Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Mugzeee on December 19, 2005, 09:04:34 PM
-
Awaiting Zazens Antivulch Idea. :D yoohooo ole Zazen........................ .................?????
-
The coad's already in place: up at a different field. :aok
-
hehee..good one bud. :)
So glad you had an original answer. thanks.
-
Or jump into a manned ack...or a Ostwind...or a...
-
Original Post
You know what would improve gameplay and fights more than anything?!?
Make it so killing planes on the ground do not count toward score (no perks, no kill awarded messages, no points). Seems like it would be very easy to do, there's already code to prevent certain types of kills from counting during certain types of missions. Just something like:
IF EnemyPlaneAlt=0 THEN KillCount=0
You could still vulch as you needed to to effect base captures but it would not benifit your score unless you at least let the enemy get airborne. That would double the number, frequency and duration of fights in the MA and would give my poor weary eyes a rest in Ostwinds/Field Guns.
Zazen
Reply #1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Mustaine
though at bases above sea level, CV's even, your altitude is not 0.
im not sure, but i think thats what shows in the film viewer also, not height above ground, but above sea level
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yea, it would be 0 AGL , above ground level, not sea level. I don't see too many people vulching the carrier deck of a CV.
Zazen
Reply #2
Originally posted by SlapShot
LOL ... so change it to ... IF EnemyPlaneAltAGL=0 THEN KillCount=0
Still it wouldn't make that much of a difference. Those who rely on "vulchin" to pad their score to make them look l33t will only have to wait a few more seconds for the same kill ... just enough time to get wheels off the ground.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yea, Slappy but think how it would play out. Say you have 8 vulchers and 5 guys trying to take off to defend. Ok, if the vulchers shoot them the moment they spawn or as they are slowly taxiing down the runway they can easily keep pace with the spawning defenders and still preserve energy. But, if they have to let the defenders get wheels up where they are able to manuever the vulchers are going to miss shots and slow down to mauever for shots, the defenders will then have a chance to get multiple planes airborne simultaneously effectively breaking the tight CAP. The vulchers would also have to linger longer and manuever more within the field's umbrella of AA fire, increasing the chances of vulcher death and improved numerical parity for the defenders. In effect what this would do is make the margin off error for timing very slim when keeping a base tightly CAP'd. The likelihood of the vulchers losing tight CAP would be greatly enhanced thereby enhancing the liklihood a real fight with some semblence of parity would ensue and persist.
Zazen
Reply #3
Originally posted by Karnak
It would also change the tactic of taking off under a vulch. Instead of trying to get airborne as fast as possible, the new tactic would be to get as much speed as you could while keeping your wheels on the ground, then time your lifting to dodge attacks as best as possible. A manuverable fighter like an A6M, Hurricane or FM2 or a powerful one like a Spitfire Mk XVI, La-7 or Ki-84 can do surprisingly well in that circumstance.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's a great point Karnak, that's exactly what they would do in real life, under the same circumstances. I don't see any reason why this idea wouldn't be doable and beneficial to gameplay. If someone can think of a reason why this would not be a good thing please chime in.
This whole concept would also put an end to the rash of career runway vulchers that up a Fw190D9 or La7 alt to 15k dive passed 15 intervening cons to make high speed vulch passes up and down the runway on the take-off spots before they inevitably run or get wacked. Sure they could still be griefers and do it just to be salamanders, but not for perks, points and 'name in lights'. I'd wager $100 this type of nonsense grinds to a screeching halt if pure vulching was no longer rewarded in these ways.
It would also put a serious fly in the ointment of the 2 account dorks that vulch themselves, these guys are so pathetic and skill-less they'd prolly miss their other account if it had to be in the air when they shot it.
There'd definately be a radical and permanent adjustment to the Top 100 Fighter List, I promise you that.
Zazen
-
The above post was Cut n' pasted from A General Discussion thread. I have thought about this for awhile, I ran it thru my brain every which way. I can't see any fault with implimenting something like this. The only demographic that would suffer more than anyone else would be the 'career vulcher', those who almost exclusively vulch as a means to generate kills in a fighter. Noone would get credit for planes on the ground so it would be an even playing field all around.
If someone can find a flaw in this let's discuss it here, otherwise I'm going to submit this idea 'officially' to Hitech and Pyro via email.
Zazen
-
It's all we need. One more artificial and arbitrary game rule. A kill is a kill is a kill.
Vulch me once, shame on you.
Vulch me twice, shame on me.
Vulch me a third time, scream for a rules change.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
It's all we need. One more artificial and arbitrary game rule. A kill is a kill is a kill.
Vulch me once, shame on you.
Vulch me twice, shame on me.
Vulch me a third time, scream for a rules change.
Just for the record I've never been vulched in AH, that was not my motivation for coming up with this idea. Promoting better fights is my motivation.
Zazen
-
Originally posted by Zazen13
Just for the record I've never been vulched in AH, that was not my motivation for coming up with this idea. Promoting better fights is my motivation.
Zazen
That's just the thing... the people doing the vulching don't necessarily want a fight. If they did, they would let the fighters roll.
FWIW, I've both vulched and been vulched. I don't try to launch from a field that is capped. If I'm vulching, there's only one reason and that's field capture.
One last thing... IMHO, killshooter favors the vulchee.
-
eh I would still vulch to piss people off.
-
There are far too many fields, and already defensive measures in place. While I personally would like to see much more ack, and maybe even another VH or 2 on Airfields, I see no reason to make killing planes impossible in a particular circumstance.
I, unlike Zazen, have been vulched many times. I have also vulched some. While I don't make a habit out of it (like many do), I don't see a change in gameplay having a huge effect. The same group that runs vulching sorties all camp, will find another work around, and start sodding gameplay in another area, and we'll be back to square 1, I fear.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
That's just the thing... the people doing the vulching don't necessarily want a fight. If they did, they would let the fighters roll.
FWIW, I've both vulched and been vulched. I don't try to launch from a field that is capped. If I'm vulching, there's only one reason and that's field capture.
One last thing... IMHO, killshooter favors the vulchee.
I generally like em off the runway myself. Makes sure ditching alot more
challenging.
-
Well, one thing that gives the vulch = no kill merit is that IRL aircraft destroyed on the ground (rolling or not) were NOT credited as kills (sorry, Mr. Boyington).
Although I think if they did that, they should credit it as ground damage (which fighter sorties already don't credit).
-
Originally posted by Sandman
That's just the thing... the people doing the vulching don't necessarily want a fight. If they did, they would let the fighters roll.
FWIW, I've both vulched and been vulched. I don't try to launch from a field that is capped. If I'm vulching, there's only one reason and that's field capture.
One last thing... IMHO, killshooter favors the vulchee.
You will still be able to vulch, you just won't get any perks, points or recognition for it.
Zazen
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
There are far too many fields, and already defensive measures in place. While I personally would like to see much more ack, and maybe even another VH or 2 on Airfields, I see no reason to make killing planes impossible in a particular circumstance.
I, unlike Zazen, have been vulched many times. I have also vulched some. While I don't make a habit out of it (like many do), I don't see a change in gameplay having a huge effect. The same group that runs vulching sorties all camp, will find another work around, and start sodding gameplay in another area, and we'll be back to square 1, I fear.
Well, what those people may or may not do if vulching yeilds no points, perks or recognition is really not relavent. Not fixing something just because they will still try to find another way to be dweebs is kind of dumb. That's like not putting anti-theft protection on the front door of your business because you figure if you do that they will just knock a hole through an exterior wall to get in anyways.
Zazen
-
Originally posted by Zazen13
You will still be able to vulch, you just won't get any perks, points or recognition for it.
Zazen
True enough, but I'll get more help if we still get points. ;)
There's a simpler way to deny perk points to vulchers... Launch at another field.
-
I'd vulch anyway. I'm an old meanie.
Just think, in one fell swoop I can annoy the guy trying to get airborn as well as all of my countrymen who want me to let him get airborn so they can kill him in flight. :aok
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
I'd vulch anyway. I'm an old meanie.
