Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: hitech on July 07, 2006, 11:02:27 AM
-
At the con we were discussing changing building down times based on how long you lived after destroying a target.
After doing some detailed thinking about it, relized the down time is problematic when mutliple people have hit a targe. But was wondering what people thought of the following.
Based on how long you lived after hiting a target, currently im thinking around 2 minutes. If you die a portion of your damage is removed.
As an example 2 people drop bombs on a hangar. 1 does 2k damage, the last does 1k damage and destroys the hangar.
The 2nd player dies after 1 min. The system would remove 1min/2min i.e. 50% of the damgage aplied to the hangar. The hangar would then reserect with 2.5k damage left on it.
Thoughts?
HiTech
-
If this is looked at from the point of making pork runs less attractive, then I think this has alot of merit.
The other side of that is a good bomber who runs escorted, fights his way into a well defended base, successfully get's his bombs off and gets shot down. What would otherwise be a rewarding and successful self sacrifice is penalized.
Tough call here HT, good idea overall. Can the reduction be applied to augering and crashes, and possibly removed for simply being killed in flight?
-
I am hoping you are requiring totally honest opinions?
I hate the idea.
It takes AH further from simulation, closer to game.
-
so the sheep go and rebuild/ take away what you have destroyed because you die ...
this may be good in case of the 500 ft kamakazi buffs ... but why penelize the fighters ?
I myself dont like it ...
but then it will become scripture just to irritate m:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by hitech
The 2nd player dies after 1 min. The system would remove 1min/2min i.e. 50% of the damgage aplied to the hangar. The hangar would then reserect with 2.5k damage left on it.
this part I am not positive I follow...
you saying the building would pop back up, but not at full strength when person #2 dies?
would there be a "time-out" to this? say player 2 flies for 13 minutes after the hangar is destroyed... would that be past the point of effecting the downtime?
lastly a side effect is it may cause is "hunting" the guy who killed the hangar. say 20 players are at a base 10 each side... a P38 comes through and nails the last FH. all the enemies saw who did it and may "gang up" to get the guy in the 38 so the FH comes back up quicker. it would be at their own risk of course ignoring the other cons, but may make the person attacking treated more like someone in a perk plane.
just a thought.
-
So if I dove in - released bombs, and 3 seconds later - i got killed by manned ack..my bomb would cause minimal damge? I don't really like that idea. I have to agree on the fact that if your mission stated to hit a hanger and you accomplished that, then what happens after point should have no effect on the bombs.
I think if there was a way to maybe just apply it to bombers / formations...where if they kill themselves by bomb blast radius - there should be no damage applied to target. That would at least get the bombers from dropping at tree top level.
BUT - if you did add that ".fuse" command to delay the bombs fuse- then tree top bombing could be fun :)
-
So, if I climb to 30k in b17's and drop 1 hanger by myself, and then I go home and land and it takes me 30min to land. Then hanger will be down for 2 min? or 15min? or 30min?
I really like the idea of you thinking about chaning down times.
Will this also affect HQ building? Town buildings? Will Strats still play a factor in down times?
1 bad thing about this, is that people will no longer be able to use a clock for hangers to predict how long they have until it comes back. I don't really think this would cause a problem, it's just that people will have to adapt to the change.
-
"...closer to game."
As if all the players diving in heavy-bombers and doing the "pork'n'auger" stunt haven't?
To reply to HiTechs? I'm all for trying it. Anything that removes any reward for the "ends justify the means" clowns is worthy of testing. Although it would royally suck for those who end up dying right after performing a "normal" attack (normal in contrast to those who deliberately "pancake in" after release). If they were to be shot down by another player or anti-aircraft guns afterr making thier run IMO they shouldn't be penalized.
-
If you live more than 2 mins, nothing would change from the way it works now.
-
I think the key is if you CRASH within that 2 minute period you could penalize them.
Being killed by ack, or another fiter following you in on a pork run shouldnt affect the bomb damage.
Just a thought.
-
Originally posted by TinmanX
It takes AH further from simulation, closer to game.
I share your opinion in a way. It´s really a "gamey" solution, and so I have some problems with it.
But on the other hand it´s perhaps a possible solution for another "gamey" problem: The "Bomb´N´Bailers" - Up some Lancs, bomb hangers, bail out, repeat. I think you can´t be really further away from simulation than that :rolleyes:
-
I have no problem with it and think it would help contolling some of the suicide lawn dart hangar bangars! Would it work for cv's? hee hee :D
-
HT I think it would be a source of endless whining, although the idea has merit. How about a slight alteration to it? Have the hangar generate smoke for the two minutes and if the attackers (in your scenario) survive have the hangar explode and be destroyed? Kinda simulate a fire with the smoke, etc.
Cheers,
asw
-
I.E.
3 fighters roll in and hit a VH, all w/ 1k eggs. They destroy the hanger and then hit the field ack. The one who got the final hit on the VH dies from the 'Sheep Sniper' in the water tower. What then?
Does it count as time off of the 'down time'?
Or does it do nothing?
If it counts towards the down time, sucky for the guys who knock it down. You have a set of Buffs roll in at 15k, drop 2 fighter hangers and then get jumped by 4 nme planes and get gang-raped and dies in 3 seconds. So, do the hangers just jump right back up? Maybe after the hangers are down the time stays just how it is right now. If the hanger is not down yet, maybe then take off the Hit-Damage %. But once it goes down, don't take off unless base is resupplied or when when they are ready to pop (how it is set up now).
A big issue is the porking, maybe have it more for the ords, troops, radar and such. It sucks when an La7 rolls in and hitss all the troops, ordnance and then goes for the radar and you finally pop him with a field gun. I say apply it towards the strat targets.
-
Originally posted by Balsy
I think the key is if you CRASH within that 2 minute period you could penalize them.
Being killed by ack, or another fiter following you in on a pork run shouldnt affect the bomb damage.
Just a thought.
It souldn't matter as most who find themselves in this situation do not care whether they get killed right after their bombs are dropped. You see it all the time, some guy races through the entire defense to just get that hangar down, if he gets killed and hangar doesnt go down, he simply rinses and repeats until he gets hangar down.
-
Alright, ok, I look at it from the flip side as this whole hanger thing is revisited.
If a guy takes a 110 or a B-17 to kill the building, is the building going to stay dead until he lands or something before starting the rebuild count down?
Both scenarios have some good points and some bad points but level bombers don't have "30k lazer guided" bombs anymore yet the down time for hangers is still 15 minutes. I'm thinking in terms of a carrot to go with the stick.
Wow, this got fast replys.
-
I hate the idea.
Building damage should have nothing to do with pilot life/death.
-
How about making it so level bombers can no longer dive bomb by putting an angle limiter?
ack-ack
-
Originally posted by detch01
HT I think it would be a source of endless whining, although the idea has merit. How about a slight alteration to it? Have the hangar generate smoke for the two minutes and if the attackers (in your scenario) survive have the hangar explode and be destroyed? Kinda simulate a fire with the smoke, etc.
Cheers,
asw
now thats kind of a neat idea... hangar starts smoking, it smokes for 2 minutes, after that it explodes. maybe you can have it so there is a blast radius to the hangar too... anyone too close (say 100 feet or something) dies (like a GV hiding next to it or in it)
that way the smoke shows to attackers the hangar will die for certian, and the enemies know their hangar is about to go down.
if the guy who did the fatal damage dies before the 2 minutes the smoke stops.
the only concern i could see is there have been times where something "should" be smoking on my FE but i don't see the smoke. possible graphic glitch on my PC driver related, or in game connection related, who knows... but it was something that used to happe when i flew a few months ago.
all these guys talking about the "not real death" or whatever by ACK... attacking ground targets with anti-aircraft was almost suicide in WWII. we play a game and have it really easy from what i have read and seen in gun footage. the "sheep sniper" of hundreds of guns shooting at you from the ground was quite a legitmate threat in real life.
-
Bad idea. It might prevent the dweebs from doing what they do, but it would also penalize a lot of legit folks for being shot down over the target.
-
why not have it once it is dead it dont come up unless resupplied,if the base is then captureed the ones who capture it have to resupply it to bring it back up.
that way they still have to work togeather and would stop some of the porking everyone moans about.
as for the idea at the top i dont like it
-
How about just allowing jeeps to repair buildings?
-
Originally posted by detch01
HT I think it would be a source of endless whining, although the idea has merit. How about a slight alteration to it? Have the hangar generate smoke for the two minutes and if the attackers (in your scenario) survive have the hangar explode and be destroyed? Kinda simulate a fire with the smoke, etc.
There is one problem with this - the landgrabbers that like to take bases.
If there is a cap, goon comes in, VH pops up, planes take it down... GV's will be able to up and break the cap in those 2 mins, causing mass high pitched whining and sending the worlds dog population into pandemonium.
-
If this idea is applied to field ack then almost no one will be willing to strafe it.
-
If used strictly for the dive bombing buffs and the pork and augerer's I'd be for it.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
...but it would also penalize a lot of legit folks for being shot down over the target.
if you are shot so quickly over target wouldnt you say your SA was not good enough ad all you were doing was "suicide porking" no care for the consequences?
-
If you prang into the ground, the target, get killed by your own bomb blast, or bail out in the 2 min time frame from ord release - no damage apllied to the object - ESPECIALLY if it's a fairly undamaged craft your in.
I could live with that, but if I'd taken hits, or was seriously damaged and still got bombs off and then pranged in...I'd still like the damage apllied.
-
I realize there is a problem, but truthfully, this has too much of a "powerup balloon" or Mario Bros feel to it. I`d hate to see the game go in that direction.
-
Originally posted by Ack-Ack
How about making it so level bombers can no longer dive bomb by putting an angle limiter?
ack-ack
Abso-friggin-lutely!!!:aok
-
Although Im still somewhat new. Im going throw my 2 cents in.
I personally like the Idea, and hate it at the same time. Im not going to say anything that really hasn't been said before. Although It really wouldnt be Fair to those buff pilots who spend many minutes climbing up to at least 10k feet, Lining them selves up to make a drop. And making that crucial decision of Drop my Bombs or Defend myself against the two enemy fighters coming at me.
So they end up dropping the bombs make a great run only to have been shot down right right away or even soon after and make all that time spent in the air Not worth a single thing??
I dont mind dieing not in the least. I dont mind cutting infront of a enemy who I know will most likely defeat me just so a fellow Bish may have that chance to fullfill his mission or even make his way back to base. but to spend all that time on a strategic bombing run and make a successful attack but not then all of a sudden I find out it was all for nothing because I was shot down within seconds... Minutes of my bombs dropping?? I really dont like that side of it.
If there was a way... Which I doubt there is to limit it crashes.... or even somehow making it so that it just takes a little more punch to knock down the hangers and or any other strat on base, So that the main concern of the comunity in general is taken care of. Which tend to be those who either Dive bomb (Limit on Bomber Alt drops. Even if it is as low as 1000 feet for Formation bombers) or a single attack plane doesnt manage to take out those strats...
Or even better..... Do what you thought of at the con. (listened to the POD CAST) and give more Feild Ack to the Bases. Make it so those who actually do try to roll through a base and knock out the strats actually have to work for it.
My apolligies if this all sounded like a repeat, which I know it is. But that is just my thought on idea. How ever it does work out. People will be upset and people will be happy.
-
Hitech...I REALLY like that you are letting the community have their say on this topic! I'm impressed, and I hope our opinions/advice will also be used with future ideas...That said, I dont think I like this idea...I think its a major change of gameplay for an issue that really isnt that big of a deal...Yea the porking and dive bombing buffs are a pain in the arse, but right now with everything going on in the game, is it necessary to spend the man hours on a less than perfect solution? The only thing I think I could support would be using this concept strictly for ammo/troop/fuel bunkers ect...Otherwise I really dont think i'd be into it....
Furthermore, I commented about is it really worth it to spend the time on this? To be honest with you, CT is already late...I think adding this feature would do nothing but push CT or more important developements/updates back even further....To be honest i'd like to see your crew working souly on CT until the release, and then afterwards focusing on new aircraft, and even more important....new maps! =)
Like I said, im very impressed you have come to the community with this proposal, and I hope to see this again in the future
cav
ps- Shouldnt this thread have been put in the Wishlist??? =)
-
Originally posted by hitech
The 2nd player dies after 1 min. The system would remove 1min/2min i.e. 50% of the damgage aplied to the hangar. The hangar would then reserect with 2.5k damage left on it.
Thoughts?
HiTech
1 Min seems a bit long, maybe 15 seconds..
or have this a variable that can be changed for the map
-
So how bout this scenario....
If your in a tiger and here comes "that guy" rolling over the hill, 100 feet off the ground in lancs. You start dogfighting with the lancs in your tiger, juke left / right..but he get his bombs off...boom - you die, back in tower... he augers in to the trees.
Do you get sucked back into your tiger from the tower? :)
-
How about making bomber formation very spread out (maybe 1K), until 5K-10K alt or so, then AI bombers would tighten the formation like it is now. This could reduce the effect of those that use level bombers to make low level bombin runs.
-
Originally posted by Waffle BAS
So how bout this scenario....
If your in a tiger and here comes "that guy" rolling over the hill, 100 feet off the ground in lancs. You start dogfighting with the lancs in your tiger, juke left / right..but he get his bombs off...boom - you die, back in tower... he augers in to the trees.
Do you get sucked back into your tiger from the tower? :)
probably be easier to give the perk points back, in that situation
-
Originally posted by Furball
There is one problem with this - the landgrabbers that like to take bases.
If there is a cap, goon comes in, VH pops up, planes take it down... GV's will be able to up and break the cap in those 2 mins, causing mass high pitched whining and sending the worlds dog population into pandemonium.
True to a point but as a sometimes "landgrabber" myself, I think in some respects it is too easy to shut down a fields defenses as the game stands right now. Taking a field should require teamwork and a little planning and coordination. In that vein I'd like to see field AAA upped in effectiveness too.
asw
-
I'm for it. To clarify:
It applies to Hangars, Ammo, Troops, Fuel, Radar.
It does not apply to base ack.
On the smoke idea:
Having a hangar pop up at a capped field but giving it two minutes of smoke time to launch planes/GVs would be a problem.
However I DO like the idea of smoking hangars to indicate damage. Much like a smoking CV let's you know it's taken hits.
Maybe once a hangar is at 50% damage it starts to smoke, at 100% it blows up? This would be a good visual indicator to both the Defenders and Attackers of how badly the base is damaged.
-
to stop the legit guy from being robbed from his bomb run. how about
if u die fromt enemy fire(actually being shot when u die, not 1 ping 20 mins ago) then you damage is still applied normal. but if u drop and auger/bail
without being currently shot the damage is taken off.
or
if you die before the 2 min period, half you damage is applied.
you still do damage but only half if u dont make it out.
