculous with each proposed fix.
Just make the reset trigger something other then just base grabbing. You can still design the game so that it allows the mission type folks to work together. There's been a whole host of suggestions along this line over the years.
-
Bldgs need to be harder BUT they need to stay down longer. One thing that makes this more game than sim is the frantic rat race of hitting a target and having that target regen b4 you get back to hit it again. Id rather see things take a lot of bombs, but stay down so you had time to plan, hold briefings etc.
-
Grimm has it right.
Start messing with lethality and hardness and the game changes from being a simulator to being super mario doom with wings. I've seem some bad ideas to help "balance" the arena, but messing with lethalithy and hardness is about the worst I've seen. The AI ack already occasionally interferes with player vs. player gameplay (ie. when getting picked out of the sky by heavy ack during a dogfight by a gun you're not anywhere near) but messing with the lethality and hardness just turns that whole AI and ground attack simulation into a big unrealistic chocolate mess.
I really hope that doesn't get changed. Like Grimm implied, as long as you're messing with the core SIMULATION part of the game, there's no reason to not start adding powerups, space warp portals, and all the rest. All in the name of gameplay balance of course...
I'd rather get vulched by the horde than have to guess what version of AI and arena "reality" I'm fighting at any given time.
-
Originally posted by eagl
I'd rather get vulched by the horde than have to guess what version of AI and arena "reality" I'm fighting at any given time.
Agreed. I don't care for these changes.