-- Todd/Leviathn
No doubt, but half of the current vulchers would not if there was no reward. They would invest their ammunition in a target that yielded a reward of perks, points and recognition.
Zazen
-
Originally posted by Sandman
True enough, but I'll get more help if we still get points. ;)
There's a simpler way to deny perk points to vulchers... Launch at another field.
The point is not to deny vulchers points per se, the point is to make for better, more frequent and persistant fights. Making vulching non-lucrative from a scoring perspective will make base defense more practical therefore fights rather than vulchfests more frequent. Vulching will still be possible to effect base captures it just won't count on your scoresheet, you won't get your 'name in lights', nor will you get perks. But, you can still do it if you feel you need to. As it is now the basic object of the game is to get a big enough horde together that you can push the enemies' CAP back to their field and set-up for lengthy vulching sessions. The point should be the fight in-between the fields not the vulch-fests over them. But until the fight in-between offers the most reward the point will always be the ultra-lucrative vulchfests.
Zazen
-
I've been on both ends of the equation many times (vulching / being vulched) - the only difference is if you are the one trying desperately to get up to stop the base capture.
Nobody has to up at a capped field - the vulchers are there to keep the enemy down so that they can get the troops in. Since the vulchers fought through the defense to put the cap on, they have the advantage and there is no use whining about it.
The vulchees are the ones who are crazy enough to up at a capped field in the desperate hope that they can get up enough speed to avoid being killed and maybe get lucky and wack the inbound troops or get some ord on the offending CV before someone lights their tail on fire.
If I'm crazy / stupid enough to up in those circumstances, I get what I get and I don't whine about it. If I weren't so desperate to get up and stop the base capture I'd up from another field and fly to the capped base like I should. If by some miracle I get up and am able to wack the enemy goon or LVT before getting wacked myself, then it was all worthwhile.
I don't think eliminating kill stats for aircraft still on the ground will make much difference. Those who are there for the points will just wait until your wheels come off the runway before flaming you. Those who are there to capture the base will just flame you anyway.
If you want to eliminate vulching, try intercepting the inbounds before they reach your field.
EagleDNY
.02
-
Originally posted by Zazen13
Well, what those people may or may not do if vulching yeilds no points, perks or recognition is really not relavent. Not fixing something just because they will still try to find another way to be dweebs is kind of dumb. That's like not putting anti-theft protection on the front door of your business because you figure if you do that they will just knock a hole through an exterior wall to get in anyways.
Zazen
Fixing something? What's broken? The only way vulching can happen, period, is if someone keeps upping at a capped field. Considering you don't vulch, and have never been vulched, I really can't figure out how you could possibly be an expert in this matter.
Don't want to get vulched? Don't take off from a CAP'ed field. It really is just that simple.
-
The point should be the fight in-between the fields not the vulch-fests over them. But until the fight in-between offers the most reward the point will always be the ultra-lucrative vulchfests.
Well the furballers will like this... but is this not going to make dropping FH/BH's a ever bigger target now. If you have a sizeable force letting planes in the air so they can score points.... this will force the players trying to take the base just to go ahead and kill all the FH's right from the start of their attacks.... ending the fuballers fun.
CAVALRY
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
Fixing something? What's broken? The only way vulching can happen, period, is if someone keeps upping at a capped field. Considering you don't vulch, and have never been vulched, I really can't figure out how you could possibly be an expert in this matter.
Don't want to get vulched? Don't take off from a CAP'ed field. It really is just that simple.
You are missing the point as usual. The point isn't that vulching is the devil per se. I am not trying to end vulching. The point is, gang-vulching and the futility of base defense because of vulching marks the end to what was and could be a good fight. Vulching will be no harder, you can still vulch. You just won't get points, perks or kudos for it. The emphasis for those who like points, perks and kudos will return to where it should be, on the fight that was happening before the vulch-gang arrived to farm score, perks and WTG's from vulching. Those that are in it for the base capture not the score, perks, 'name in lights' are still able to vulch away and effect their capture.
Zazen
-
Originally posted by CAV
Well the furballers will like this... but is this not going to make dropping FH/BH's a ever bigger target now. If you have a sizeable force letting planes in the air so they can score points.... this will force the players trying to take the base just to go ahead and kill all the FH's right from the start of their attacks.... ending the fuballers fun.
CAVALRY
That happens anyways. It's more humane to have them just drop the FHs if they choose to do so than the current system where the only reason the FHs don't get dropped is because the career vulchers scream bloody murder when their suckling fest on the vulching cow teet is ground to a halt.
Zazen
-
Obviously base defenders are taking a chance when they up at a CAP'd field they know that, They still will be, they can still get vulched. BUt as Karaya mentioned, they will at least have a chance to get some manuerving speed up and get airborne. Vulching will still exist, defenders will still have a really tough job breaking cap. It just won't be the ludicrous score, perk, cheap farming tool farce it is now.
This system would work especially well on the HUGE maps where the nearest base is relatively far away, too far usually to mount any meaningful counter-attack before capture achieved. The biggest problem with the HUGE maps is the milkrun-hordes can domino thru 1 base at a time at any one of the 255 fields and effect capture before help can arrive from a proximate base.
Zazen
-
Here's another great furthering of the idea you will all undoubtedly love. If the defender is still on the ground and gets shot, not only will the vulcher not get a kill, perks or points, the defender will not get a death. The defender will get a ditch just like a gv would if he ended mission on the move on pavement. So, not only would vulching cease to be rewarding but defenders will cease to be punished so severely for trying to effect a vigorous base defense, thereby increasing the number of players likely to mount that kind of base defense. This would further increase the likelihood of numerical parity being achieved and a great fight breaking out from what would otherwise be just another mind-numbing, vulch-o-rama.
This refinement would minimize the griefers that would otherwise continue to pure vulch just to be griefers. If they knew the defender wouldn't een get a death unless they were airborne even the greifers would likely let them get aloft.
Zazen
-
this idea would be about as stupid as making HO shots not cause damage.
-
Originally posted by Furious
this idea would be about as stupid as making HO shots not cause damage.
Why's that? Explain.
The only effect this would have on individuals is they would not get perks, points or their 'name in lights' for simply vulching. Unlike the HO example they can still vulch to keep a base completely suppressed for base capture they just won't get any other reward for doing it.
The only people that won't like this idea are those that rely heavily on vulches to generate the 'appearance' of greatness which is merely an illusion.
Zazen
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
Fixing something? What's broken?
Base defense when a particular country is out numbered. (Not enough players to respond to an attack fast enough, due to the lack of bodies to go around.) Its kind of like trying to play baseball without a Second Baseman, Short Stop or missing an Outfielder. Lets face it, the ENY sanction that HT invented has helped a little. I stress “Little” (for at least the last 4 months the numbers remain lopsided to the tune of 30 to even 50 players at times!) And no. It hasn’t balanced sides by way of making the hoard fly A/C with a higher degree of difficulty. We know this by watching a Map fold to the Hoard in short order no matter which A/C they are forced to fly. Why? Could it be perhaps because the hoard don’t care if they vulch in a Hurricane 2-C or a C205 as apposed to say an LA7 or a 190A8? I think Zazens idea might even support the ENY sanction system and thereby making the balance HT may be trying to achieve even more attainable.
I admit without shame, this would severely cripple my chances for perk points! :lol
But I think in the big picture it would benefit the whole of the matter.
Guess ill just have to roll up my sleeves and learn to be a better fighter pilot.
Hey….I just spewed some of them (Anti tool shedder) thoughts. Ewww dat feels icky. Peculiar even. :noid
Don’t get yer hopes up. Ill still capture every base I can get my grubby little hands on! Muhahahaha
Heck..i vulch a field just to annoy zazen when i know he is in a field gun. But he manages to get me sooner or later :furious
Zazen for a well explained fresh and new idea.
-
Originally posted by Mugzeee
Zazen for a well explained fresh and new idea.