-
we really do need more ack or leath/accuracy turned up. as it is right now,field AA is nothing to fear.. but is should be.
routinely see single planes deack an entire field just to setup a vulch.
a sinlge fighter should not be able to deack a field period.
-
Originally posted by detch01
HT I think it would be a source of endless whining, although the idea has merit. How about a slight alteration to it? Have the hangar generate smoke for the two minutes and if the attackers (in your scenario) survive have the hangar explode and be destroyed? Kinda simulate a fire with the smoke, etc.
Cheers,
asw
This I like with my own added twist.
1) Player A drops 2k of bombs on a FH and lives for the next 5+ minutes.
2) Player B drops 1k of bombs on same FH, enough to destroy it with the present settings.
2A)Change this to the first step of the FH's destruction. Have small initial explosions and start a 'detonate clock'.
3A) If Player B dies in the alloted time the 'detonate clock' is reset and the FH only has 2K of damage from Player A. Think of it as damage control putting out the fires and containing any damage.
3B) If Player B lives for the alloted time, the 'detonate clock' gets to 0 and the FH actually blows up. You have a secondary explosion and KaBOOM, no more hanger. I just realized the 'alloted time' and the 'detonate clock' are in fact the same time :)
3C) Player C comes along sees the initial explosions of the FH and puts his 1K of bombs on the same FH. The 'detonate clock' goes to 0 and you get the secondary explosion that destroys the FH.
3D) An alternative would be have a 'secondary 'detonate clock' or make it so both Player B and Cs 'alloted time' now control the 'detonate clock.'
Clear as mud right?
-
Originally posted by whels
to stop the legit guy from being robbed from his bomb run. how about
if u die fromt enemy fire(actually being shot when u die, not 1 ping 20 mins ago) then you damage is still applied normal. but if u drop and auger/bail
without being currently shot the damage is taken off.
Agreed -
If you take hits from either the base ack, GV's, or aircraft the 2 min time limit should not apply.
Don't think it worth calculating if the hit was catastrophic or not.
The 2 min time limit should only apply to the dive in, drop eggs, and auger guys.
Difficult though, can forsee the pork/auger guy maybe taking a few hits if base ack is up.
Don't think there is a proper solution without making things arcadish.
Fuzeman - One flaw:
If I fly in with Lancs at 20k and salvo 2 a FH (6k of eggs) there is no clock, when they hit thats enough to kill it. Lets say within 2 mins I get killed by capping fighters, my long buff run was for ZERO.
On a plus side - I'd love a .fuze command, drop eggs, 5 mins later they detonate :) .
-
My vote (do I get a vote?) is not to implement this suggestion. If I drop a bomb on a building and it is destroyed, what possible connection is there whether I get shot down 2 minutes or 2 hours later? The bombs still destroyed the building.
I much prefer the way it is now. Buildings go down a set amount of time which can be improved upon by re-supply.
And that's all I have to say about that.
-
I like Ack-Ack's idea. Force the buffs to drop from level alt (drop from bombsight only, angle limiter, etc).
-
Originally posted by Saxman
I like Ack-Ack's idea. Force the buffs to drop from level alt (drop from bombsight only, angle limiter, etc).
I believe Auto-Level is automatically engaged for you once you go into the bombsite. Make it so that you can't drop bombs unless you are in the bombsite.
Crap, I don't mean to hijack this thread.
-
Originally posted by badhorse
I much prefer the way it is now. Buildings go down a set amount of time which can be improved upon by re-supply.
And that's all I have to say about that.
Ordinance/Troops down-time is cut down by resupply, hangar down-time is currently set to a standard duration. Resupply has no effect.
-
I dont like it that much keep it the way it is. My .02
-
Originally posted by Kermit de frog
I believe Auto-Level is automatically engaged for you once you go into the bombsite. Make it so that you can't drop bombs unless you are in the bombsite.
Crap, I don't mean to hijack this thread.
Ju 88 exception?
Bronk
-
I dont like the Idea at all
but i do like the idea about Bombers having to be in bombsight
to drop
cept A-20's, Ju88s and TBM's etc
-
Originally posted by MOSQ
On the smoke idea:
Having a hangar pop up at a capped field but giving it two minutes of smoke time to launch planes/GVs would be a problem.
Agreed, but only for the time it takes for the change in game play to become the norm. I think fields should be tougher to take - we'll get better & longer fights out of it, and it will reward those who take the time to plan and coordinate a good field capture mission.
Cheers,
asw
-
Originally posted by Cooley
I dont like the Idea at all
but i do like the idea about Bombers having to be in bombsight
to drop
cept A-20's, Ju88s and TBM's etc
Exactly Cooley!
Bronk, yes, you are right too.
-
My initial response was... "Hmm... er.. Naaaahh"
After reading some responses and mulling over the cause/effect of this enhancement, I think I'm swinging towards the 'yeah' side.
Here's my $.02:
I understand the attempt to dissuade those who intentionally dive their craft while releasing ord into a target then cratering to tower and reupping within seconds to deliver more ord. This behaviour should be discouraged.
As is the case with low flying bombers used to drop ord before the blast takes out their own craft. This, too, should be discouraged. ( Though my favorite pasttime is attacking said craft with the 190-A8 boom-stick platform O' doom. )
And so is the case with those who conduct level bombing and bail out of their craft after having dropped ord., for the sole purpose, supposedly, of gathering up the next load of ord and returning to the target area as quickly as possible. Again, this, too, should be discouraged.
Unfortunately, the level bomber who has every intention to return to base intact may become mauled shortly after delivering their ordnance and lose the credit that they had earned. Being, primarily, one of these types, it hits a bit close to home, however, if my bombers are destroyed within 2 minutes of my ord detonation, then I have failed in taking the necessary precautions either by target selection or volume/effectiveness of escort fighters.
If I take my bombers into a heavily contested area without proper escort and a herd of 190s/110s pixellates my buttocks after I drop, well.. I deserve it. It's a risk that will have to be considered when planning missions. Not unlike trying to sneak a base that is the current staging base for the front line. D'oh!
Seems to me that this change would enhance the need for good teamwork and seriously elevate the importance of good fighter escorts, as well as the defensive CAP forces for different bases.
ALSO.. this allows roving 262 defenders to destroy troop-porking LA7s soon enough to prevent 3 people from thwarting the efforts of 50.
Sorry.. couldn't resist that last one.
:aok
-
you dive in with a heavy fighter and drop on the last hanger, which proceeds to smoke. You extend and see your squaddie below you being chased by a con, and he asks for help.. You reply on vox, " err sorry there buddy pal, i just dropped the last fh, your going to have to wait another minute and fifteen seconds."
I like the increased ack, and ack accuracy idea better, as well as the level bombers being enforced with a pitch limiter or something.
-
I'm with Ack Ack, Cooley & Bronk on this one.
-
Seems just a little too gamey for me, how about it affects your perk points depending on how long you live after. Im no perk potato but it seems a little less radical/gamey to just set it so you lose a certain amount if you die to fast, and gain points if you live past the 2 minutes.
-
I would to add.
Shrink time to 30 seconds. If the plane has to have significant performance altering damage for this not to apply.
IE flap shot off apply. Tail shot off doesn't apply.
If attacking AC bails/augers within that time no ords for 10 min regardless of base.
Give em a real reason to try and survive an attack.
Think of it as your commanding officer thinks you have misused resources.
Bronk
-
If it will apply to the porking fighters that zoom in on a field and take out troops and ordnance on suicide missions, then yes, do it. It shouldn't just apply to buildings, but to everything, radar, troops, ordnance, and fuel, as well as hangars and such.
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
If it will apply to the porking fighters that zoom in on a field and take out troops and ordnance on suicide missions, then yes, do it. It shouldn't just apply to buildings, but to everything, radar, troops, ordnance, and fuel, as well as hangars and such.
I agree, just dont know if this is possible.
-
I dont like the idea.It would bring a "gamey aspect" to something I want as much realism as possible.
I do believe the hardening of barracks and ammo bunkers should be considered so that simple single passes from fighters cannot destroy them.
-
Of course, another option is to simply raise the hardness.
We're setting hangers to 8,000 pounds in Operation Downfall. No casual porkage here, if you want that hanger down, you better mean it :)
-
OK, sorry HT the more I think about the idea he more I dislike it. As has been said, how long a person lives should have no effect on how much damage his drop does.
How about -
Each field has an ammo bunker and barracks in close proximity -
So
a) Add extra manned ack to each field in their vicinity.
b) Give the manned acks proximity fuses like the cruiser/cv 5".
c) Make the structures resuppable - each load reduces downtime by 3 mins.
Sorry ROC - 8k for a FH is ridiculous, even the current 3.5k is pushing it.
-
I think its important to keep the goal strictly in mind -- it sounds like that
goal is to reduce suicide attacks without trashing everything else.
Hangars that pop up and down like Jack-in-the-Boxes would get frustrating. I don't think that idea would be much fun.
The smoke idea got me thinking, but the excellent objections raised show it to be impractical. Hangar needs to be either up or down, or it'll encourage now-or-never rushes.
Requiring drops from the bombsight would not help at all. It's too easy to set salvo for 20, nose down to 60 degrees -- and either macro or manually hit F6-fire2 in less than a second. Especially with the new, slower autotrim there'd be NO effect on whatever "accuracy" the pork and auger crowd now enjoys.
An assigned maximum drop angle has been extensively discussed before (This thread exhaustively reviews data including pics and original drop angle tables (http://flyaceshigh.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=168118) ) and rejected by HiTech as "arbitrary" (HiTech's response is right here (http://flyaceshigh.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=1962513&highlight=i+disagree+simaril#post1962513) ). One might suggest that limiting drop angles is no more arbitrary than hangar destruction written in vanishing ink, BUT HTC has always put a premium on accuracy in flight physics, and adjusted the capture mechanisms freely for gameplay's sake. I think thats the right way to do it, and I wouldnt compromise for this situation.
How about merging a couple ideas together:
After killing damage to a hangar (or carrier?), build in a 20 second lag before actually dropping the hangar. Twenty secs is plenty of time to discourage suicidal behavior, but it isnt long enough to seriously impede the rest of us.
The idea keeps it simple -- you HAVE to stay alilve for the damage to count, period.
You cant really say its gamey, because in real life pilots wanted to live the entire way home!!
20 secs isnt long enough to get in the way of action's flow, and if you try to up from the hangar in the post-explosion lag you risk getting popped with a death when the blast radius is applied. So, its a self regulating, "whaddya expect when you up in a crater?" solution.
-
Originally posted by hitech
At the con we were discussing changing building down times based on how long you lived after destroying a target.
After doing some detailed thinking about it, relized the down time is problematic when mutliple people have hit a targe. But was wondering what people thought of the following.
Based on how long you lived after hiting a target, currently im thinking around 2 minutes. If you die a portion of your damage is removed.
As an example 2 people drop bombs on a hangar. 1 does 2k damage, the last does 1k damage and destroys the hangar.
The 2nd player dies after 1 min. The system would remove 1min/2min i.e. 50% of the damgage aplied to the hangar. The hangar would then reserect with 2.5k damage left on it.
Thoughts?
HiTech
So if someone dives on a cv and sinks it, then dies 30 sec later... the cv will re-appear ?
I think the chaos of hangers / buildings / boats popping up and down would be a riot.
An entirely new score matrix that factors in a negative "Kamikaze score" along with fighter, bomber etc. Make sure not landing, or being KIA, hurts a little bit in the score / rank dept. Lets see how often the score hookers decide to Kamikaze stuff then, eh?
Maybe allow 5 freebies a month... just because trees happen, any after 5 "cha ching"
I'm sure whatever you decide HT, some folks will cry like spanked newborns... but please try something.
-
I like the angle limiter idea myself... Just make it so if the buff's pitch up or down more than 5-10 degrees then they can't release the bombs, think about a bomb bay on a B24 for a second, if your pitched down at a 45-60 degree angle the bomb will not fall straight down and out through the bay doors like they would if you were level, the bomb would drop and most likely fall inside the fuesalge of the plane because of the angle at which your releasing... You can even make it to where if they try do dive bomb in heavy buffs that the bomb actually explodes inside the plane and kills the pilot :) with the exception of buffs that were designed to dive bomb like the JU88's...
Just for kicks I would like to see your idea be emplemented HiTech. I'd be willing to bet that a good 70% of base taking will stop, simply because most of the base taking hoards suck at getting there plane back home, they don't know anything about tactics, its all drop your load and bail out/auger, most are good for 1, maybe 2 passes before they get smoked (notice I said most, not all, theres some good squads out there that work together well in base taking, the majority are a bunch of hoard monks though) I kind of like your idea, it gives them something to work for :) it will only help them to get better by making them try and make it home or at least try and live for another 2 minutes.
**EDITED I wrote this before page 4 was even up LOL, wow fast responses LOL
-
I also think that whatever comes out of this, the community will creatively apply the permutations, adapt, and find a good solution to the new situation's challenges.
Iceman24 -- check out this thread and HT's negative response to the drop angle limit idea. here (http://flyaceshigh.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=168118&highlight=bombers)
Applause to HT for letting us play with the ideas, to apply some of that sneaky creativity ahead of time and poke the holes that would have shown up anyway....
-
thats what i was looking for Simaril thanks bro
I wrote my last post before page 4 had even begun, lots of quick responses LOL
I must have missed HiTech's response a while back when that was written, after reading his response I can definately understand why this hasn't been done yet.
-
"I also think that whatever comes out of this, the community will creatively apply the permutations, adapt, and find a good solution to the new situation's challenges. "
I totally agree with that 100%, looking back at everyones post's it seems that basically everyone wants something done to stop the dive bombing heavies by using one idea or another. Coming up with a solution is 1 thing, but at least most people are agreeing that this is definately becoming a nuissance and needs to be stopped, that i like :)
-
HT,
I don't think 'rebuilding' the building would be the way to go. I would go back to reducing the down time.
A building takes, say 10 minutes to rebuild after it is destroyed with X number of points of damage.
IF I destroy a building completely by myself, and die immediately, it's still down, but some percentage of the down time is reduced. Using your earlier example, say 50%.
If I did the last 25% of the damage to kill something, and die, then the down time would be reduced by 25% * your earlier 50%.
This way, Yes, you killed it. Yes, it stays down. It just comes back faster.
I think that possibly the BEST fix would be the pitch limiter. You have to be LEVEL (+ or - 10 degrees) to drop bombs from a (non-dive) bomber. And I'm not talking about pulling up at the last instant and opening doors :-) IIRC, that is also closer to RL. If your not level, odds are your bombs would jam in the doors or miss entirely.