Thanks Mugz, I really believe in this idea. I know HiTech has read it. Noone has come up with a flaw in it. The only semi-negative responses are muffled grumbles from a few who are going to miss the vulching gravy train. I'll give this thread until Friday before I go ahead and email it to Pyro for official consideration for implimentation.
As we all know I hold a PhD Anti-Aircraftology. The first Phase to rectify the vulch-pandemic was to tell everyone who cared to know how to be good in an Ostwind/Field Gun. This is Phase 2 of the mission to improve gameplay in the MA, particularly on the HUGE maps where the problem is most pronounced.
Zazen
-
so, basically, the only "improvement" in this entire idea is modifying the scoring DB, which basically, no one who's competent gives a rat's bellybutton about anyway?
sounds great. :aok
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
The career vulchers will become career pickers, or proximity vulchers, hovering at the edge of the field, just outside of ack range, as opposed to having to fly through the ack. No longer will they have to simply deack and drop the VH; with your marvelous idea, they will no longer have to do either.
You forget I spend 30 hrs+ a camp sitting at fields being vulched. I am perhaps the most qualified person in the game to tell you what happens and what would happen. I've watched a million fields being vulched and I've seen hundreds of the tight vulch CAP's be broken. So long as defending planes are able to get airborne there is an excellent chance the defenders will be able to break CAP at some point against all but truly overwhleming odds. This is for two reasons:
1) Defenders are typically taking off in planes that climb well, are more manueverable and are carrying much less fuel.
2) Defenders get to return to the fight 3 seconds after they are shot down, attackers take much much longer.
So, as long as the defenders are able to get airborne and there's at least a decent ratio of them to the attackers, they will be able to mount some sort of base defense. Of course there will be people who hang outside of the AA umbrella to cherry them as they do now, but the defenders can fight against that. They can't fight against people making pass after pass on the take-off spots at their totally defense-less planes as they spawn.
Zazen
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
so, basically, the only "improvement" in this entire idea is modifying the scoring DB, which basically, no one who's competent gives a rat's bellybutton about anyway?
sounds great. :aok
Yup, will be a great improvement. If only the 'competant' people who don't care if vulching people on the ground is just a waste of ammo are the only ones vulching besides the dedicated base capture guys, there will be a HUGE drop in the amount of vulching.
Zazen
-
I pulled all of that, having actually wasted some time considering your proposed change, it occured to me that simply taking the scoring incentive out won't necessarily prevent deacking and the dropping of VHs. I'm also concerned that since the GV and AC models are fairly similar, that HT couldn't impliment something which negated any and all damage and kill tallying while anything is on the ground.
Let's consider also the endless FH porking. What do you get for dropping a FH? 1 or 2 perks, on a good night? .5 to 1 for the horde? And look how many of those go down on any given night.
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
I'm also concerned that since the GV and AC models are fairly similar, that HT couldn't impliment something which negated any and all damage and kill tallying while anything is on the ground.
Let's consider also the endless FH porking. What do you get for dropping a FH? 1 or 2 perks, on a good night? .5 to 1 for the horde? And look how many of those go down on any given night.
I am going to talk to HiTech or Pyro about the coding practicality of it via email.
As you said in your post you deleted, people will still come to fields to get kills, they just won't purely vulch, so the same 'peer pressure' that prevents FHs from being dropped now at CAP'd fields will still be active without pure vulching. In actuallity I think my change would actually lessen the advent of FH dropping by all but high altitude buffs, the low-alt FH killers and the diving lancs would have a much, much greater chance of being intercepted with airborne defenders to contend with.
Zazen
-
Originally posted by Zazen13
Yup, will be a great improvement. If only the 'competant' people who don't care if vulching people on the ground is just a waste of ammo are the only ones vulching besides the dedicated base capture guys, there will be a HUGE drop in the amount of vulching.
Zazen
I'm not even hinting that only the guys who don't care about score are vulching. I'm saying that they are the group more likely to not care about score, and hence won't be vulching anyway. If a bunch of idiots in the Arf Angels, shiznobs, or whatever other dedicated rank squads want to spend all of their time online trying to gangvulch a third account, that's great. It keeps them out of my way, gives you something to shoot at with your ground guns, and they feel like heroes.
As I've stated before, all you have to do to end vulching is quit upping at capped fields. If all the newbs and vets alike at the capped field scrambled from the adjacent field, they'd come in with speed, full mags, alt, and just about every advantage in the fight. It requires no coading, and is already in the game.
I still don't see why we need to change gameplay to curb a particularly stupid behavior. The problem isn't the game; it's the people.
-
Originally posted by Zazen13
I am going to talk to HiTech or Pyro about the coding practicality of it via email.
As you said in your post you deleted, people will still come to fields to get kills, they just won't purely vulch, so the same 'peer pressure' that prevents FHs from being dropped now at CAP'd fields will still be active without pure vulching. In actuallity I think my change would actually lessen the advent of FH dropping by all but high altitude buffs, the low-alt FH killers and the diving lancs would have a much, much greater chance of being intercepted with airborne defenders to contend with.
Zazen
You still miss the point. With your grand ideas, fields will be buried in cherrypicking tardfoons, maintaining both their alt and their speed. Instead of 8 idiots slow and wheeling around in a panic, we'll have 8 idiots at alt and speed, practicing all of the BnZ sissypants stuff you've flooded the BBS with. There will no longer be any sort of fight around a base being attacked. There will simply be a mob of pickers, who'll step aside for the mob of porkers once enough defenders get airborne.
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
As I've stated before, all you have to do to end vulching is quit upping at capped fields. If all the newbs and vets alike at the capped field scrambled from the adjacent field, they'd come in with speed, full mags, alt, and just about every advantage in the fight. It requires no coading, and is already in the game.
I
Hub, don't you see that is what is responsible for the milkrunning hordes and the non-fighting, especially on huge maps. People aren't upping from vulched fields, the milkrun-horde continues unabated and there's very little actual fighting. That's the whole point, to make defending fields under attack both more practical and effective. This would not only make domino-effect milkrunning much more difficult, but it would push fights away from fields more toward the middle. Do you know what that's called? A FURBALL!
More furballs and less milkrunning and vulching especially on the HUGE maps is the goal here.
Zazen
-
Originally posted by Zazen13
Hub, don't you see that is what is responsible for the milkrunning hordes and the non-fighting, especially on huge maps. People aren't upping from vulched fields, the milkrun-horde continues unabated and there's very little actual fighting. That's the whole point, to make defending fields under attack both more practical and effective. This would not only make domino-effect milkrunning much more difficult, but it would push fights away from fields more toward the middle. Do you know what that's called? A FURBALL!
More furballs and less milkrunning and vulching especially on the HUGE maps is the goal here.
Zazen
The milkrunners look for bases without resistance, fields on the periphery, etc. The horde porks anway. The score weenies don't think much about either; they look for a fight that's already underway, between fields, and either fly a circuitous route around the fight, or attempt to use your so-called smart flying to push the fight back to the field, and then vulch and pick guys just as they get wheels-up.
Instead of trying to stallfight a zeke at 90mph (zeke snuck out when they were trying to get the il2 that snuck out), they're going to be waiting in the wings, and come screaming in WFO and pick. The idea that you're creating a better fight in this manner just makes no sense. You're not creating fights, you're making vulchers fly "smarter". This is not good for the defenders who launch at these fields. It also drags the victims of the would-be GV and ack heroes out of range of their guns. Having done plenty of anti-smart flying in these situations, I feel that I'm qualified to say you're doing some anti-smart planning, and must dismiss this idea for being wholy impractical.
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
You still miss the point. With your grand ideas, fields will be buried in cherrypicking tardfoons, maintaining both their alt and their speed. Instead of 8 idiots slow and wheeling around in a panic, we'll have 8 idiots at alt and speed, practicing all of the BnZ sissypants stuff you've flooded the BBS with. There will no longer be any sort of fight around a base being attacked. There will simply be a mob of pickers, who'll step aside for the mob of porkers once enough defenders get airborne.