-
Originally posted by Simaril
The idea keeps it simple -- you HAVE to stay alilve for the damage to count, period.
You cant really say its gamey, because in real life pilots wanted to live the entire way home!!
Can imagine the howls if the same reasoning was appiled to -
a) Guys sitting 600-800 off a buffs 6 with pilot wounds, bits missing, oil/fuel/rad hits just for the all important kill. Just imagine if he had to survive 2 mins after downing the buff, else the buff reappears and he doesn't get the kill.
b) The famous AH2 conga line - How many pilots IRL sat behind a con spraying away with a hoard on his tail. More likely be trying to get the hell outta there. Put a 2 min time limit on him also.
c) The infamous plane on fire - You really think guys were more intent on getting a kill than bailing out? Put a 2 min time limit on him also.
Just as well this isn't "real life" so any comparisons are mute.
Sorry, time limits aren't the answer.
Can't count the amount of times I've dove in on a field porked the troops and a split second later got the 1 ping ack pilot kill.
If nothing else all you will see is D9's and Lala doing pork runs so the can 'extend' away from the field. Time limit solves nothing.
Ouch - Sorry a 1k egg does 1k of damage, should quite rightly be independent of 'alive' time. Also as per previous poster THIS IS NOT REAL LIFE.
Where during WW2 was there perfect Summer Days EVERY day, no night, guarenteed 75% fuel availabilty?
-
Originally posted by Souless
I dont like the idea.It would bring a "gamey aspect" to something I want as much realism as possible.
Hangars that rebuild from total destruction to fully operational facilities in 15 minutes isn't gamey? Wouldn't it be more realistic if it took at least 3 days to make a hangar operational?
C'mon, the whole thing is a game!
-
If this stops the nuggets that buzz in and pork troops, ord, and fuel in there LALA's then auger, then I am all for it. :D
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Can imagine the howls if the same reasoning was appiled to -
a) Guys sitting 600-800 off a buffs 6 with pilot wounds, ....
b) The famous AH2 conga line - .....
c) The infamous plane on fire - .....
Just as well this isn't "real life" so any comparisons are mute.
Sorry, time limits aren't the answer. Time limit solves nothing.
...snip.........
I disagree completely.
Don't make the mistake of confusing the simulation parts (ie in flight) with the game parts (like hangars limiting ability to take off from a field).
Originally posted by Kev367th
Sorry a 1k egg does 1k of damage, should quite rightly be independent of 'alive' time. Also as per previous poster THIS IS NOT REAL LIFE.
Where during WW2 was there perfect Summer Days EVERY day, no night, guarenteed 75% fuel availabilty?
Sure, a 1k egg does 1K damage -- but how does doing 3k damage to a structure prevent tanks from appearing??????
Simple, because that's the way HT set it up. And if the GAME part can be made better by tweaking some of the AUTOMATICALLY ARBITRARY rules HT created, then why shouldn't the change be made?
Personally, 2 minutes is excessive when the goal is to discourage pork-n-auger. That's why I like the 20 sec lag in applying damage --
and lets be honest, if you cant stay alive 20 secs after the bombs drop, weren't you doing something gamey anyway?
-
Originally posted by hitech
At the con we were discussing changing building down times based on how long you lived after destroying a target.
After doing some detailed thinking about it, relized the down time is problematic when mutliple people have hit a targe. But was wondering what people thought of the following.
Based on how long you lived after hiting a target, currently im thinking around 2 minutes. If you die a portion of your damage is removed.
As an example 2 people drop bombs on a hangar. 1 does 2k damage, the last does 1k damage and destroys the hangar.
The 2nd player dies after 1 min. The system would remove 1min/2min i.e. 50% of the damgage aplied to the hangar. The hangar would then reserect with 2.5k damage left on it.
Thoughts?
HiTech
I don't like the idea, imop the way it is now damage, and down time is fine for FHs/Bh,Vh etc, but i have few sugestions;
1. HQ raids and intercepting them ussed to be one of the best organized fun actions in AH1,
Sice AH2 came out you ruined that fun with new settings !!!
Why did you let at strat./country status the 4 damage steps for HQ, i don't know what for !? , cuz HQ goes down all or nothing. Soo if a bomber pilot climbs 1 hour and hit HQ with 30 000 lbs get nothing, just free comunity work.
I sugest bring back the old damage setup in 4 steps and DON"T GIVE RESUP OPTION 30 min . This will ecorage players to attack/defend HQ.
2. CVs - imop are too soft many players complain about on BB,goes down with 8000 lbs, should be at least 15 000 lbs, not cuz is realistic, but the bombing is too unrealistic precise, and the fun fights die too soon
-
"C'mon, the whole thing is a game!"
your correct, it is a game, but it a game modelled around being as realistic as possible without taking the fun out of it. Could a WWII figthter have been D600 behind a buff spraying him looking for another kill, yes... Would he is another story, but it could be done. I don't think that there were many pilots that actually engaged in a turn fight say a 38 versus a zero like allot of us do everyday, but it could have been done. Now dive bombing in heavy lancs or B24's is a different story all together. Basically we are saying that this was IMPOSSIBLE to do. simply put, and backed up by Simarils post, it is impossible, the bombs would not and could not drop out. I also doubt that in real life any pilots bailed out over enemy runways and took there .45 and shot planes as they appeared on the runway, but was it possible, sure, so that's why we can do it in our game, I doubt that there were any Lancs or B24's, or even ME262's that landed in real life on a carrier, but could it have been done, sure why not, that's why we can do it in this game
-
I like the idea. From my point of view it compensates for unrealistic survivability behavior.
-
Btw I in no way buy the more gammy idea.The fact that it would create a more will to live after drop, would make things less gammy.
Also the intent was allways all ground objects including ack.
The 2 min time was an example, 15 secs is to short, 1 min might work.
And so far from the responses and resones im leaning more to doing the implemtation.
HiTech
-
In the case of fighters porking, I think two minutes is about right. That should cover it nicely.
-
Originally posted by hitech
If you live more than 2 mins, nothing would change from the way it works now.
I like this idea, should help keep the pork and auger folks in check.
-
try it, we can always rollback to what it is today ..
-
Hey HT,
The idea has some merit, but I can forsee problems. Suppose 10 guys get together and run a jabo mission to do a vh - jabo 1 gets his off and damages the vh, jabo 2 gets his off, kills the vh and dies to ack, jab 3-10 get theirs off and pulverize the vh area and get away.
It sounds like the vh would be coming back up almost immediately because they lost Jabo 2... despite being hit by 10 loads of bombs. 9 Jabos fly away in disgust grumbling how 18,000 lbs of bombs can't kill a vh anymore.
I think porking can be addressed more easily by changing the downtimes and number of bombs needed to kill the various strategic targets at the base, and by preventing the lancs and other level bombers from suicidal dive bombing.
If we want to prevent a single player from porking a base into the stone age, all we need is:
1. Downtime for Troops (Barracks) destruction reduced to 15 min (like a fighter hanger). Justification: Troops just crawl out of their holes and go on fighting after a bombing raid. Good Infantry is always hard to keep down ;)
2. Toughness of Ord / Ammo Targets to be increased to 3,000 lbs bombs each (like a vh), leave downtime at 2 hours. Justification: Ammo bunkers are HARDENED and UNDERGROUND - a little 20mm or 30mm fire shouldn't torch it up like a Ford Pinto.
3. Prevent Level Bombers from releasing bombs while diving. Either make it so the autopilot must be active, or you have to be in bombsight view, or both for any bomber that wasn't used as a dive bomber. Justification: do I even have to? This change might even give the bomber boys some reason to break out Ju88s or Stukas for base attacks. We can debate which bombers were used in diving attacks, but we can at least agree to stop the 4-engine types from doing it.
I think these changes would be simpler for you to code / implement and would solve a lot of the gameplay problems with suicide lanc CV killers and troop porking la-la drivers.
EagleDNY
$.02
-
This is a two edged sword ... Pre-Destruction and Post-Destruction.
For example ...
= Pre-Destruction ======================
It takes 3K to take down a hanger and its down for 15 minutes.
I drop 2K on the hangar but auger.
HT follows right behind me and drops 1K on the hanger.
Because I augered my 2K drop is reversed, hence the hanger only has 1K on it. It will take another 2K worth to drop it. HT dies 1 minute later (before the hanger is destroyed) ... now it needs 3K to take it down.
= Post Destruction =====================
It takes 3K to take down a hanger and its down for 15 minutes.
I drop 2K on the hangar and don't auger.
HT drops 1K on the hanger.
Hanger blows up ... countdown starts to rebuild. At this point, if either of us die, then the penalty should be applied to reverse/speed up the rebuild time.
[1 minute later] ... HT is killed.
HT did 1/3 of the total damage to the hanger.
1/3 * 15minutes = (5 minutes).
15 minutes - [1 minute] - (5 minutes) = 9 minutes left to rebuild.
HT's damage is subtracted from rebuild countdown which allows the hanger to come up quicker.
==================================
I don't want to see any smoking hangers during whatever time limit HT would decide on ... and then see the building blow up. If you get the correct amount of ord on an object that causes it to blow ... then blow it up. If those who participated in the destruction die within the time period, after the destruction, then the rebuild time is shortened.
If people die within the time period after dropping ord prior to its destruction ... then their efforts/ordinance are/is nullified.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Btw I in no way buy the more gammy idea.The fact that it would create a more will to live after drop, would make things less gammy.
Also the intent was allways all ground objects including ack.
The 2 min time was an example, 15 secs is to short, 1 min might work.
And so far from the responses and resones im leaning more to doing the implemtation.
HiTech
Bad idea IMO -
What about (happens to me) -
Dive in, release eggs, kill barracks, then get nailed split second later by field ack. (had quite a few outright pilot kills).
Guess my jabo run was for nothing, because the ack killed me within 1 min.
Sorry, time limit isn't a fix, it's a kludge, and I must disagree it really smacks of being as gamey as the pork auger guys.
-
I would have to try it to form an opinion. I learn by doing. I am all for some idea geared toward an incentive to survive an attack mission and return home safely.
-
If we are going to make "gameplay" adjustments to prevent this type of pork and auger behavior, why can't we make the adjustments to the game to prevent the cause, rather than using a timer to adjust the effect?
There are many possibilities that, although may be unrealistic, at least doesn't work like the "omega 13" (ala Galaxy Quest) and turning back time.
1. Increase fusing time for bombs dropped out of level bombers - Forces level bombers to drop from higher altitudes
2. Limit drop angle of level bombers - Forces bombs to be dropped at less steep angle and prevents dive-bombing
3. Put an Ordnance time limit on the individual player - After the player uses ordnance, he cannot get any more ordnance for 10 minutes. - This discourages pork, auger, instant re-spawn because the player would have to wait to get more ords. Could re-up without them though.
IMO, this whole thing stems from the basic game principal that says in order to "win" the enemy fields must be shut down by killing all the structures on it. There is no individual death penalties, so it doens't matter to the "win the war" player how the job gets done. Why can't we get a game-play change that would encourge more fighting over strat targets and cities, rather than pork-and-auger tactics?
-
I don't see this a good idea. The amount of time it takes to re-up a hangar or other strat and the life span of a player in the game have nothing in common.
-
Assuming the object is to de motivate and reduce the effectiness of suicide porkers.
The game play motivations tools are standard rewards such as "attaboys" and perks....
as a general philosphy I would try to use the tools created for "motivation"
COAD problems to one side the "pure" method (IMO)would be to perk ordinance. Its "in character" and easily understood hundreds of other games on the market have folk "buying" stuff............
Big bombs are expensive medium bombs are cheap small bombs (& rockets) are free. (they are all free if you land successfully)
Given the COAD difficulties of perking ordinance and given you can "flag" a death shortly after a bomb release then you could have a perk penalty for "dieing"soon after releasing a bomb......... (or after any ground object damage such as straffing troops or AA)
Frankley I wouild like a combination of both of the above...............
The hard truth is that reducing the down time will not actually demotivate folk........... these are the same guys who will HO rather than manouvre.... if the hanger goes "bang" they will be happy and come back the moment it looks to be up again.
The other aspect of the suggestion is that it reduces ( directly) the effective ness of suicide porkers..ie the down time is reduced.......... or presumably the damage is reduced if the bomb run did not actually get a kill.
Well it will rebalance some of the effects of suicide bombers......
and I can see the benefit in this.
It does add another layer of stuff to the interplay between strat and repair rates..makes it even harder to understand.
Generally my take is that it is a "fix". It trys to modify game play by a mechanism that does not mimick a reality consequence......... and I do beleive that by mimicking "reality consequences" AH gets better rather than "moving sideways".
Demotivate the suicide porker by hitting his perk points and make those perks his access method to the tools he requires to pork.
-
Like I said earlier, I really think that developing time could be spent in a more worthwhile manner...ie- completing CT...Hitech, I really dont see this issue being so important that it has to be changed immediately...I think we can all live with the porking and dive bombing aircraft for another couple months until CT is finished, and after CT is released, you can devote all your time to correcting this problem the right way...ie- maximum angle bombs could release and fall in bomber bays....I just think working on this would be adding to much to your plate, and slowing down something more important....just imo
again...thanks for looking for our advice/opinion on this issue...I see this as a big turning point in aces high, and im loving the fact that your faithful costumers get to really throw out their opinions on the pro's and con's...I just hope this isnt a 1 time deal..
-
I understand both the good and bad points of the suggestion.
That being said, I must point out the suggested idea at hand can be nothing more than an incomplete, temporary remedy to the problem at hand, that will ultimately backfire in time.
There are many problems why people do dweebey and gamey things. One of them is that unlike the real thing, we don't die when we screw up. Ofcourse, we can't do anything about that (unless some company goes the distance and develops a cool joystick that sends out electric shocks whenever you die.. *nyuk nyuk*).
However, there are many more problems in-game that also give reason to such gamey and reckless behavior and all of those, can be addressed in one way or another.
For example - some suggestions
a) Bombs don't have mass - you can drop the bombs during any kind of plane behavior and the bombs will always drop successfully. You can release bombs while flying inverted, while barrelrolling, looping, and they will not damage the plane in anyway.
Introduce collision-detectable mass to the ordnance and people will be forced to take certain precautions and measures while preparing for the drop. This simple change alone, both increases the survivability of the attacker (by correcting his bad habit in attack runs and forcing him to abide by historic precautions), and the predictability of the attack run (making interception attempts easier for the defenders).
b) Bombs are generic - every bomb in the game is a general-purpose bomb that can be used for everything at any altitude.