Have you ever tried to cherry pick a Hurricane who is on the deck while you are going 500mph in a Typhoon while the Hurricane is radically turning?!? Good luck with that! If you can consistantly do that you are a better Cherry picker than I am....;)
Anyways, as I said I've been at a million CAP'd fields and there's well defined stages, each stage puts a tighter and tighter stangle-hold on the field until it's almost entirely suffocated, unable to defend itself at all.
1) High CAP- These guys are over 10k, they can prevent defenders from getting to that altitude but cannot prevent planes from upping or getting considerable E.
2) Medium CAP- These guys are typically Jabo'ers who have dropped their loads and are between 5 and 10k. They are attacking planes that have upped recently but have plenty of E to manuever and defend themselves.
3) Tight CAP- These are the ones that sound the death knell for the base defenders. They can be from deck to 5k and they are persistantly buzzing the take-off spots and taxiing planes preventing any defenders from taking off much less getting enough E to manuever.
So, at each stage of CAP the base is less and less able to mount a defense. My change would target the final type of CAP the Tight CAP. They would have a choice, continue to vulch planes for no reward and maintain that Tight CAP or back-off to Medium CAP or High CAP and let the defenders up, get a bit of E and then enage them and get rewarded for doing so.
Zazen
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
The milkrunners look for bases without resistance, fields on the periphery, etc.
That's exactly right they do. As it is now it's very hard to defend against. But, give defenders a chance to up and fight them off and what was a milkrun on a periphery field suddenly becomes a fight at a periphery field.
Zazen
-
Yes, you're exactly right. The defenders will get a little bit of E, and the attackers, instead of being Co-E, will still have a more pronounced advantage, and also not be bothered by Ack. The problem with defending in this situation isn't just getting some E built up; it's getting the attacker to dump his, and jump him when he does. Your idea would encourage no attacker to get slow, or give up his advantage in altitude energy. They'll come down, 2, 3, 4 or 5 at once, fire off a short burst, and the hurri/zeke/il2 that got wheels up has no place to go, and no advantage against any of the attackers.
If anything, this utopian scheme of yours would only make the situation worse.
To clarify my concerns regarding this proposed change to gameplay:
The easiest way to land a sortie of more than 5 kills, for the vast majority of players, is to vulch. The second easiest is pure cherrypicking in a many-vs-few engagement. Both yield the same results, and provide the same padding effect insofar as scoring/ranking is concerned. When you eliminate the easiest method, the second easiest method becomes the path of least resistance. That's my concern; that instead of these clowns being consumed with vulching, they'll be overwhelming any fights that have developed whereever the vulchers have been overrun.
-
The only bad thing I see about this is if your a base capture guy...
This system just made the FH/BH's the best target in the game. The furball types are no longer going to help cap a base... so the next best thing to do is take the base down so no one flys. Right now we have guys dropping the troops all over map, it will not be long before it hits the buff drivers (who don't have alot of good targets anyway) they can effect the battle for the map by dropping the FH/BH's all around the battle areas. It sucks hopping from base to base looking for troops. Think what it would be like having to do that for a fighter.
Cavalry
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
Yes, you're exactly right. The defenders will get a little bit of E, and the attackers, instead of being Co-E, will still have a more pronounced advantage, and also not be bothered by Ack. The problem with defending in this situation isn't just getting some E built up; it's getting the attacker to dump his, and jump him when he does. Your idea would encourage no attacker to get slow, or give up his advantage in altitude energy. They'll come down, 2, 3, 4 or 5 at once, fire off a short burst, and the hurri/zeke/il2 that got wheels up has no place to go, and no advantage against any of the attackers.
If anything, this utopian scheme of yours would only make the situation worse.
The defenders can still use their ack. You are assuming just one defender is upping. Look at my original post, I use a typical example of 8 attackers vs 5 would-be defenders. If those attackers are not inclined to vulch the defenders until they are airborne, those 5 defenders have an excellent chance of getting enough E built up to manuever. You saying allowing a vulcher to vulch take-off spots makes him burn more E than trying to cherry a manueverable and airborne target with some E is...ummm...not making sense. I've seen plenty of D9 and La7s vulch take-off spots going 550mph then zooming to 10k, they would be very hard pressed to do that vs. a manuevering Hurricane, much less 5 of them, they'd definately burn more E trying to do that that making passes on take-off spots or up and down the runway.
Zazen
-
Originally posted by CAV
The only bad thing I see about this is if your a base capture guy...
This system just made the FH/BH's the best target in the game. The furball types are no longer going to help cap a base... so the next best thing to do is take the base down so no one flys. Right now we have guys dropping the troops all over map, it will not be long before it hits the buff drivers (who don't have alot of good targets anyway) they can effect the battle for the map by dropping the FH/BH's all around the battle areas. It sucks hopping from base to base looking for troops. Think what it would be like having to do that for a fighter.
Cavalry
Why would furballers not help CAP a base? They would have more targets as there would be more people wanting to defend and there would actually be a furball not just a runway vulching session where you wait in line for your turn to make a pass on the one guy crazy enough to try to up.
Zazen
-
See edit in prior post. I don't know that you fully comprehended my concerns, and I want to make sure we're on the same page in that regard.
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
To clarify my concerns regarding this proposed change to gameplay:
The easiest way to land a sortie of more than 5 kills, for the vast majority of players, is to vulch. The second easiest is pure cherrypicking in a many-vs-few engagement. Both yield the same results, and provide the same padding effect insofar as scoring/ranking is concerned. When you eliminate the easiest method, the second easiest method becomes the path of least resistance. That's my concern; that instead of these clowns being consumed with vulching, they'll be overwhelming any fights that have developed whereever the vulchers have been overrun.
The difference is the guy vulching is at ZERO risk and the guy getting vulched has ZERO chance. If the vulchers all became cherry pickers on all teams, well that would be interesting. Because, you would now have a bunch of guys who were up until this point vulchers having to fight other cherry pickers who were previously doing the same thing (vulchers would be forced to fight other vulchers). It would actually make life easier for the guys on the bottom of the furball dogpile as the cherry picking altitudes would suddenly be very crowded, they would have to get rid of guys at or near their altitude first before they could relatively safely cherry pick the TnB furballers down low. My guess is the majority of the vulchers turned cherry pickers would end up cancelling each other out, so between the furballers that are now not getting cherried as much and the base defenders not getting vulched, you have much better, more frequent and persistant FURBALLS.
While purely cherry picking is low-risk there is a chance he can die either to another cherry picker or by blowing his E and getting into a compromising situation. If ack is down and VH is down a vulcher has ZERO risk. In gameplay terms getting rewarded for doing soemthing that is zero risk is a very, very severe balance issue.
Zazen
-
Hmmm, interesting. I hadn't given much thought to that particular aspect. While I'm not sure that is indeed what would happen, it would be rather entertaining to see a "race to space" as the various pickers began fighting for the apex perch at the highest alt, and having to either avoid or kill all of those like-minded folks. However, I fear a great many would just nose-down and go screaming through the lower alt fights to get a scrap or 2 before someone came down and bagged them.
However, I still have concerns at the fields being worked over. The possibility that the lack of vulching could cause wave after wave of medium alt bomber formations can't be ignored, and we still don't know what would happen with guys who've only ever vulched. They'd get in where they fit in, and that would likely be small groups hovering at each end of the field, waiting for someone's wheels to clear the tarmac. The specifics may change, but I fear the principle will still be, as you put it, 0 risk vs 0 chance.
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
Hmmm, interesting. I hadn't given much thought to that particular aspect. While I'm not sure that is indeed what would happen, it would be rather entertaining to see a "race to space" as the various pickers began fighting for the apex perch at the highest alt, and having to either avoid or kill all of those like-minded folks. However, I fear a great many would just nose-down and go screaming through the lower alt fights to get a scrap or 2 before someone came down and bagged them.
However, I still have concerns at the fields being worked over. The possibility that the lack of vulching could cause wave after wave of medium alt bomber formations can't be ignored, and we still don't know what would happen with guys who've only ever vulched. They'd get in where they fit in, and that would likely be small groups hovering at each end of the field, waiting for someone's wheels to clear the tarmac. The specifics may change, but I fear the principle will still be, as you put it, 0 risk vs 0 chance.
That's exactly right, in AW we called it the altitude arms race. Just know that the higher the cherry pickers chase each other the safer the furballers are from being disturbed down low. If the cherry picker did elect to dive down low to get away from the other cherry pickers, well he just blew all of his E, he's now in furball land with no 'Big Stick' to club 'em with, unless he's good, he's as good as dead.
This is not a solution to the bombers, nothing can stop a bomber but a fighter at the bomber's altitude. As it is now any bomber coming to a field is rarely attacked if 15k+.
Watch guys who up at fields that are partially CAP'd, they don't extend away from the field laterally they climb and extend vertically. Whether they are engaged or not they at least now have a fighting chance. If there's enough defenders, anything close to a 1 to 1 ratio there will be an interesting fight. As it stands now, 5 vulchers who took ack and VH down can keep 10 defenders from mounting a defense by shooting them as they spawn or taxi, that's a messed up gameplay balance issue that prevents alot of what would otherwise be fun fights, my solution would help fix this.
Zazen
-
It may temporarily cure pure-vulching, but I still have concerns on the effects of such a change, and the trickledown effects, and consequent changes in tactics and gameplay.
Anyhow, I'm off to hunt down vulchers.
-
Why would furballers not help CAP a base? They would have more targets as there would be more people wanting to defend and there would actually be a furball not just a runway vulching session where you wait in line for your turn to make a pass on the one guy crazy enough to try to up.
You have to think like a capture guy...
They hate to see the bad guys flying, it gets in the way of the capture. But they need a useable airfield once they capture it. So they vulch anything taking off. And no goon driver likes going any place near a furball. So they are going to kill the base... no one upping from it. Killing the furball... and we will be back to... the furballers mad at the capture guy for killing the furball and the capture guys mad at the furballers for not helping take the base. :lol
CAVALRY
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
It may temporarily cure pure-vulching, but I still have concerns on the effects of such a change, and the trickledown effects, and consequent changes in tactics and gameplay.
Anyhow, I'm off to hunt down vulchers.
I've thought about that, I made a small list of conceivable gameplay ramifications, direct and indirect:
a) Less pure vulching.
b) More base defense fighters (typically turnfighters)
c) Less milkrunning
d) More cherry pickers that used to be vulchers
e) More furballers that used to be defenders
f) Less low-alt buffing/strafing
g) Less dive-bombing heavy's
h) More fights between fields
i) Less fights directly over fields
j) More people and co-ordination required to take fields
k) More fights around periphery fields when milkruns fail
l) People who used to only defend with AA will now tend to defend with planes. Making for larger fights (furballs)
That's all I have so far, feel free to add to the list.
Zazen
-
Originally posted by CAV
You have to think like a capture guy...
They hate to see the bad guys flying, it gets in the way of the capture. But they need a useable airfield once they capture it. So they vulch anything taking off. And no goon driver likes going any place near a furball. So they are going to kill the base... no one upping from it. Killing the furball... and we will be back to... the furballers mad at the capture guy for killing the furball and the capture guys mad at the furballers for not helping take the base. :lol
CAVALRY
I don't necessarily think that will be the case. First of all there will be defenders to stop them. Secondly, if the capture guys have to kill bases to capture them they are going to pay a price in making that base very vulnerable to recapture and making it useless for at least 15 minutes to continue a steamroll of captures. As it is now all you have to do to take a base is take down town, ack and VH and have a few guys vulching planes as they spawn, leaving the base entirely intact and a perfect launching pad for continuing the milkrun steamroll. There's not alot of time to mount a counter-attack from a nearby field for the defenders. But, if the attackers were forced to invest the time and personell to drop a base, well that gives the defenders a chance to mount a counter-attack in force before the attackers can consumate the capture.
Also, you will still have CAP fighters, they will still get mad if you drop FHs. They will just not be directly over the field at 2k making runs up and down the runways.
Zazen
-
I see and understand your points. Your system will improve gameplay...
For the "Furballers". But what are the the Base Capture guys getting from this beside a lot harder target to capture. Those guys pay to play AH too. What is the improvements for them?
The one thing I have seen, After 10 years of AW, WB, FA & AH, the Base capture players are always coming up with new ways to get around "gameplay improvements". Many times the Fix was worst than what we had brfore.
CAVALRY
-
Originally posted by CAV
I see and understand your points. Your system will improve gameplay...
For the "Furballers". But what are the the Base Capture guys getting from this beside a lot harder target to capture. Those guys pay to play AH too. What is the improvements for them?
The one thing I have seen, After 10 years of AW, WB, FA & AH, the Base capture players are always coming up with new ways to get around "gameplay improvements". Many times the Fix was worst than what we had brfore.
CAVALRY
The base capture guys will actually have to co-ordinate and work together efficiently in the face of defenders. This will be alot more fun and interesting than simply upping a few 110s, strafing down town, ack and VH then vulching any brave souls as they spawn planes until the goon arrives. There will actually be more emphasis on skilled capturers because..well..it will take more of them and they will require more skill to successfully effect a base capture.
The laws of economics dictate that the more of a resource required relative to its supply the more valuable that resource becomes. As it is now base capture guys are the 'ugly red-headed step-children' of AH. Make their jobs require more skill, co-ordination and personnel and suddenly people respect them and become anxious to aid them in their far more engaging task.
This change is designed to improve gameplay, not necessarily make the game easier for any one sub-set of the community. Defenders will still have a steep up-hill battle as you would logically expect, it just won't be the virtually insurmountable sheer rock cliff it is now.
Zazen
-
The base capture guys will actually have to co-ordinate and work together efficiently in the face of defenders. This will be alot more fun and interesting than simply upping a few 110s, strafing down town, ack and VH then vulching any brave souls as they spawn planes until the goon arrives. There will actually be more emphasis on skilled capturers because..well..it will take more of them and they will require more skill to successfully effect a base capture. The laws of economics dictate that the more of a resource required relative to its supply to more valuable that resource becomes. As it is now base capture guys are the 'ugly red-headed step-children' of AH. Make their jobs require more skill, co-ordination and personell and suddenly people respect them and become anxious to aid them in their task. Zazen
OK... I am all for it.
Even if only the see the faces of the "I am a Dogfighter/Furballer only" types as the map still get moved by even larger... But now well coordinate attacks by the "step children of AH". :D
CAVALRY
Every time a base gets capture...(and a pointless furball dies) an angel gets his wings...
By-the-way... I don't have red hair...
-
When I first browsed this thread it reminded me of McCains anti-torture bill. In that no matter how erronious or how many unintend consequences there are, nobody would have the gonads to be against it because of how it would make them look. Then I thought of another parallel. Its a solution looking for a problem.
There are funny little truisms of bad luck in AH that are universal to those who spend most of thier time in fighters. Things like perk planes and puffy ack and disconnects, pilot wounds and final approaches, CV coarse changes and final approaches.
One that comes to mind relevent to this topic is the old head to the long green bar in a heavy fighter to arrive at the targed with a long red bar and no green to be found. It happens so often I expect it to be so. I see solid caps broken just about every login.
As the self proclaimed anti-vulch king, I would not be surprised vulching would be front and center of your AH world view. Your stats clearly indicate that to be the case. Now I will vulch at the drop of a hat if given the opportunity. The key word being opportunity. Its not like running down to the corner store and buying a vulch. Its more like running down to the corner store with only 1 dollar each time, and buying a scratch off lottery ticket. You might walk out with money in your pocket, but odds are you wont.
On most maps I have no trouble finding fights. On most maps there are hot spots where you can count on good fights for hours on end within a couple sector area. Within that couple sector area, the battle ebbs and flows from furball in the middle to one field being capped to the other field being capped. If there was a problem, it wouldnt be that way nearly every time I log in.