Divide the types of bombs, so people will have to correctly choose loadouts for their designated purpose of flight. Let them set some kind of detonation alt or fuse delay tp the bombs - which will determine how effective the detonation was. By introducing such a system to the bombs (albeit game-adapted, simplified version of it), the bomb detonation will have discrepancies in its effectiveness, so a 1k load of ordnance may not reach its full potential in damage if the fuse delay or arming alt or whatever was incorrect, or an incorrect type of bomb was used for the mission.
This will make the results of bombing more unpredictable - it will require the fighter/bomber/attacker to take steps to deliver the ordnance more accurately, soundly, and logically, for the ordnance dropped to reach its full potential in destructivity.
c) Rare/uncommon ordnance options are much too common in-game - 1k bombs are a rare thing to carry. While a single P-47 with its maximum ordnance load can easily take out a VH with a single pass.
However the task becomes much more difficult when say, you need multiple P-47s armed with only 500lbs bombs to do the job. Immediately the number or bombs required on target goes up. Combine that with the 'quality of the drop' as can be seen in b), the gamers will be forced to become proficient in the drops to a certain degree.
Slap a perk on the 1k loads, introduce limited availability to the 1k bombs, I don't care how you do it - just make it so that the 'standard' armament preferred in the game, is in most cases limited one or two 500lbs bombs. That alone, can remove a lot of fizz from the suicidal porkers.
d) Field defenses are weak - bring out the 88mms and let's if the the deck-running buff pilots can still laugh....
..
The point is, many of the problems are realism problems (as in not enough of it). A correct dose of realism can go a long way to influencing people to stop doing stupid things in game.
Such 'temporary remedies' ultimately will not do the game any good. With every 'gameplay concession' added to the game it just gets weirder and weirder. I mean, think about it - we're talking about bomb damages that suddenly disappear as soon as the pilot who dropped them dies. Ain't that weird?
Why take such a indirect, poor approach to the problem when a more direct approach can fundamentally cure the game from the perceived problem? If suicidal porkings are a problem, then simply bring in every factor in real life to the game, that would make such rash behaviors unpreferrable (except the death factor, of course), instead of planting weird and corny little 'gameplay concessions' to everything.
-
I cant see jack-in-the-box hangars as being a good thing. Far too confusing and unpredictable. Its up-- its down -- no its ups again! Ugh.
At the same time, I have to disagree with Kweassa. Any incentive, effectively and predictably applied, will alter game behavior. Pork and auger happens because there's simply ZERO disincentive, as long as you dont care about score. The guys who are least likely to care about score are precisely the ones who would care most about strats and hangars -- the base capture guys. Making field ack tougher wont affect that, because you cant get around the fact that dying is irrelevant to their style of play.
The only way to change the behavior of capture guys is to make the undesired behavior advarsely affect capture.
So, it seems to me that time penalties are just the best way to do that. Either put in a destruction lag, so target damage istn applied until the lag times reached; or, reduce the target down time if you die within the tiem window HT sets. 50% down time penalty seems fair.
If the "dont die" time is under a minute, either would seem practical. If its over a minute, the damage application lag would just get too weird.
Because you really wouldnt want any intervention to disrupt game flow. The on again/ off again damage, with hangars popping in and out like transdimensional warpers, woudl jsut feel spastic, jerky, bizarre to me.
I find it interesting that the ones who seem against the CONCEPT of anti-suicide run interventions sound like they've gotten used to doing them. I'm sure that whatever is implemented, they'll adjust and still be able to kill what they're after -- the game will go on, whether prokers come in at 500 feet or whether they learn to pull out at 2k. Just new tactics, like what happened when towns got more spread and FHs were split. Wont be a crisis at all.
-
i like that idea that you came to bbs and asked us what we thought
can we get more of that? in all seriousness very refreshing I must say....on the topic I think its a gamey fix for a gamey problem...return buffs to original bombing mode, set max angle a buff can drop from and make it bombsite only release..however it would fix guys bailing out after releasing eggs but i dont think that justifys the fix...thanx for asking though :)
-
Originally posted by jaxxo
i like that idea that you came to bbs and asked us what we thought can we get more of that? in all seriousness very refreshing I must say....on the topic I think its a gamey fix for a gamey problem...return buffs to original bombing mode, set max angle a buff can drop from and make it bombsite only release..however it would fix guys bailing out after releasing eggs but i dont think that justifys the fix...thanx for asking though :)
Jaxxo...HT has already talked about the angle limit idea and reviewed why he doesnt like it here (http://flyaceshigh.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=168118&highlight=bombers)
Also, the drop from bombsite wont work because they can hit F6 then FIRE2 so fast that the bomber wont change pitch at all.
100% agree that HTC's being great about coming to us. As I recall, the last time this happened was with ENY -- and the system we got seems much more tolerable than the first suggestion. I'm betting we'll get a less stressful intervention this time, though. :lol
-
i understand the bomber will drop as fast as u can hit the button but at least it will have to be straight and level...im thinking it is like it is to encourage newbs to fly buffs........when htc posts it encourages genuine responses for better gameplay, which im all for......
-
why not set real "delay" for bombs !?
i read about british bomber crew getting back in England and drinking tea by the time bombs blew up
-
Would it not be easier to just make all targets indestructible. Heck, just get rid of them. That would free up system resources thus increasing frame rates.
-
I have some thoughts I don't like about the idea, but the best way to see is to implement it and see how it works out.
I REALLY like the idea of limiting level bombers and preventing them dive bombing. I would permit a shallow dive, as this was historically done mostly in the pacific.
-
Originally posted by Simaril
I cant see jack-in-the-box hangars as being a good thing. Far too confusing and unpredictable. Its up-- its down -- no its ups again! Ugh.
At the same time, I have to disagree with Kweassa. Any incentive, effectively and predictably applied, will alter game behavior. Pork and auger happens because there's simply ZERO disincentive, as long as you dont care about score. all.
Soo, in your opinion i should feel guilty for porking a base, that's a bad behavior ?!
Now you tell me, why is more glorios and realistic your death in a furball with the main goal just a furbal/improve skils , than other dieing in a risky mission poking a base!?
Have you ever been in the army ? ! If you get one order/mission you have to do it, even if is dangerous and you will die for your country ,
was the WW2 just a chaotic fun furball without goal ?!
:(
-
I like the idea for a simpler reason - it introduces an in-game incentive/reward for a player to survive. There is none now.
I think it should be extended to include denying damage points and hit percent for scoring. They should only be awarded for sorties that are landed, ditched and bailed, and not included for sorties ending from death or capture.
It's pretty hard to argue that living and surviving to fight again are "gamey." ;)
-
Originally posted by Waffle BAS
.............I think if there was a way to maybe just apply it to bombers / formations...where if they kill themselves by bomb blast radius - there should be no damage applied to target. That would at least get the bombers from dropping at tree top level.
Or people that drop their ords and bail out..... Thats just dumb anyways but there are a ton of people that just run to target, Drop & Bail.
If ya drop a target in buffs and get shot down, fine. But if ya just toolshed and bail there should be a penalty
-
just give us some manned 88's at the fields. will ward of the pork and augers yet still allow the base captures to take place. pork and augers are normally 1 or 2 guys at a time a couple manned 88 will easely handle that.
harden the 88s so it takes say 500lbs or what ever to kill them so no quick squirts from 50cals etc will kill them but the base takers that come in force will be able to take them out with some rockets or bombs.
its not gamey players will still need to defend. its accurate air bases in wwii had AAA in the form of 88's 5inchs etc etc.
-
Originally posted by ghi
Soo, in your opinion i should feel guilty for porking a base, that's a bad behavior ?!
Now you tell me, why is more glorios and realistic your death in a furball with the main goal just a furbal/improve skils , than other dieing in a risky mission poking a base!?
Have you ever been in the army ? ! If you get one order/mission you have to do it, even if is dangerous and you will die for your country ,
was the WW2 just a chaotic fun furball without goal ?!
:(
No, I'm not dissing capture and strat work at all. It's the only way to stop a horde night, and its legitimate tactically in any case.
No matter how you do it, there are times you're going to die when you're porking. Those "go down fighting" deaths arent the problem. It seems to me that the issue for HT and the most others here isnt porking per se, its the gameplay effects of the guys who go in with no intention of living at all.
And nobody's talking about stopping porkers. If that was the goal, HT would just move kill levels impossibly high. Instead, he's saying that porkers need to think about getting home if they want full effect. That seems reasonable to me.
And BTW furballers pay a penalty for dying, with perks cut to 1/4 what they would have been. Great furballers dont care, but to average fighters (like me) that penalty affects my ability to get better fighter planes.
So, why shouldnt the strat guys pay a penalty that affects their strat game? Even the most restrictive suggestion still lets stratters die without RTB'ing -- they just have to survive 30-120 secs after target.
-
I've been porking troops and ord because we are usually outnumbered. Only way to slow down the masses of red. Not doing the sucide thing.
I don't do bombers and most Jabo runs are to towns because anything smaller I will most likely miss.
Last night a squaddie and I took out troops and ord at three different bases. Manned ack was a player only for one ship at one base although a bunch of it was shooting at us. We ignored it unless it happened to be in front of us on a pass.
That said, playing with downtimes isn't going to help other than make the fronts more stagnant. Some have said something to the effect that implementation will magically make people work with more coordination. Yeah, right. Bigger horde maybe.
You want to make porking more difficult? Put more and better ack on the fields. I enjoy shooting down red planes but all the ack is dead in 30 seconds and the VH doesn't last much longer.
Low level bombers a problem? Give us some of the 40mm bofors on the fields. The 37mm, while deadly is not much of a deterrent because of the difficulty of actually hitting anything and haveing to hit a bomber multiple times you are luckly to get just one.
Guys are willing to man the guns if there is any. With enought AAA low level attacks, porking are pushed to higher altitudes and if he survives the first pass he would really be thinking if he wants to make another.
As it is makeing three passes on an airfield and boogieing when your ammo runs out is not uncommon without supressing the ack.
In summary: More/more lethal ack=more apprensive and dead porkers.
-
How about making the level bombers available only at the fields that are further away from the frontline.
Or perk the level bombers :) and if they crash, they penalised themselves.
Perk system has so much potential, a little more attention to it and it could regulate alot of things.
-
I was originally liking the idea but the devil is in the details.
I say if they hit the ground or bail, implement it, in any other case no.
And I like the idea that whatever the target is, it only smokes until the time limit is up and then blows up if the attacker didn't hit the ground or bail in the alloted time.
Edit:
Oh, and start the clock from when the bomb is released. It takes almost a minute for a bomb to fall 30k. ;)
-
I like it. The "gamey" part is destroying something knowing your going to die, then doing it again.
There needs to be a penalty for death. If you can't take down your target without getting out alive, it's time to re-think your plan.
Gunner
-
How do you tell the difference between one who porks and augers and one who porks and gets owned by ack or a fighter doing base defence? Is there a way to auto detect a players intent?
-
I love the idea. There is a gameplay balance issue when there is a disproportionately great effect on many people as a result of the minimal effort of one person. There will be no perfect solution to this gameplay issue, but there needs to be a 'best-fit' solution. It has become painfully obvious that gameplay is suffering as a result of the griefer phenomena, if nothing is done it will only get worse. While the 'strat' portion of the game is fundamental to its operation the practice of it by a dedicated cadre of griefers threatens to compromise the integrity and enjoyment of the game for a far greater number.
This solution is a milder one than one I would have liked, that is if you do not survive more than 30 seconds after a drop your damage does not count at all...But, I would accept this as a compromise solution. One thing is for certain, 1-3 guys suiciding into hangers with dive-bombing lancs, rendering the field plane-less for 15 minutes, is baaaaaad for gameplay and always has been. Any solution will be welcome with open arms...
Zazen
-
Originally posted by Birddogg
How about making the level bombers available only at the fields that are further away from the frontline.
Or perk the level bombers :) and if they crash, they penalised themselves.
Perk system has so much potential, a little more attention to it and it could regulate alot of things.
This brings up something I've always advocated...Make field sizes mean something, make the 4 engine buffs only available from large fields and the 2 engine buffs only from medium or bigger fields and small field only able to support single engine bombers. Re-arrange the field sizes accordingly. As it is now field sizes don't mean a whole lot, this would add some welcome strategic complexity to the game.
-
Originally posted by KTM520guy
How do you tell the difference between one who porks and augers and one who porks and gets owned by ack or a fighter doing base defence? Is there a way to auto detect a players intent?
And thereby hangs the problem.
What if I up a Tiffy with ord and go to pork a field.
I get my eggs off and destroy the barracks, a split second later ack kills me, or I got followed down by a high con.
I die, therefore my run has just amounted to NOTHING.
Sorry, a timer of ANY kind isn't the answer to deliberate pork/auger, but it sure will penalize people who are hit by ack etc after releasing ord.
Just how gamey we gonna get?
-
There is no problem. A death is a death, be it from ack that should have been killed first, or a high con who did what he was supposed to do and anticipated correctly.
You could have dropped higher, gone in higher, had been part of a team effort to accomplish your goal.
Anticipation, planning and thinking should be rewarded, shouldn't they?
And luck (good and bad) is a legitimate part of life, war and games... ;)
-
Good points Rolex, I agree.
-
whats wrong with an angle limiter? Its realistic and solves a bunch of problems.
-
my opine:
the weapon should work, live or die.
....incentives are good though. Maybe an ordinance timer is a better solution. Once a piece of ordinance is pickled, you can not load that type of ord for 'X' minutes, preventing the pickle/auger/spawn cycle.
Maybe X=10 or more minutes and maybe X is tied to ENY.
-
Originally posted by Ack-Ack
How about making it so level bombers can no longer dive bomb by putting an angle limiter?
ack-ack
AND......they should HAVE to use the bombsite!!
Not the F3 view
-
Rabbit,
angle limiter would be OK except HT has said it's "arbitrary" and thus unacceptable to him. So, unless he goes to the entire process of modelling bomb bay physics, dimensions, bomb inertia and "toss" effects, etc, etc, he doesnt want to set an arbitrary limit.
Also, you have to realize that the limit would be different for each vertical positon in a rack. So, the first bomb would be safe at a much steeper angle than the "top" one. which might need to be dropped from an essentially level bomber.
The work involved in doing drop angles right is way more than is realistically going to happen now. Eventually, detailed bomb bay modelling is coming...but until that task reaches the top of the "to do" list, we have to find a different way of addressing the issue.
The thread about this is still here, with Hitech's response towards the end. (http://flyaceshigh.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=168118&highlight=bombers)
-
I do not like the proffered concept. It certainly seems to a roundabout method that will add confusion.
There are several things that I have advocated for several years.