Granted, on the same maps there are steamroll areas too. Much of the time, in my experience, the steamroll goes on practically unopposed. For some reason you see that as a problem with the attackers. Its not like they have to overcome things like 5-10 minutes replacement time if they go down. Or limited loiter time with the 2.0 fuel burn rate. Or the 10-15 minute turn around time when going bingo. Or bringing troops from 100 or more miles away because of the small dedicated troop porking squad. Then there is the inconvience of manned ack and VH poping up every 15 minutes. And of course the obligatory death of the first goon that took 20 minutes to get there by the odd il2, la, or hurri that somehow slips out of the cap. Its so easy in every situation for the attacker. Its so unfair. We must take away the little perk to helping support such a uber proposition. We must piss on what enjoyment others get out of the game for various unscrupulous reasons because "I" dont approve of it. "I" pay my $14.95 and "I" have a right to piss on other peoples game play when "I" dont agree with it.
I dont play for rank, or stats (at least not any AH scores directly). I play for fun. And now that I think about it, ya know what? Vulching is fun. Is it challenging? Well that depends....How many friendlies do I have to race to get it first? There are so many answers to breaking cap, if...the defenders have the collective will to do it. I still say you have a solution looking for a problem just because you dont approve of how others play.
-
Vulching is fun.
And somewhat of a Flight sim tradition....:rofl
CAVALRY
-
Originally posted by Murdr
I dont play for rank, or stats (at least not any AH scores directly). I play for fun. And now that I think about it, ya know what? Vulching is fun. Is it challenging? Well that depends....How many friendlies do I have to race to get it first?
1. So continue to vulch under the proposed idea. Its still an efective method. The proposed idea would also creat new challenges. Like learning how to kill an airborne plane lets say.
Originally posted by Murdr
There are so many answers to breaking cap, if...the defenders have the collective will to do it. I still say you have a solution looking for a problem just because you dont approve of how others play.
2.Collectivity is a matter of percentages. More players online = increased collective effort. Its a law of averages. In the case where a particular country out numbers another by say..30 players. The outnumbered country/countries would be more effective in the defensive role with Zazens idea, not having to rely on breaking the law of averages.
regards :)
-
Originally posted by CAV
And somewhat of a Flight sim tradition....:rofl
CAVALRY
This is not the end to vulching, it's an end to being rewarded for vulching...
Zazen
-
Originally posted by Murdr
I dont play for rank, or stats (at least not any AH scores directly). I play for fun. And now that I think about it, ya know what? Vulching is fun. Is it challenging? Well that depends....How many friendlies do I have to race to get it first? There are so many answers to breaking cap, if...the defenders have the collective will to do it. I still say you have a solution looking for a problem just because you dont approve of how others play.
You can still have fun vulching, you just won't get any score, perks or your name in lights for it. But, if you don't care about any of that, it won't really affect you at all, you can still have a happy time vulching.
Zazen
-
Originally posted by Mugzeee
The proposed idea would also creat new challenges. Like learning how to kill an airborne plane lets say.
Did I hear him right? What did he just say to me?
2.Collectivity is a matter of percentages. More players online = increased collective effort. Its a law of averages. In the case where a particular country out numbers another by say..30 players. The outnumbered country/countries would be more effective in the defensive role with Zazens idea, not having to rely on breaking the law of averages.
regards :) [/B]
Take a couple buddies, up at another field, come in high and dispurse the loiters a little, some defenders may manage to get up. Happens all the time. Its not that complex. It doesnt take changing the way things have always been to do it.
-
Originally posted by Mugzeee
2.Collectivity is a matter of percentages. More players online = increased collective effort. Its a law of averages. In the case where a particular country out numbers another by say..30 players. The outnumbered country/countries would be more effective in the defensive role with Zazens idea, not having to rely on breaking the law of averages.
regards :)
That's exactly right Mugz. It would be possible to slow a steamroll even with an overall numeric disadvantage. As it is now, numbers are everything. Once a base is Tight CAP'd the only recourse for the defenders is to try to relieve the be-sieged field from an adjacent one.
Ufortuantely, especially on the HUGE maps, there is almost never enough time to do so before it is captured. Under the current system, even a smaller attacking force can keep a larger, would be defensive force, from getting airborne because it is too easy to kill spawning or taxiing planes, they appear at pre-determined places and are stationary or moving slowly. By not rewarding their destruction you dramatically decrease the number of people willing to waste ammo to shoot them in that compromising position thereby enhancing the chance the defenders can mount a vigorous defense.
Zazen
-
Originally posted by Zazen13
I've thought about that, I made a small list of conceivable gameplay ramifications, direct and indirect:
h) More fights between fields
i) Less fights directly over fields
That's all I have so far, feel free to add to the list.
Zazen
Sorry for quoting myself but I have a small point to make about this particular side-effect. Read between the lines and imagine a map like Trinity, Equinox or Frac. What this really means is less flight times to fights for everyone. No more flying 20 minutes to a fight that's over before you get there because the base is vulched. Instead you'll have a 10 minute flight to a fight that will definately still be there when you arrive. This translates into more action, more often, with less wasted flight time, both to and from the fights for everyone.
Zazen
-
Originally posted by Zazen13
You can still have fun vulching, you just won't get any score, perks or your name in lights for it. But, if you don't care about any of that, it won't really affect you at all, you can still have a happy time vulching.
Zazen
Sure, approach end, departure end of runway, dont matter to me where. Either way they are dead. So what did we accomplish? Zazens pettyness over how others may or may not be rewarded has been addressed. Whohoo, where do i sign the petition?
Originally posted by Zazen13
What is this morbid fascination and pre-occupation with what others will or won't do when, if, how, you want them to.
-
Originally posted by Murdr
Sure, approach end, departure end of runway, dont matter to me where. Either way they are dead. So what did we accomplish? Zazens pettyness over how others may or may not be rewarded has been addressed. Whohoo, where do i sign the petition?
Against one guy you may be able to camp the end of the runway just as easily as the spawn point, but against multiple defenders upping simulataneously you will not be so successful at doing so if they get the chance to get airborne. The point is not what people are doing, the point is to improve the game so it's more fun overall for everyone, more fighting and less milkrunning.
Zazen
-
If I may repeat a point made and lost somewhere up above, (I'm sorry, Zazen, but It's hard to follow the thread with 5+ posts in a row each responding to individual posts one at a time) it appears that your aim is to improve things for the FURBALLERS--both those cranky over getting vulched, and those cranky because a tight cap or dropping the fh's kills the furball. The problem as has been pointed out, is that it's potentially at the expense of the CAPTURE GUYS. No matter HOW you phrase it, it's like you're wanting to take away what THEY find fun because it interferes with your idea.
It's also an important point that the game environment is ALWAYS moving. Even if one field IS capped and captured, the attackers are going to HAVE to move on to the next field eventually, anyway. There's ALWAYS a furball SOMEWHERE waiting to happen. Did the capture guys bust up a furball by capping the field and downing the FHs? So frelling what? Move on to the NEXT field and furball while the mop up work is being done and the capture completed. And the horde of furballers should at LEAST be proud of the fact that the reason a field CAN be capped and FHs dropped (most captures I've been on actually prefer to leave the fh's intact so the base can be launched from right away) is frequently because they were so darned effective at dropping the defenders.
You want to make it harder to capture so that the capture guys have to coordinate and plan their attacks. I realize I'm just a newbie around here, but I've TRIED to organize and coordinate, and with some exceptions all ANYONE wants to do is furball just for the sake of furballing. Put together a mission yesterday, and got maybe 7 guys to up with me, about a THIRD, if that, of what I set the mission to call for. Not surprisingly, while it held together decently for my first mission, it failed. Largely I think because our target wasn't the big furball itself over a field we'd been spending 3 days trying to capture so that's where everyone ELSE wanted to be instead. Rather, we were trying to be smart and swing around to the unmolested base SUPPORTING the meatgrinder, and effectively take our main objective from behind.
While people frown on it, vulchers and cherry pickers provide a valuable service to the capture guys: They keep the enemy out of the air where they can't harrass buffs, jabbos, goons, M3s, LVTs, etc etc etc. Even the "career" guys are useful in that regard. While there are some guys who'll vulch regardless, trying to discourage it is only going to hurt the capture guys if the vulchers go away.
Now, I'm a pretty much a dedicated fighter pilot in here. I don't do well in attack/bombing runs, (the argument could be made I don't do well in air-to-air, either, but that's beside the point) so RARELY carry eggs or rockets. But that doesn't mean I'm just thinking of what's in the air around me. I want to know if we've got real mud-movers coming in, or troops standing by. The status of the town and if it's READY for troops. If the field is de-acked, or capped, or fh's down so we can get those troops in relatively unmolested. If the town needs to be dropped, the cap is nice and tight, and it's green as far as the eye can see, you can bet I'll roll in and play wrecking ball with the Jabos, because when I'm up on a capture mission that's my JOB: Kill the guys in the air, kill the uppers, kill the gvs, kill the town. Furball, vulch, cherrypick, whatever it takes to contribute to the capture per the capabilities of my ride
Maybe that's a bit alien thinking for the furballers, but it's REAL frustrating trying to do my bit, or get guys TOGETHER to do it, when all anyone cares about is the furball.
And you want to make it HARDER for the capture guys?
-
If the airfield is the object of capture then suppression of its defence will from part of the attacking strategm..............
Hence whether stuff is vulched wheels down or wheels just off it will be the same.
One of the objectives of the attack will be to deny defenders the oppurtunity of combat in that area.
To achieve quicker access to combat you must put the fields closer...this raises a host of other gameplay problems...............
The other method is to move the object of capture away from the airfield........... place them between airfields not at them.
There are avariety of options once land grab is no longer due to airfield capture. (Vfield capture, City capture, logistic route denial etc etc)
But just one of the benefits is that two (or even three) airfields can be equidistant from the object of capture (ie the point of attack/defence) This point is between airfields but with apropriate travel time from airfield to combat.
As such mass suppression will be difficult to achieve splitting the attackers forces in to two or even three groups.
Access to combat will be more possible for the defender but timing will be of the essense to avoid capture by the enemy.
Surprise attacks could be more effective but once the element of surprise is removed then defence is more plausable.
Numbers will still count.
-
Originally posted by Saxman
If I may repeat a point made and lost somewhere up above, (I'm sorry, Zazen, but It's hard to follow the thread with 5+ posts in a row each responding to individual posts one at a time) it appears that your aim is to improve things for the FURBALLERS--both those cranky over getting vulched, and those cranky because a tight cap or dropping the fh's kills the furball. The problem as has been pointed out, is that it's potentially at the expense of the CAPTURE GUYS. No matter HOW you phrase it, it's like you're wanting to take away what THEY find fun because it interferes with your idea.
I'm not quite sure how making vulches not count toward score interferes with base capture guys having fun doing what they like to do? They can still capture fields, they can still vulch if need be, they just won't get rewarded for 'pure' vulching. Seems to me if you are just after accumulating fields it really wouldn't make alot of difference other than there might be a little more actual fighting involved, is that a bad thing?
Zazen
-
Originally posted by Tilt
If the airfield is the object of capture then suppression of its defence will from part of the attacking strategm..............
Hence whether stuff is vulched wheels down or wheels just off it will be the same.
Actually it's not the same at all. Wheels down the defender has ZERO chance for success, airborne with some E he has at least some chance of success.
This isn't an end to vulching or base capturing. This would be an end to base defense being an almost total exercise in futility. It would give people who wish to vulch to augment their score, perk account and ego an incentive to be at least a smidgeon sportsmanlike about it.
Zazen
-
how about this idea... DON'T UP A VULCHED BASE... if you do, your either stupid and deserve to be killed, or balsy and deserve to be equally killed....I can swing this argument around and say that if I bust a GV's track or turret they shouldn't be able to land. Or tower out before a bomb hits them.... Best thing you can do at a capped base is to up GV's not planes, heck spawn em in if you have to... If the same guy wants to up over and over again and let me take target practice at him its his stupid fault not mine for shooting at him.... I don't here anyone griping about the guys that spawn camp GV's with tigers and land 80 freakin killz. Or the guy that drives an m8 into an enemy's FH and shoots fighters b4 they can even start rolling, so this argument is useless... Maybe the best scenario would be to ad a 2nd VH to medium and large bases ? I currently think the way it is, is fine. Some maps favor buff pilots more, some maps furballers and gv's, some maps for base takers...... Bottom line is that if your whining about getting vulched, up a gv or up a base back and come in with alt and bust up the attack, don't try and mess up someone elses good time just because you don't like to use common sense...
-
The point I was trying to make, Zazen, is that some people vulch because there's a stats reward for doing it. Removed that reward, and some people won't want to vulch anymore. As annoying as full-time vulchers are (equally annoying, I'd say, as full-time furballers :P ) those guys can actually be useful to base captures.
Anyway, as has been stated repeatedly, there's ALREADY a solution to being vulched built right into the game: Up somewhere else and come in high. There's no need to manufacture one.
-
Originally posted by Iceman24
how about this idea... DON'T UP A VULCHED BASE... if you do, your either stupid and deserve to be killed, or balsy and deserve to be equally killed....I can swing this argument around and say that if I bust a GV's track or turret they shouldn't be able to land. Or tower out before a bomb hits them.... Best thing you can do at a capped base is to up GV's not planes, heck spawn em in if you have to... If the same guy wants to up over and over again and let me take target practice at him its his stupid fault not mine for shooting at him.... I don't here anyone griping about the guys that spawn camp GV's with tigers and land 80 freakin killz. Or the guy that drives an m8 into an enemy's FH and shoots fighters b4 they can even start rolling, so this argument is useless... Maybe the best scenario would be to ad a 2nd VH to medium and large bases ? I currently think the way it is, is fine. Some maps favor buff pilots more, some maps furballers and gv's, some maps for base takers...... Bottom line is that if your whining about getting vulched, up a gv or up a base back and come in with alt and bust up the attack, don't try and mess up someone elses good time just because you don't like to use common sense...
Again, why would not getting points, perks or recognition for vulching interfere with your fun? Is vulching only fun for you strictly BECAUSE you get score, perks and recognition?
We agree that under the current system, attempting to directly defend a field under attack with fighters is tantamount to insanity. That is the whole point here, gameplay would improve if it were not tantamount to insanity but instead just really, really danagerous.
Zazen
-
Originally posted by Saxman
The point I was trying to make, Zazen, is that some people vulch because there's a stats reward for doing it. Removed that reward, and some people won't want to vulch anymore. As annoying as full-time vulchers are (equally annoying, I'd say, as full-time furballers :P ) those guys can actually be useful to base captures.
Anyway, as has been stated repeatedly, there's ALREADY a solution to being vulched built right into the game: Up somewhere else and come in high. There's no need to manufacture one.
They may not 'pure' vulch anymore that is true. What they will do instead is establish medium CAP and engage fighters after they've become airborne. In air combat terms we call that a fight. The defenders are still at a severe disadvantage, but they are at least given the opportunity to directly fight for their base. The vulchers will just have to have a bit more skill to kill a plane that is airborne rather than stationary on the take-off spot or taxiing slowly down the runway. I don't really see how that would directly interfere with base capturers enjoying themselves, if anything I would think that would make their task far more interesting and alot less akin to playing offline.
While upping somewhere else and coming in high sounds good in theory, it doesn't work very well in reality. The problem is it takes too long and it's almost impossible to get sufficient numbers on location simultaneously to disrupt the capture, more often than not captures are so easy they are effected before any significant help can arrive from a proximate field. This is especially true on HUGE maps where the typical distance between fields is greatest and for fields under CV attack where time to target for the attackers is much shorter than for defenders from an adjacent field.
Zazen
-
I can sum up this thread.....TAKE OFF FROM A DIFFERNET FIELD U BUNCH OF LAZY SLACKERS!!!If u dont like gettin vulched BOO HOO, take off from another field stupids.
-
Originally posted by Lan784
I can sum up this thread.....TAKE OFF FROM A DIFFERNET FIELD U BUNCH OF LAZY SLACKERS!!!If u dont like gettin vulched BOO HOO, take off from another field stupids.