1) Place a perk value on bombs of greater weight than 500 lb or 250 kilos for all non-bomber aircraft. Let's say, 3 perks each. Perks are not expended if the pilot lands.
2) Recognize that various types of bombs were required for various targets. High explosive (HE)was typical for heavy and medium bombers attacking soft targets. Semi-armor piercing (SAP) were used against hard targets and ships. HE was not very effective against armored ships as the bombs detonated on contact and did not penetrate the vessel. SAP bombs should not be available for heavy bombers. Light and/or dive bombers would have access to SAP bombs. If HE had only 25% of the effective of SAP bombs against ships, it would greatly reduce the suicide, dive bombing buffers. Using SAP against soft targets reduces damage by 50% as the bombs penetrate deeply into the ground before exploding, thus limiting the blast effect.
3) Add some difficulty to bombsight calibration and some sort of randomizer to simulate the effect of wind on bomb patterns and accuracy. Have this tied to a multiplier related to altitude in tens of thousands of feet. Thus, accuracy is related to altitude.
4) Bombers designed for level bombing should only have bombs released by the bombardier, not the pilot. Only the bombardier should be able to open the bomb bay doors while in flight.
5) Harden barracks and ordnance bunkers. Require at least 2,000 lb of combined ordnance to destroy either.
6) Harden both unmanned and manned AA.
Incorporating the above will substantially alter the paradigm in the MA.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by Widewing
I do not like the proffered concept. It certainly seems to a roundabout method that will add confusion.
There are several things that I have advocated for several years.
1) Place a perk value on bombs of greater weight than 500 lb or 250 kilos for all non-bomber aircraft. Let's say, 3 perks each. Perks are not expended if the pilot lands.
2) Recognize that various types of bombs were required for various targets. High explosive (HE)was typical for heavy and medium bombers attacking soft targets. Semi-armor piercing (SAP) were used against hard targets and ships. HE was not very effective against armored ships as the bombs detonated on contact and did not penetrate the vessel. SAP bombs should not be available for heavy bombers. Light and/or dive bombers would have access to SAP bombs. If HE had only 25% of the effective of SAP bombs against ships, it would greatly reduce the suicide, dive bombing buffers. Using SAP against soft targets reduces damage by 50% as the bombs penetrate deeply into the ground before exploding, thus limiting the blast effect.
3) Add some difficulty to bombsight calibration and some sort of randomizer to simulate the effect of wind on bomb patterns and accuracy. Have this tied to a multiplier related to altitude in tens of thousands of feet. Thus, accuracy is related to altitude.
4) Bombers designed for level bombing should only have bombs released by the bombardier, not the pilot. Only the bombardier should be able to open the bomb bay doors while in flight.
5) Harden barracks and ordnance bunkers. Require at least 2,000 lb of combined ordnance to destroy either.
6) Harden both unmanned and manned AA.
Incorporating the above will substantially alter the paradigm in the MA.
My regards,
Widewing
Couldn't agree more.
-
Am I the only one that thinks that developing this into the game would be a waste of time right now??? Lets be honest...The dive bombing aircraft and the suicide porking isnt that big of a deal...yes it happens, but in my experience (and I spend a lot of time in the MA), it's not something that stops gameplay...You will always have the guy willing to fly from another base to bring troops...I remember "cyclic" flew 4 sectors in a goon, without complaint or question to capture a base...I just dont really see this is something that needs immediate attention in light of other things in the game...Correct me if im wrong, but didnt HTC say no new aircraft or developements until CT is out at the con a couple weeks ago? So why this???? Why would you want to add something thats not very important to your plate, when you should be focusing on CT??? It's like the jeep...Yea its fun and all but was it necessary? Couldnt all of those hours spent modeling a jeep been used for CT? Same with this...If HTC isnt even considering new aircraft until CT is released, then why consider this? I dunno....I dont like it...
If your not going to give CT 100% attention (like most of us thought you were doing for months now), then atleast give us a new map or two...Not something like this....
what do I know?
by the way, this isnt a flame or rant htc...
-
Ok, as the guy who suggested this (geez Dale...you were listening :D), I would like to clarify where the idea comes from.
First and for most, it is not intended to punish anyone. Its intent is to reward those that don't use gamey behavior to destroy ground targets and use good SA and planning to accomplish their chosen mission.
My second reason was my growing weariness with guys that climb a 51 or La7 to 15k then dive past a lower enemy fighter to drop a bomb, then circle in the ack shooting a hanger (or some such) until killed by an ack or player. Some one early on in the tread mentioned the gameyness of the idea. All I can say is that gamey behavior must sometimes be modified with a gamey solution. Especially, if this 'gamey' solution can cause the game to be played in a less gamey fashion.
Finally, will some folks be 'punished' even though they tried to do the right thing? Of course. However, that is why Dale posted the here is to try and find ways to mitigate the impact on those that do actually put an effort into their game play.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Btw I in no way buy the more gammy idea.The fact that it would create a more will to live after drop, would make things less gammy.
Also the intent was allways all ground objects including ack.
The 2 min time was an example, 15 secs is to short, 1 min might work.
And so far from the responses and resones im leaning more to doing the implemtation.
HiTech
I think the gameyness perception would hinge on how you presented it visually. Seriously, seeing hangers and other objects pop up and down inside of one minute would tend to look silly (aka gamey). If you were to as suggested, give us a visual cue such as smoke and fire on a standing object while the clock was ticking on the lifespan of the porker it would be a much better presentation IMO.
In that scenerio, we as players have visual confirmation that the object is now destroyed pending the timer outcome. If the 'porker' outlives the timer, the object explodes like normal, and we have visual feedback on that outcome. If the porker dies the smoke/fire dissapears from the standing object, and we have a visual cue to tell us that outcome also. Either way, we are not left in the dark at any time as to what the status of the object is.
Without some kind of visual feedback for us to track what is going on, I think it would be confusing.
-
I like Widewing's idea better...
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
My second reason was my growing weariness with guys that climb a 51 or La7 to 15k then dive past a lower enemy fighter to drop a bomb, then circle in the ack shooting a hanger (or some such) until killed by an ack or player. Some one early on in the tread mentioned the gameyness of the idea. All I can say is that gamey behavior must sometimes be modified with a gamey solution. Especially, if this 'gamey' solution can cause the game to be played in a less gamey fashion.
So, in this example, a 51 or LA MUST stop what he is doing and fight the opponent in front of him before dropping the ack or whatever? This kinda seems to me like you are telling others that can only play the way you want them too. To an extreme, that would be like HTC saying you can only fly Spit V's on Tuesdays.
-
Oooops! double post. Sorry.
-
My take on the idea:(
I like the fact that HT has put it to the boards for discussion, and there has been some excellent ideas come up.
Fact one, it is almost impossible to stop the dive bombing Lanc's/B17's
Two, the porkers (done it myself) are also just as hard to stop or take down.
Three, there is no where near enough defenses at an airfield to prevent this (short of porking every base within 10 sectors) from happening.
Four, I have no problem with someone wanting to slow up a horde by removing the resourses from said field, however, this should be viewed as a very desprerate measure and the attacker should be met with a wall of AA fire that makes attacking a port seem like a walk in the park.
As stated by many MA goers the need for proper field defenses is long over due. There is no way to stop such Kamekazi's from from simply dropping 20,000 lbs of ord's at 100' off the ground.
The Ostwind, while somewhat effective in the AA dept is no match for such attackers. The complaint about why fields should never have veh's such as the Wirbelwind, 88's, 5" guns, Bofors 40mm's and twin & quad 20mm is borderline hilarious.
The attacker can shoot my turret out with HIS multi-gun 20 & 30mm cannons, rocket pods and bombs and I get to shoot back with a single 37mm slower firing gun????
my 2 cents
-
Originally posted by KTM520guy
So, in this example, a 51 or LA MUST stop what he is doing and fight the opponent in front of him before dropping the ack or whatever? This kinda seems to me like you are telling others that can only play the way you want them too. To an extreme, that would be like HTC saying you can only fly Spit V's on Tuesdays.
Hmm, still trying to figure out how your analogy, in any way, fits the situation described. In no way does this attempt to force anyone to play the way I want them to. However, it would no longer reward them for gamey play. If people wish to continue playing suicide monkey...they can. But, their impact on the game would be great reduced by doing so.
-
I think it's a great idea. It will neuter some of the many pork & auger suicide dweebs.
-
Originally posted by KTM520guy
So, in this example, a 51 or LA MUST stop what he is doing and fight the opponent in front of him before dropping the ack or whatever?
If you think about it in the real world if the attacker DIDN'T stop what he was doing to fight off the 51 or Lala that would be suicide..
Wouldn't it ??
Hmmm..
-
Sorry, I'm not the best at translating thoughts to words.
So you would rather somebody fight you as opposed to dropping the ack?
-
LOL you got to be kidding! Take a deep breath and think about what your contemplating. How in the world would a pilot fly 20 min or more to a target drop his/her ord and then the effort be penalized because of a death. So what if he/she dies after killing the target. You won't bring back the denial of fuel to the enemy by targeting with ord but you are entertaining this silly idea? Veh-base hangars are easily taken out by 1 passing buff and you won't sspread them out??? rambling i know..................bad bad idea.
I despise porking so why not just harden targets more and increase fld ack to hinder or how about removing perk points for those that pork and auger.
-
Originally posted by KTM520guy
Sorry, I'm not the best at translating thoughts to words.
So you would rather somebody fight you as opposed to dropping the ack?
Another way to think of it. If you were being attacked by a fighter while attempting to kill ack in the real world ?
What would you do ??
-
The way AH airfields and gameplay are laid out anyone who claims HT's solution is any more gamey then what is already apart of the gamey is delusional.
Remember this is a game.
Blowing up 2 FHs in real life didn't close down an airfield. Fuel and Ammo were not kept out in the open on the field and not at the same few spots on every field. Killing a 'barrack' didn't knock out all the troops etc...
That said no can deny the disproportionate impact one or 2 suicide bomber / jabos can have on the fun of many others (especially on CVs, not that I care I don't fly 'CV planes'). Too many folks are too willing to spend their game time killing themselves in pursuit of 'winning the war' or just to disrupt the fun of others.
That said I don't the suicide half-damage / time-out or whatever it is will make any difference to these guys. Is the point to change or modify game play behavior? Or is it just to stick something in to appease the complaints?
For suicide / dive-bombing bomber folks, just make it so you can only release bombs from the bomb aimers position. You don't need to perk bombs or formulate some mathematical numbers scheme to address this. Just force the player to be in the bomb aimer's position to release bombs. In conjunction with that re-vamp the bomb sight / bomb drop model. Make it so you have to 'dial in' altitude and speed. The choices now are laser guided bombs or the clumsy calibration method that is now turned off in the main.
You would hit one key to set speed up, another for to set speed down. One key to set altitude higher another lower and make bomb accuracy dependent on the bomb aimer keeping that speed and altitude while in the bomb aimer position. If he jumps position then force him to reset those those settings when he jumps back. Make it so internal ordnance can damage your own bomber if you dive above certain angles.
For the suicide jabo / strat porker make it harder for him to kill certain strat objects (ammo and troops). Add a few more of each and set repair/rebuild time based on the % of that particular 'strat' killed. For example lets say there's 4 fuel depots. If all 4 (100%) are down then they rebuild over the maximum down time. If just 1 is killed it rebuilds 75% faster then if all are killed, if 2 are killed they rebuild 50% faster etc...
This way the guy who augers in to kill one or two barracks may find those 2 re-built by the time he gets back to finish off the other 2 etc...
I personally don't care if some wants to kill himself over and over in pursuit of his fun. I don't care anything about the cries of how killing the cartoon out house is 'more real' then killing the cartoon airplane. I just would like to see things brought into better balance. One guy shouldn't be able to just fly a couple of auger missions and stop the fun of many others.
Any solution to address that will be 'gamey' to some one.
-
I would break off from my anti ack mission and give the attacking fighter my attention. But that's just me. I can't speak for others.
Basicly this idea is a way to force a certain style of game play.
-
Originally posted by hitech
At the con we were discussing changing building down times based on how long you lived after destroying a target.
After doing some detailed thinking about it, relized the down time is problematic when mutliple people have hit a targe. But was wondering what people thought of the following.
Based on how long you lived after hiting a target, currently im thinking around 2 minutes. If you die a portion of your damage is removed.
As an example 2 people drop bombs on a hangar. 1 does 2k damage, the last does 1k damage and destroys the hangar.
The 2nd player dies after 1 min. The system would remove 1min/2min i.e. 50% of the damgage aplied to the hangar. The hangar would then reserect with 2.5k damage left on it.
Thoughts?
HiTech
I really, really really do not like the "jack in the box" hanger. Seems to me a better solution is that, in your example, 3000lbs kills hanger. Hanger does not pop until 3000lbs damage is "repaired" at a rate of 200lbs per minute (i.e. 15 minutes). Lets keep your 2 minute time limit. If someone who did 1000lbs of damage dies at 1 minute, then his 1000lbs damage is halved. Apply then the 500lbs to the "repair time", i.e. deducts 2.5 minutes from the total downtime.
In this way, a "dive bombing lanc" does the required 3000lbs of damage, but is destroyed by his own explosion, the hanger is destroyed, but nearly instantly pops. If a "legit" bomber did 1000lbs damage before the lancs dive-bombed, the downtime of the object would only be 5 minutes.
Thus, in a coordinated assault of 3 Jabos carrying 1000lbs of ord each, the entire team would not be penalized just because one of them got picked by the ack as he climbed away after completing the mission. The hanger is still down (mission accomplished) but at a reduced rate (10 mins instead of 15).
[aside]If you really wanted to get mean, you could allow subsequent bomb drops on an already destroyed hanger to increase the downtime using this method. That would make bases truly suppressible and encourage people to up from an adjacent field rather than sit in the tower waiting for a hanger to pop.[/aside]
Bolded for emphasis -- The whole "jack in the box" concept would hurt game play IMO. Consider this example -- it would very much discourage anyone who was just strafing down the last building in town from trying to intercept the enemy LA 7 that just upped. He is in a no win situation. He can try to defend the goon, but then the LA7 needs only HO and kill him to get a building to instantly pop -- ruined capture. The other alternative is to let the LA 7 kill your goon -- again, ruined capture. He was already a team player by strafing down the town. Now you discourage team play by encouraging him to avoid a fight to protect his goon. By reducing downtime instead of making the building automatically pop, if the good guy dies, the troops on station still have a few minutes to make it into the map room before the building he just strafed pops. Even if he lived only 12 seconds, that is 10% of two minutes, which means the building will be down about 4 minutes.
-
Originally posted by KTM520guy
Basicly this idea is a way to force a certain style of game play.
Again...you are incorrect. It does not "force" style of game play. What it does make the reward for a certain type of game play less....doesn't mean it can't still be done.
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
Again...you are incorrect. It does not "force" style of game play. What it does make the reward for a certain type of game play less....doesn't mean it can't still be done.
It indeed does force style of play. You are saying if I couldn't fly into a base, pork it and get away, that anything I did manage to take out would pop back up thus making my sortie null and void. It's a punishment for even attempting to pork. Why even try unless you are certain of a 100% successfull outcome.
-
Originally posted by KTM520guy
Why even try unless you are certain of a 100% successfull outcome.
LOL KT if I needed to be certain to be successful why am I most of the time low man on the pile in a furball ?
If I certain of a 100% successful outcome, it would be watching paint dry.
It's not the outcome in those situations, it's the journey.
-
Originally posted by nopoop
If I certain of a 100% successful outcome, it would be watching paint dry.
Hey man, don't bag on watching paint dry. I do that for a living. LOL
:rofl :D
-
A few minutes wont make a bigg difference. They will just auger in after 5 minutes then, and re-roll.
Need to have some requirement to land back at a base with at least one a/c intact.
How about the damage caused by formation bombers be only 1/3 if they dont rtb to a base? and full damage if they do? If you want the Lanc bombload fine, but they have to know that if they go on a suicide run or auger, that much of the damge they do will be repaired.
Same for suicide Jabos. If you rtb, full damage, if you dont then 1/2 the damage you did is fixed. Die within X many minutes no damage.
Will cut back on the endless Kamikaze lemmings we see. Zoom, strafe, splat, repeat.
"he's saying that porkers need to think about getting home if they want full effect. That seems reasonable to me."
Me 2.
-
Hmmm, seems like the "don't die" thing is much easier to understand then the 6 part wall of text. But I could be wrong.
-
Not to be rude, but I see this as, essentially, a stop-gap, half-hearted attempt to address one of the problems in the MA. I don't think it is the best way to go about doing this.
I appreciate that you are trying to address this problem, HiTech, but in my honest opinion, this solution is nothing but the above.
What I really like are Widewing's suggestions. However, his suggestions look like a real pain in the butt to code. It would take time, which you probably do not have right now. But rest assured, it would make the game very much better. Not only would divebombing lancs be ended, but suiciding would at least also have to take less weighty bombs to not suffer a penalty, AND CVs would be less vulnerable to heavy bombers, and more vulnerable to dive and torpedo bombers. Perhaps they would see more use. They would certainly be more useful.
This all would certainly take a lot of time and a lot of work to implement (I think you said adding perks to ordinance is especially a pain in the butt). But I'm positive it is the best proposal in this thread. It is all expansive and covers most bases.
I'm willing to wait for it. I can put up with the suiciding and the divebombing lancs for awhile longer. I've been doing it all this time. What's another year or so?
About the only thing I can assure you about the proposal you outlined, is that these boards, the TA, and the MA, are going to be jam full of people who can't figure the details out, asking the same question over and over again. And it doesn't sound like the easiest one to explain. I had to read it a few times to get it myself.
I think this is one of those situations where it would be better to save your money to buy a reliable car then blow what you have at the moment to get a possible lemon.
No offense meant by this.
-
Originally posted by MOIL
The Ostwind, while somewhat effective in the AA dept is no match for such attackers. The complaint about why fields should never have veh's such as the Wirbelwind, 88's, 5" guns, Bofors 40mm's and twin & quad 20mm is borderline hilarious.
The attacker can shoot my turret out with HIS multi-gun 20 & 30mm cannons, rocket pods and bombs and I get to shoot back with a single 37mm slower firing gun????
my 2 cents
I agree,
the AA defence needs a tune up, and is more imoptant than bombing
the bases have no AA defence, all this vulching and pick up at the end of the runway are ridiculos,
I can go alone, eassy over a base in a Typhoon, kill vh, all acs , and vulch until run out of amo,/juice. Who was the super Chuck Noris pilot to do this kind of stunts in WW2?
Those 20mm autoguns/ the auto 88 have very slow rate of fire/weak damage efect, blow up with 1 x 20mm shell,are set just useles droping the frame rate
-
Why stop at strats/hangers?
Why shouldn't GVs benefit from the same "protection" from dive bombing Lancs and suicide Jabos?
You dive bomb your Lancs on my GV and dont last longer than 2 mins my GV reappears, death is wiped from the record, ditto for suicide jabos.
Whats good for one part of the game, is good for another.
No idea why people keep referring to "in real life".
IRL a guy wouldn't sit behind a box of buffs with a pilot wound, engine smoking, bits coming off his plane etc etc just for the all important one kill.
IRL a guy in a burning plane wouldn't be flying around still trying to get kills, more likely bailing out.
So here my big problem with the proposed solution -
It makes A SINGLE aspect of the game wholly dependent on you staying alive, yet ignores other situations were the same would be relevant.
The solution IMO is to add another manned ack to the field close to the strats ( 2 are grouped on most fields) and give all manned ack proximity fuzes.
-
I like the idea of doing something. I know nothing will be perfect so I would be willing to compromise....what about the rest of you.
Hitech,
If all planes that were on the ground were treated as proxies it would make a difference in the vulching and some of the shade scorers. the planes would have to be airborne to count as a scored kill. players could still cap a base for capture with no bad effects but it would deter players who set up vulches for scoring purposes. Just a thought. I know some may think this would not change anything but I have seen minute changes have big effects before.
-
Originally posted by Ack-Ack
How about making it so level bombers can no longer dive bomb by putting an angle limiter?
ack-ack
/signed
-
kev367:
"The solution IMO is to add another manned ack to the field close to the strats ( 2 are grouped on most fields) and give all manned ack proximity fuzes"
That's a start, but lets make it "somewhat" fair. To only add ONE more manned ack at a field is like adding a 30cal to the M3.
There should be XX amount of guns on a field based on it's size and all gun positions should be manable. That way if no one mans the guns then you have less of a chance to defend yourself/base.
Large field = 4 40mm Bofors guns, can be twin or quad mounts, 6-8 37mm mounts, 8-10 multi-barrel 20mm mounts, 2 5" guns and 1-3 88's or equivelant. We should also have towable/deployable multi-barrel AA guns.
Then scaled back on gun mounts for Med & Sml fields. Ports already have a ton of ack, but you can only man ONE 37mm gun on the dock????
This IMO is ludicrus, an important base in the game, yet once VH is down & the single gun is killed you have no way to defend it.
De-acking a field or trying to take down resources should (and was in ww2) extremely dangerous. I read in one of my ww2 books that the Jabo attack pilot had one of the most stressful & danderous jobs. Now I could be wrong because I'm not a plane/pilot guru like some in here, but would make sense to me.
My 2 cents
-
Originally posted by Cr0ssEye
I like the idea of doing something. I know nothing will be perfect so I would be willing to compromise....what about the rest of you.
I'm not against compromise I'm just saying I don't think that this is a problem that needs to be fixed immediately. Especially not if the only way it can be fixed immediately is with the (IMO) lesser of the suggested changes.
I'm willing to wait for something more indepth like Widewing suggested (maybe compromised a bit) and just deal with the current situation as is for awhile longer.
Now if this were to go in effect I wouldn't complain about it persay, but I'd certainly hope that after CT and whatnot was finished up this issue would be revisited with a more time/coding-intensive solution.
I'm just saying that I do feel as though this is a stop-gap partial solution to some pretty interlinked problems and although you could knock a few down with this solution, if you're going to go and change it later anyway to something better, might as well just leave it as is right now and maybe devote the time it would take to code this now into thinking about how to code something more complex at a later date.
-
Originally posted by MOIL
kev367:
"The solution IMO is to add another manned ack to the field close to the strats ( 2 are grouped on most fields) and give all manned ack proximity fuzes"
That's a start, but lets make it "somewhat" fair. To only add ONE more manned ack at a field is like adding a 30cal to the M3.
There should be XX amount of guns on a field based on it's size and all gun positions should be manable. That way if no one mans the guns then you have less of a chance to defend yourself/base.
Large field = 4 40mm Bofors guns, can be twin or quad mounts, 6-8 37mm mounts, 8-10 multi-barrel 20mm mounts, 2 5" guns and 1-3 88's or equivelant. We should also have towable/deployable multi-barrel AA guns.
Then scaled back on gun mounts for Med & Sml fields. Ports already have a ton of ack, but you can only man ONE 37mm gun on the dock????
This IMO is ludicrus, an important base in the game, yet once VH is down & the single gun is killed you have no way to defend it.
De-acking a field or trying to take down resources should (and was in ww2) extremely dangerous. I read in one of my ww2 books that the Jabo attack pilot had one of the most stressful & danderous jobs. Now I could be wrong because I'm not a plane/pilot guru like some in here, but would make sense to me.
My 2 cents
CC Moil totally agree.
A timer is just ignoring the fact the problem really isn't pork/auger, but the fact the fields are so pitifully defended.
Hell the choo choo train of death is worse than the small/medium fields.
-
kev:
"Hell the choo choo train of death is worse than the small/medium fields"
Hahahahahahahaha:rofl
You're killin me Smalls!!
-
I think it's moving to gamey. IMO one of the best features in AH1 was, pork the fuel, limit the strat attacks. But then again, many tears came from that feature too. I believe many people will whine even more. I don't think pilot's lives should be a part of it.
Oz
-
Originally posted by Widewing
.....4) Bombers designed for level bombing should only have bombs released by the bombardier, not the pilot. Only the bombardier should be able to open the bomb bay doors while in flight......
This has got to be the best idea I've heard in a long time. It totally eliminates the dive bombing/suicide runs and doesn't require an arbitrary angle to limit angle of attack.
-
Ok, here's an example of poor planning, SA, and just plain bad luck.
Though, had this occured in the MA, only one set of buffs would be destroyed ( assuming you get killshooter with bombs ), the new proposal would render that damage moot.
I'm ok with that. We should have been more careful.
Just some of the Thrills we get to enjoy in the Squad Operations series of our Special Events. ( Shameless plug )
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=181904
-
Can I just ask why you would even want to alter this ??? Personally I think if you struggle in unescorted buffs for the long time it takes to hit a target and then return safely they should be down longer. In reality bases and convoys would have fighter cap to stop incoming buffs along way out. The fact that most players in here are not prepared to fly a tactical defence mission and cap fields at altitude making it difficult to hit suggests that most people arent interested in their bases or task groups. I am not saying they should be, just being honest. If you want to change anything make flying buffs a reasonable proposition by giving them a realistic perk score for a successful mission and supply a decent perk bomber to use their perk points on. Flying for an hour or so to hit a target and return for 5 points or less is madness. I guess this game was originally set up for fighters with little thought for anything else unfortunately what you set up and what has evolved may not be the same thing. You have a large number of players in here now that spend most of their time doing everything else and very litttle in fighters. This game has grown and could get larger If you want it too but I just feel you should spend a little more time thinking outside of fighters.
-
I agreed with widewings idea when he brought it up a few years ago and agree with it now.
It makes sense and seems fair to everyone.
lazs
-
I agree that something has to be done, and HT's plan here is a step in the right dirrection. Some of the suggestions here are all well and good, but implementing them may be far more time consuming than HTs has avalible right now.
I like the twist of the object smoking till the "timer" runs out and then destroying it as apposed to the "pop back up" idea.
The bases do need to be made more difficult to take. With the groups we have flying these days a single pass is enough to flatten most bases. Hardenning of the targets would help, and be easy enough to adjust. More manable guns would be good too. "IF" people wanted to defend a base they could, but this may fall into the "time problem" that HT has. I don't think increasing the hardness on the guns would be good, as straffing a gun should take it out in one pass...as long as you hit it :)
Granted, increasing the hardness, and setting a timer on the ordance to slow to suicide porkers are "stop gap" messures, it is "something". and I'm all for a little "something" as opposed to "nothing" :aok
-
I still fail to see how hangar rebuild time and life expectancy can be/should be related. These are two very different thngs and have nothing to do with each other.
-
Originally posted by KTM520guy
I still fail to see how hangar rebuild time and life expectancy can be/should be related. These are two very different thngs and have nothing to do with each other.
That's because you continue to focus on the negative aspects of the proposal. It's not about hangers or life expectancy. It is about reducing the rewards for suicide. It's about attempting to de-Quake the game a bit.
-
I couldn't bring myself to read past Hitechs second post, but my thoughts are NO I do not like it, most pork 'N' auger guys don't live 2 minutes after the drop so why not make it 1 minute? Ever sit & watch a timer count off seconds; 1 minute is a long time. Esspecially when you are waiting on food in the microwave.;)
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
That's because you continue to focus on the negative aspects of the proposal. It's not about hangers or life expectancy. It is about reducing the rewards for suicide. It's about attempting to de-Quake the game a bit.
I understand the reason for the proposal and it's good. The effect, however, is not good.
-
I think Moil is is the right track for a solution to this problem. In addition I think a change to base layout should be made. As an example, here is a cool setup for a V-base. Best of all, it's already an HTC creation.
(http://www.kesalesket.net/karelia/sf_vbase.jpg)
-
Originally posted by KTM520guy
I think Moil is is the right track for a solution to this problem. In addition I think a change to base layout should be made. As an example, here is a cool setup for a V-base. Best of all, it's already an HTC creation.
]
watching surface marked yellow for sucsesful landing, i was thinking why, we get a ditch ,landing on the base on the grass 1 inch from runway !!?? Were lot of complains about this in last years, imop should get succssesfull landing anywhere on the perimeter of the base
How many bases in WW2 had concrete runways!?
-
Lets all be realistic...This is not a big enough problem in the MA to make a MAJOR change in the game...It really isnt! I can gurantee that even if this silly idea is added into the game, there will still be massive porking and massive whining... And in regards to dive bombing lancs into cv's? Instead of waiting for them to come to whine, ya know you could always up a CHOG, CAP the CV, and get kill after kill of buffs trying to attack (conventionally or unconventionally)
Am I the only one who is seeing this as a waste of time??? Did HTC not say there will be no new developements until CT is released? So why this???? And why now??? I really dont think this "problem" is a big enough one to divert your attention from CT...I dont think this is a smart idea....All its going to do is cause more whines, and push the already unfashionably late CT back another 2 weeks, 6 months, 10 years!!! If you really want a side project to slow you down while working on CT atleast create a new map or give us a new gv or buff......
Arghhhhh:furious
-
Thanks KTM,
I think everyone including myself would like to see a "fair" solution for everyone. I do not want to dictate how people should play the game, I do not want to take someones fun away or limit what they can do.