We do that now, it doesn't really work, see the above ^^^ post for the reasons why.
Zazen
-
Captures easy my oscar.
Yeah, IF you have the right number of guys, IF you have the right guys in the first place, IF those guys are all committed to the capture, IF those guys can coordinate properly, IF they can keep the defenders down, then yeah, MAYBE then you can call it easy. The successful captures I've been in on have more or less had the same thing in common: The enemy doesn't have anything in the air.
That's how a base capture works: NEUTRALIZE ENEMY AIR DEFENSES. As in, vulch, cherry pick, kill the FHs. Don't let anything up because it's going to fubar the whole thing (ONE fighter in the air that breaks through cap to the troops can screw the pooch) A base capture isn't SUPPOSED to be a fair, even furball with both sides allowing each other to up and join in the fight. It's dirty, it's brutal.
There's nothing wrong with this system. If the attackers can coordinate their assault so well that they can set up an air-tight cap, then the DEFENDERS can coordinate their counter-attack from another field. NO ONE here has said the Defenders had to lone wolf their way over from a satellite field. That's THEIR choice.
So maybe instead of trying to change the dynamic for attackers you should look at changing the defenders'' approach:
1) DON'T UP FROM A CAPPED FIELD IF YOU DON'T WANT TO BE VULCHED. JEEBUS! How many times has this been said already?
2) Don't go in all gung-ho Lone Ranger style thinking you're gonna break the cap by yourself. Do what you need to do to organize the defense. Make a mission if you have to. Guess what, if you coordinate the counter-attack you won't have the meaningly slow trickle of guys into the fight.
-
Originally posted by Zazen13
We do that now, it doesn't really work, see the above ^^^ post for the reasons why.
Zazen
Why not??? You can't fly 10 miles??? do they teleport to the base??? Trust me its because....YOUR LAZY!!
-
Originally posted by Murdr
Did I hear him right? What did he just say to me?.
Ahhh dang it Murdr. My reply is intended to benefit the whole of the lot. (I know *you* are an accomplished Flight Sim Fighter Pilot) :cool: But others can benefit from such a feature in that they will improve their deflection shooting and or Out Of Plane maneuvering to set up a POM pursuit. I think it would be sort of a *Built IN* teaching tool. The noobs would be learning valuable tactics, timing and control without even signing up for a special class.
Originally posted by Lan784
Why not??? You can't fly 10 miles??? do they teleport to the base??? Trust me its because....YOUR LAZY!!
10 miles!!! where...what map? :) Sorry bro..most bases are bout 20 to even 25 miles apart.
Not that it matters. I see this idea as a good tool for improving skill. That is the soul purpose for my support. I do not see this as a whine of the Vulched thread. I think zaz has made it clear if we are willing to read with an open mind. Regards
-
Well if we are going to add gameplay improvements why stop at just this one? Look at all the players that up a plane... fly into a fight, get a kill or two, die, re-up again and do this over and over never trying to land their kills. Maybe we can do some improvements there too. Like you only get points for kills landed. It will not stop them from playing the way they like... they just no longer get points for doing it.
And the capture players may like a few gameplay improvements too....
Not to long ago, if you the dropped the fuel tanks at a base, planes was only able to takeoff with 25% fuel. Maybe it is time for that rule to come back.
And how many times have you looked down at a base and seen planes taking off on runways that was just full of bomb craters? And think, how can that happen?
A great gameplay improvement for the capture players would be any plane moving to fast into a crater would damage the land gear and crash the plane. This would be a great improvement for the buff drivers. Now to stop planes from upping they no longer have to kill the FH/BH's... They can bomb the runways or any place on the or around the base, to stop A/C from upping.
If we are doing gameplay improvements, lets do them for all the player types, not just a few.
CAVALRY
-
Originally posted by CAV
Well if we are going to add gameplay improvements why stop at just this one? Look at all the players that up a plane... fly into a fight, get a kill or two, die, re-up again and do this over and over never trying to land their kills. Maybe we can do some improvements there too. Like you only get points for kills landed. It will not stop them from playing the way they like... they just no longer get points for doing it.
And the capture players may like a few gameplay improvements too....
Not to long ago, if you the dropped the fuel tanks at a base, planes was only able to takeoff with 25% fuel. Maybe it is time for that rule to come back.
And how many times have you looked down at a base and seen planes taking off on runways that was just full of bomb craters? And think, how can that happen?
A great gameplay improvement for the capture players would be any plane moving to fast into a crater would damage the land gear and crash the plane. This would be a great improvement for the buff drivers. Now to stop planes from upping they no longer have to kill the FH/BH's... They can bomb the runways or any place on the or around the base, to stop A/C from upping.
If we are doing gameplay improvements, lets do them for all the player types, not just a few.
CAVALRY
Nothing wrong with thinking of gameplay enhancements. To think the game is ever going to come at a stand still as far as Game play implications, design or features is plain crazy.
Post you ideas in a new thread and see how it goes.
I think zazens idea would also be a Game play balancing devise.
HT has implemented several balancing devises in the past. And when a work around is discovered or the devise doesn’t completely attain the desired effect, then new ones are thought of and or suggested. Some good...some bad...some just plain off the wall. Zazen has decided to present his in a gentlemanly fashion. well thought out and well presented.
I admire his ability to keep this as a discussion and not a place of Flaming or bashing. Thanks to all for keeping this "Discussion" on the up and up. ! :)
-
We already magically appear at the beginning of the runway without need to taxi from any holding point...............
Airfield attacks were common both during BoB and throughout the GPW but not one that I have ever heard of were with the objective of capturing an airfield whilst in use.
Aircraft taking off were commonly slaughtered or one got off whilst two others didnt make it.
OK its a game and RL may not be always appropriate..........however every step we move away from the history devalues it in some way IMO.
by tacking on un realistic game play fixs we move further and further away from what this could be...........
Yet this problem (and several others) could be solved by moving closer to the historic actuality...............airfi elds (IMO) should not be subject to direct capture....they should be available or not based upon the progress of the local land grab. As such they can be placed closer to the point of combat without being the point of combat. Further given this their ground based defences can be increased............... loads of stuff to the benefit of furballers and land grabers alike can come into play whilst we move further away from airquake and toward combat sim.
-
There's some interesting counter-proposals here. Keep in mind the point isn't to necessarily, specifically punish those who prefer to, for whatever reason, vulch planes on the ground as opposed to fight them in the air. The point of this is to improve gameplay in a way that doesn't punish anything, but instead removes the reward for an activity that is an impediment to good gameplay. Some of the counter-proposals suggested aren't bad, but they would require an almost complete re-write of HUGE portions of the game code, therefore making their implimentation highly impractical and unlikely. Simply changing whether or not kills register on planes on the ground, however, would not likely require much coding at all. Keep it coming guys, good stuff here...
Zazen
-
Tilt. Didnt you post a thread on a version of this idea a while back? Someone did i think. Anyway, i remember thinking that it too, was a neat idea.
-
Original Post
You know what would improve gameplay and fights more than anything?!?
Make it so killing planes on the ground do not count toward score (no perks, no kill awarded messages, no points). Seems like it would be very easy to do, there's already code to prevent certain types of kills from counting during certain types of missions. Just something like:
IF EnemyPlaneAlt=0 THEN KillCount=0 <----- BS , What's next 5000 Foot air launches ? ....
-
Original Post
You know what would improve gameplay and fights more than anything?!?
Make it so killing planes on the ground do not count toward score (no perks, no kill awarded messages, no points). Seems like it would be very easy to do, there's already code to prevent certain types of kills from counting during certain types of missions. Just something like:
IF EnemyPlaneAlt=0 THEN KillCount=0 <----- BS , What's next 5000 Foot air launches ? ....
-
Originally posted by CHECKERS
IF EnemyPlaneAlt=0 THEN KillCount=0 <----- BS , What's next 5000 Foot air launches ? ....
How'd we go from allowing planes to get their wheels up to a 5k insta-spawn? That's not really the same concept at all.
Zazen