However, it appears most (not all) seem to keep wanting more & more realism in the game (myself included) vs easy mode or relaxed.
I beleive all players should be rewarded for accomplishing thier missions and helping their Countymen. If one or two guys wants to attack, de-ack or pork a field then they should be met with heavy AA fire and chances of survival or doing any damage will be little to none. No different than me trying to attack a port in Jeep by myself, sure I CAN try it but what do you think the outcome will be?
It should take planning, teamwork and communication to achieve a victory at a base or airfield.
I know there is a lot of guys that like to furball and are not looking to take bases or vulch. This is great too, they (the furballers) can furball all day, get in those white-knuckle fights and have the bragging rights if they wish.
Just keep in mind if you want to furball over an enemy base or vulch an airfield be prepared to be shot at with a lot of guns, you want to furball just off base, over the water or in the hills, have at it.
There is no single "fix" or "solution" to all that happens in the MA, most will come from us the players. For myself I just grow tired of the wash, rinse & repeat scenario that takes place everyday.
-
Originally posted by cav58d
Am I the only one who is seeing this as a waste of time???
Ahh..
Pretty much.
-
Spent last night mulling it over -
There are two pork/auger types:
a) Drop eggs then bail
b) Drop eggs then lawndart in right after them.
The proposed solution won't affect (a) they'll just stay in the aircraft a little longer.
It would affect (b), but in their case you only need seconds not minutes.
Frankly HT never really said in either of his original posts what exactly the proposed change was meant to counter.
If (a) - It won't
If (b) - It will, but timer only needs to be 5- 10 secs.
Even for dive bombing buffs you don't need 1 or even 2 minutes.
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
My second reason was my growing weariness with guys that climb a 51 or La7 to 15k then dive past a lower enemy fighter to drop a bomb, then circle in the ack shooting a hanger (or some such) until killed by an ack o
Uh, If I upped with bombs my intent is NOT to engage fighters no matter how bad they want me to.
If my intent is to engage enemy fighters, I will not be heavy with ord.
As for the circleing in the ack, as I have stated in a previous post, the ack isn't that deadly a threat because it is hard to hit with it. Except for Zazen of course. If everybody could hit as much as him nobody would be circleing in the ack for long.
Maybe the ack needs to be modeled with Zazen as the gunner.:aok
-
Originally posted by cav58d
Am I the only one who is seeing this as a waste of time??? Did HTC not say there will be no new developements until CT is released? So why this???? And why now??? I really dont think this "problem" is a big enough one to divert your attention from CT...I dont think this is a smart idea....All its going to do is cause more whines, and push the already unfashionably late CT back another 2 weeks, 6 months, 10 years!!! If you really want a side project to slow you down while working on CT at least create a new map or give us a new gv or buff......
Arghhhhh:furious [/B]
Chill a bit. HT's suggestion is nothing like coding out with a new plane or map -- I'd bet that the code involved would be minimal.
Think about it:
IF player doing damage dies under 2:00 THEN hangar damage erased (or whatever).
I'm no coder, but you have to be looking at a days work or less. And, if it makes the gameplay better, why not do it?
Lastly, dont forget that it IS HiTech's company, he's been in the business for more than a decade, and he's the guy who takes a hit if bad decisions are made. With that in mind, I'll bet he's being more careful than any back seat strategist ever could be when it comes to allocating assets and time!
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
CC Moil totally agree.
A timer is just ignoring the fact the problem really isn't pork/auger, but the fact the fields are so pitifully defended.
Hell the choo choo train of death is worse than the small/medium fields.
Agree totally with the need for more and better ack ack at fields, and like the the idea of having escalating lethality (larger guns) at big fields too.
We really need big-gun (88mm or 5") ack ack mannable at fields. The 37mm stuff is virtually useless unless someone is diving right in on you. Having mannable big gun ack ack also gives a single defender a chance to stop the single porker.
EagleDNY
$.02
-
1 minute
-
Originally posted by cav58d
Am I the only one who is seeing this as a waste of time???
[/B]
I think HTC is one of the best in time management. What they have done, with the few people they have, is totaly amazing in my opinion. I don't stay up at night worrying about HT wasting his time.
-
ehem
Getting back to thread subject.
Originally posted by Rolex
There is no problem. A death is a death, be it from ack that should have been killed first, or a high con who did what he was supposed to do and anticipated correctly.
You could have dropped higher, gone in higher, had been part of a team effort to accomplish your goal.
Anticipation, planning and thinking should be rewarded, shouldn't they?
And luck (good and bad) is a legitimate part of life, war and games... ;)
gunnerCAF and Rolex sums it up for me.
Base porkers never intend on making it home.
-
Well rather than timer that affects one part of the problem namely dive bombing buffs a porkers -
a) More ack at fields, more mannable and bigger guns.
b) Buffs only bomb from the site.
Not only addresses the above problem but also -
a) Dive bombing buffs on GVs
b) Dive bombing buffs on CVs
Timer is so lame, but if it is implmented I see NO reason why the same logic can't be applied to suicde buffs/jabos on GV's and CV's.
I'm a base porker and I always intend to make it home, just doesn't happen sometimes.
Mostly get hit by ack.
For the guy who said we should deack the field first - I suggest you look at the various guncam vids available, almost all show intact ack while they are attacking fields. They aren't deacking, they are going for planes on the ground, supplies etc.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
For the guy who said we should deack the field first - I suggest you look at the various guncam vids available, almost all show intact ack while they are attacking fields. They aren't deacking, they are going for planes on the ground, supplies etc.
Yes, but our ack doesnt have the ability to lose its resolve and run for cover.
-
I dont like the idea at all
-
When you should first make porking a base harder. As it is now your side out numbered both teams will up la7s kill all your troops ! lone plane shouldn't be able to kill all troops at base. Make troop killing 3k or more and that would improve game play. no sides kill troops most bases hunt goons over only base left in 262's . but then its just a thought.
As for suggestion i can see it now last building dead drop troops oh watermelon he augered wait damn i already started drop. Great now troops dead at our base $%&&&#!^#$!^!&! hitech.
-
Have to admit it myself - I was out porking troops tonite at 43 and 44 to take the pressure off 42 which the rooks had capped. At least I had enough grace to take a Ki-84 over and do it though - none of this suicide 4 engine bomber junk.
It is a legitimate, strategic defensive tactic when your side it outnumbered. It just shouldn't be as easy, or work for as long as it does. I don't think HT's timer idea would stop me at all - it would just make me take up a 51 or Tiffie and run away for a couple of minutes after a bomb run on troops or ord.
Harden the Ord to 3K bombs per, lessen the time troops are porked down to 15 minutes per run, and a good portion of the problem will be solved. Increase the effectiveness of airfield ack (bigger guns or a lot more of em) and another portion will be solved by making it tougher for a single plane to pork the field.
If somebody wants to stop the porking after that is done, I'd suggest they up and put out a fighter screen to stop it.
EagleDNY
$.02
-
I think this idea stinks.
At the risk of hurting some fighter pilots feelings, I think the previously "unnannouced" reduced bomb blast radius should be offset by a longer than 15 minutes hangar downtime. Say 30 minutes.
Stop whining about land-grabbing. If you read the game intro, getting started and strategic game play, capturing real estate is the foundation of the game and winning the war.
Do you fighter jocs know that a perfect 100% accurate bomber mission (not counting interceptor kills) only yields 1.75 perks when landed ?
I have to fly Spit XIV's just to keep my ranking under 2000.
The 327th relies on my B24's to kill the FHs & VHs while they de-strat the airbase and kill the town using Jabos and slick fighters. This takes profound teamwork under present settings. Which is one of the goals of the game.
I spend 30 to 45 minutes travelling across 3 or more sectors to gain a safe altitude for "pin-point" high alt daylight bombing.
Any hangar downtime reduction from other than re-supplying is totally unrealistic and I find insulting.
How many of you look forward to expending 45 minutes of your time getting to target only to have it wiped out because you got gang-banged at 20K.
The 8th Air Force would have been useless in WW2.
Eagle, Group XO
327th Steel Talons Squadrons
-
I like anything which reduces suicide porking.
-
No SIR, I don't like it. I don't like it at all. (for the Ren N Stimpy fans) :)
If you want to stop the dive bombing buffs (etc) then shoot them down. Cripes how about defending your territory?
I would be all for hardening the hangers and then having them stay down longer but IMO this is a terrible idea.
-
Originally posted by EagleDNY
Have to admit it myself - I was out porking troops tonite at 43 and 44 to take the pressure off 42 which the rooks had capped. At least I had enough grace to take a Ki-84 over and do it though - none of this suicide 4 engine bomber junk.
It is a legitimate, strategic defensive tactic when your side it outnumbered. It just shouldn't be as easy, or work for as long as it does. I don't think HT's timer idea would stop me at all - it would just make me take up a 51 or Tiffie and run away for a couple of minutes after a bomb run on troops or ord.
Harden the Ord to 3K bombs per, lessen the time troops are porked down to 15 minutes per run, and a good portion of the problem will be solved. Increase the effectiveness of airfield ack (bigger guns or a lot more of em) and another portion will be solved by making it tougher for a single plane to pork the field.
If somebody wants to stop the porking after that is done, I'd suggest they up and put out a fighter screen to stop it.
EagleDNY
$.02
Same here Eagle. Dogg and myself were doing it as well last night but we were at 20k with B24's and 1k eggs. So, roughly 1k-3k of eggs were dropping at a time (depends on how many planes you have). Being able to straff down the ords and troops in two passes is a joke. You should need at least 500lbs -1k of eggs before those go down. It might slow a field capture process a bit, but it will slow down the porking and suicides. Yeah it is thier life and thier $15 a month. But it is cowardish to see guys do it over and over again... nothing like getting off the runway and set up for a shot and the guy bails, and then you look back and your field is compleatly porked by that lone Lgay.... :rolleyes:
-
I have to go along with Widewing and Moil. At least their solution is more 'realistic' compared to a game timer.
-
There is a continuum with taking fields so very easily at one end and making fields impossible to take at the other.
As you lads try to push the maker from one end of the field to the other, do you ever stop to consider the overall effect on gameplay?
Push the marker nearly to the "impossible to take" end and what do you get? Stalemate. Or hordes of 200 trying to take one field. With what effect on server and framerate with 200 attackers and 200 defenders in one sector?
I think everybody needs to step back and shift a little macro rather than being so micro.
Gameplay sucks to be sure. Is making fields even harder to take going to make it worse?
-
While I appreciate the drive to continually re-evaluate the game and its different aspects, I must cast my vote against this suggestion.
Thank you just the same for considering new ideas, though.
NCLawMan
-
I don't think that a useless field with no fighter hangers up but that would take even longer to change over would be very good.
I would either like to see ack and hangers last till the city was captured or the field to fall even easier.
More ack and more powerfull and accurate and difficult to knock out ack. A fighter straffing a field should be a suicide mission. A bomber at less than 30k should be dead meat and most of his bombs shouldn't hit anything.
Bombs should be perked for both fighters and bombers.
lazs
Public Relations Officer for the BK's
-
My vote is no. I think others have covered why not. So I wont repost whats already been stated.
-
Here's an idea. That wont alter how the game works but how we play it.
Make all field structures an guns damaged by bombs only. Make it work like GV armor. Town buildings can remain as they are.
fuel, guns= 100 lbs
ammo bunkers, troops,= 250 lbs
Also up the number of troops, ords, and fuel on all bases by 1 or 2.
Imho this would stop most single AC from porking up a base in one flight.
It would also make players use real jabo AC instead of La7s and 190Ds.
Bronk
PS I'm on the fence about the Guns and fuel since both are easily damages by AC gun fire. But if it puts a stop to the "pork the base auger" I'd go for it.
-
Wat Tilt said mostly and Widewing .
Perk the bombs .
-
Originally posted by airspro
Wat Tilt said mostly and Widewing .
Perk the bombs .
Make it so pork people cant attack the same country twice.
A Knit porks a rook base & dies, for the next 10 min he can only fly against bish.
Gameplay for everyone else stays the same, pork people get handed long delays in trying to pork just 1 feild.
-
As usual Widewing's ideas make more sense than mine. Proxy vote to Widewing.
-
Here's a crazy idea. Instead of Hitech wasting his most valuable time coading an ill-conceived change to the game, we (the players in the game) could take matters into our own hands. Using the tools we already have. Now for the crazy part so hold onto your shorts. We could DEFEND our bases. If you really want to talk insane, we could resupply. Ever wonder why the rooks steamroll most of the maps? They resupply. When they get rolling just try and pork their troops. Before you land they have troops back up.
-
Originally posted by KTM520guy
Here's a crazy idea. Instead of Hitech wasting his most valuable time coading an ill-conceived change to the game, we (the players in the game) could take matters into our own hands. Using the tools we already have. Now for the crazy part so hold onto your shorts. We could DEFEND our bases. If you really want to talk insane, we could resupply. Ever wonder why the rooks steamroll most of the maps? They resupply. When they get rolling just try and pork their troops. Before you land they have troops back up.
Here's another crazy idea!! How about understanding what he is trying to deal with!!! It's not about porking troops and ordinance or killing hangers. It's about suicide bombers. Tell me how "We could DEFEND our bases." deals with that? There is no defense against someone willing to die to blow something up in the game. Anyone can do it (and many do) all day long.
-
I guess bullets don't work against suicide porkers? Mine do.
-
Still think if you get killed by your own ordinance blast - then no damage should be applied to what ever you hit. :)
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
Here's another crazy idea!! How about understanding what he is trying to deal with!!! It's not about porking troops and ordinance or killing hangers. It's about suicide bombers. Tell me how "We could DEFEND our bases." deals with that? There is no defense against someone willing to die to blow something up in the game. Anyone can do it (and many do) all day long.
I do understand. Having magically re-upping strats and turning this game into Quake is not the solution. If some dolt wants to crash into a set of troop tents, let him. My guess would be that the number of suicide dweebs is pretty small at any givin moment. Don't punish those who have every intension of landing after a mission but for some reason can't. In Hitech's first post he mentioned a timer of 1 or 2 minutes. That is a very, very long time. Any good pork plane can get to the radar ring in 2 minutes.
Here is a pecfect example on how the propsed idea would have a negative effect on game play. Last night my squadies and I flew a large bomber mission into a medium airbase. Our intension was to drop hangers in order to take the heat off one of our bases. We gave ourselves plenty of time to get to a nice high drop alt. When we got close to the base we found that every plane in the list that was good for shooting down bombers was above us and waiting. We were going have to fight our way in but that's what B24s were made for. Fight your way in, drop ord, and fight your way out. We got in dropped our targets and all save one set of bombers got chewed up in the insuing meat grinder over the base. All that died did so within the proposed time limit. Only one squadie flew home to land.
If this new element had already been in effect, all our hard work would have been instantly reversed. If that were the case, why even up bombers at all? Why even try to pork troops in order to slow down the other countries steam rolling horde?
-
AMEN
-
Originally posted by Widewing
...snip...
There are several things that I have advocated for several years.
1) Place a perk value on bombs [>500lbs].....snip.....
2) Recognize that various types of bombs were required for various targets. ....snip.....
3) Add some difficulty to bombsight calibration and some sort of randomizer .....snip.....
4) Bombers designed for level bombing should only have bombs released by the bombardier......snip......
5) Harden barracks and ordnance bunkers. ......snip.....
6) Harden both unmanned and manned AA....snip.....
My regards,
Widewing
This would be a great system if all players were experienced. However, I suspect it wouldnt work from a AH business standpoint because of the critical role bombers play in maintaining addiction as newer guys develop.
I've been in online flight sims for less than 3 years, and I had near absent ACM skill prior to AH2. I've thought about HOW my abilities moved forward, and I've seen MANY others follow the same path. I'd bet that most players move through these developmental stages as AH'ers:
1)The "this is REALLY cool" stage. New guys try everything, and though they die alot they figure its because they're learning. They have no idea how hard it will be, but they keep trying and dying cause they can see it'll be a blast.
2)Try hard at fighters, dies all the time, looks for something else to do. Often finds can survive in bombers or GVs more easily, and can sometimes contribute to battles and bases that way. Keeps upping fighters, but dies more often than kills. Avoids balanced sectors because SA is still weak, and cant be sure why keeps dying.
3) Gets pretty good at bombers or GVs, enough so that may decide to stay with them for "career." Some keep trying fighters, and gradually learn the skills needed to stay alive and get kills.
4)Respectable fighter skills, but not a contender in tight ACM situations or 1v1s. Evasives and concepts still need work.
5) An established fighter jock who is now ready to learn the finer points. Sensei says that those who receive black belt are mature enough to realize that they are just beginning to learn their art -- and same here.
I firmly believe that bombers help players stay in the game, while they're learning the full range of what AH offers. If bombers are made less accessible or less effective, many new guys will drop out of the retention stream and be lost to AH.
This is all a long way to say that while Widewing's ideas would work well for the pool of moderately skilled players, I dont think they could work well for HTC. AH2 needs a continued stream of new players, and ANY step that reduces retention is a BAD idea for all of us too.
On further consideration, I think the best measures may be MOIL's suggested increase in AA defenses on bases. Making low level porking suicidal BEFORE the strats go down will require a change in tactics -- use bombs and release @1k alt to stay clear, use medium bombers to strat or even high alt ones. With stronger ack defenses, the hardnesses wouldnt need to change, because the ack alone would shift the balance adequately.
Best of all, from a retention standpoint, it would let lower skilled players get even more involved in the game -- they'd be able to pork as well as anyone, and would be more likely to have the needed patience for higher approaches.
-
Originally posted by KTM520guy
...snip....
Here is a pecfect example on how the propsed idea would have a negative effect on game play. Last night my squadies and I flew a large bomber mission into a medium airbase. ...... We gave ourselves plenty of time to get to a nice high drop alt. ...... We were going have to fight our way in but that's what B24s were made for. ......We got in dropped our targets and all save one set of bombers got chewed up in the insuing meat grinder over the base. All that died did so within the proposed time limit.
If this new element had already been in effect, all our hard work would have been instantly reversed. If that were the case, why even up bombers at all? Why even try to pork troops in order to slow down the other countries steam rolling horde?
Gotta say, this is an EXCELLENT point. KTM's group did exactly what makes gameplay best, and HTCs proposal would clearly have made the effort useless.
While this sortie may not be typical, it seems to me that any measure that discourages level bomber use is a bad idea -- for gameplay and for player retention reasons. And, from what HTC said at first, I dont think less level buff use was the intended result.
We'd adapt regardless, and after implementation the same mission might have been half fighters and half bombers. All the same, I'd suggest that stronger low level autoack would be a better solution to get the desired result.
-
Originally posted by KTM520guy
If this new element had already been in effect, all our hard work would have been instantly reversed. If that were the case, why even up bombers at all? Why even try to pork troops in order to slow down the other countries steam rolling horde?
In a word...NO. Had you bothered to ask, you would have found this isn't really intended to apply to level bombers. It wouldn't apply to guys that load up their F4U's to bomb a CV and pull up out of the ack. It would apply to the dweebs that climb to 15k in the fastest fighter they can find, dive past any and all opposition, bomb something and circle in the ack shooting stuff until death.
As for this being a Quake-like solution....well, sometimes you have to fight fire with fire. It's to deal with Quake-like behavior.
-
Not so sure about that, NB -- while the intent is to deal with suicide griefers, the MECHANISM Dale sugggested would have kciked in and reversed destruction.
That's why I dont think its a good solution. If the time window was less -- like 45 secs -- it might stop augerers without hurting this mission type, but at 2 minutes the limit very could hit level bombers.
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
As for this being a Quake-like solution....well, sometimes you have to fight fire with fire. It's to deal with Quake-like behavior.
Becoming the thing you dislike is never the solution. This whole thing is really is a non-issue brought on by a very vocal minority here on the bbs. This proposal, when put into effect (and I'm sure it will be) will do nothing good for the game. What will be the next thing that needs to be "fixed".
-
Originally posted by Simaril
Not so sure about that, NB -- while the intent is to deal with suicide griefers, the MECHANISM Dale sugggested would have kciked in and reversed destruction.
That's why I dont think its a good solution. If the time window was less -- like 45 secs -- it might stop augerers without hurting this mission type, but at 2 minutes the limit very could hit level bombers.
Be sure...I just spoke to HT a couple of hours ago. Making sure that it doesn't negatively impact level bombers is the most important aspect of it, at this point. If he can't find a way to insure that they don't get clobbered by it, he won't write it. BTW, one of the things we talked about was delaying destruction until the time period is up. This would mean that once something was down, it would stay down. I'm not positive how he plans to do it, but, that is the direction he is leaning.
Originally posted by KTM520guy
Becoming the thing you dislike is never the solution. This whole thing is really is a non-issue brought on by a very vocal minority here on the bbs. This proposal, when put into effect (and I'm sure it will be) will do nothing good for the game. What will be the next thing that needs to be "fixed".
Wanna borrow my reading glasses? I stated in my very first post that this was my suggestion. It has nothing to do with any "very vocal minority" on this board. I discussed the idea with HT just prior to the convention. It isn't new. It is something that has bothered some folks since way before he started writing War Birds.
I believe you are probably correct, it will be implemented in some form. He was asking the board on the best way to do it...not whether or not to do it.
Bottomline, if you aren't a suicide bomber...it shouldn't affect the way you play at all. If you are....then start workin' on dem skills. :)
-
I'm not a suicide dweeb and I'm always looking to better myself. Each time I up a plane or GV it's never my intension to crash or get shot down. The later happens a lot though. LOL. But, how does the game know that?
The delayed destruction seems silly to me. Think about it. That would be like you hitting me in the face with a baseball bat but my jaw doesn't break untill next week. This is WWII game here. The level of technology was pretty low back then by todays stadards. Bombs fall and go boom. Not go boom later.
:)
-
Originally posted by KTM520guy
The delayed destruction seems silly to me. Think about it. That would be like you hitting me in the face with a baseball bat but my jaw doesn't break untill next week. This is WWII game here. The level of technology was pretty low back then by todays stadards. Bombs fall and go boom. Not go boom later.
:)
Better annology...
Guy hits the baseball over the fence (hey, you brought up the baseball bat :)) and the scorekeeper waits to put the runs up on the scoreboard until the umpire calls everyone safe. BTW, ever hear of delay fuses? :D
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
BTW, one of the things we talked about was delaying destruction until the time period is up. This would mean that once something was down, it would stay down. I'm not positive how he plans to do it, but, that is the direction he is leaning.
I do not like this idea. Now instead of penalizing a suicide porker, this will give defenders an advantage aginst a well orginized offense.
First off when a field is flat and ready for the taking, and the cap force is on standby with ord...VH pops up, and is immediately taken down...The defenders should not be allowed to continue spawning like cockroaches until the timer expires.
Second, we need to know immediately that an object has been damaged enough to be destroyed. Otherwise everyone and their brother will be needlessly wasting ordinance on an object that is already dead.
Third, it is not an easy thing to safely deliver troops to the town. Now the goon has to loiter indefinatley when buildings pop up, because they have to wait on the timer to destroy them?
I already made a suggestion on this a couple of pages ago. Destroy the object immediately, but give it a unique graphic while the timer is running (smoke, or smoke & fire on the standing object was the example given). Blow it up like normal when the timer expires. Everyone at a glance will know the status of the object, and there is no confusion.
-
Timing is everything in this game as it is now....whether it is a move in air to air combat or landing troops before buildings pop up after 15 minutes. But at least everyone knows the time constraints.
With HT's death timer, no one would know how much damage was done to a hanger or how long it will be before it pops up once it is down.
Air to air has always been the priority in AH and everything on the ground, except a Tiger tank, is just a VERY EASY target. Just make the defenses and building hardness such that a single plane followed by a goon can't capture a V-base by killing 2 acks and a hanger. Or so that a single flight of level Lancs at 10K can't take out 3 fighter hangers and a VH at an airbase. The current radar system does not give a defender time to reach alt before the bombs hit.
Acks have no chance to defend a base....the range and accuracy of a .50 cal is much greater than that of a 37mm ack or Osti as the game stands now (unless you're Zazen), and buildings are too easy to strafe down.
-
Originally posted by Murdr
I already made a suggestion on this a couple of pages ago. Destroy the object immediately, but give it a unique graphic while the timer is running (smoke, or smoke & fire on the standing object was the example given). Blow it up like normal when the timer expires. Everyone at a glance will know the status of the object, and there is no confusion.
Just thinking that a CV is a special case since it already displays that way...Would be cool if it lists to one side while the timer is running :)
-
I disagree with as Docc puts it "The Death Timer" scenerio, unless it is used to penalize bomb and bailers and them only!
-
Originally posted by Murdr
Just thinking that a CV is a special case since it already displays that way...Would be cool if it lists to one side while the timer is running :)
Murdr...
He may well change his mind about how to do it. He did say that he wasn't going to implement graphic changes (that would leave out listing CVs).
-
First my apologies if I've accidently repeated anybody, this thread is pretty long.
It seems the general idea to is discourage the "pork and auger" people. I agree it would add general mayhem to the game if the hangers were popping up and down. Here's my angle.....
1) Make the bombs from bombers (one's with bomb sites) only able to release when viewing the bomb site.
2) Leave the destruction of buildings the way it currently is. It is very realistic and historically accurate (except for the pop back up in 15 minutes, but hey it's still a very cool game). Pilots would die in some instances after hitting their intended target. That IS the cost of war.
3) To discourage the "pork and auger" folks, re-work the perk system to apply a negative score if the pilot gets shot down/augers/crashes within 2 minutes even if flying a non perk plane. Right now, you still get perk points even if you don't land your mission, and have successful hits/objects destroyed. It could be as simple as adding a negative to the perk point gain for the 2 minutes for when you hit something, or even more costly (an extended formula).
:aok
-
Only able to bomb from the f6 veiw is a super idea. Many others in this thread and other threads would also agree. I don't know if negative perks are good though. Some noobs would never get off of zero and quit the game. I would say that zero perks would work. Maybe even only award perks upon landing.
:)
-
Just make it impossible to capture a base. Problem solved. Gameplay difference would probably be negligible.
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
Better annology...
Guy hits the baseball over the fence (hey, you brought up the baseball bat :)) and the scorekeeper waits to put the runs up on the scoreboard until the umpire calls everyone safe. BTW, ever hear of delay fuses? :D
Nah..I like the broken jaw better =)
Seriously though I think this is a trivial issue to deal with, and a waste of time that could be well spent on getting CT or something more important released
-
I dont like it.. I think it could cause many more problems than it would solve..
First, It would encourage alot more running away from the fight after initial engagement.
Second, If there is high cap and a mission rolls in on a base, everyone high will just wail until everyone drops their bombs, swoop in for the kill and there will be no damage to the field.. Lame situation in my opinion.
-
Originally posted by xNOVAx
I dont like it.. I think it could cause many more problems than it would solve..
First, It would encourage alot more running away from the fight after initial engagement.
Second, If there is high cap and a mission rolls in on a base, everyone high will just wail until everyone drops their bombs, swoop in for the kill and there will be no damage to the field.. Lame situation in my opinion.
First....these guys are running anyway.
Second....anyone doing that would risk not killing everyone inside the time.
Oh, and this would be no more lame than the suicide bombers themselves.
Cav...
This is taking nothing from CT.
-
Nobaddy...This isnt taking time from CT??? How So? Has HTC outsourced this pet project to microsoft?
-
Its a waste of time....The complaint isnt with suicide porking...It's with porking in general...If troops or ords get porked, does it really matter whether they are done by a suicide pilot, or by a guy who last 120 seconds afterwards? NO! In the end the strat is still down, and someone complains
-
Originally posted by cav58d
Has HTC outsourced this pet project to microsoft?
Don't say the "M" word!
*puts fingers in ears*
Na Na Na Na Na............
I can't hear you....
:lol
-
Originally posted by cav58d
In the end the strat is still down, and someone complains
Nail, meet hamer. :aok
-
Originally posted by hitech
At the con we were discussing changing building down times based on how long you lived after destroying a target.
The 2nd player dies after 1 min. The system would remove 1min/2min i.e. 50% of the damgage aplied to the hangar. The hangar would then reserect with 2.5k damage left on it.
Thoughts?
HiTech
You could shorten the time requirment allot if this is supposed to be a way to stall teh pork'n-auger dweebs.
Diving into a defended base with your hair on fire, bombing, and sticking around to fight "I" don't see as a problem.
It's those folks who know at engine-start-up-time that they will be following thier bombs into the target that are the griefers. Even if you don't do it till the second or third pass... it's allot shorter than 2min from what I've observed.
JMO
-
I think we all need to be honest with ourselves...Our complaint is that the troops or ords have been taken down...This is a strategic part of game play, and I can assure you even if this silly idea is brought into the game, you will still see porking going on to stop advances.... This is a "solution" that will do nothing more than divert attention from things that should be getting done in the office!
Porking is a major part of the game and will never end...If I see a reset coming I will help save my country and pork front line bases...Its inevidable (SP)
The only solution would be to harden all objects in question....Hell, make an ammo bunker or troop barrack the same hardness as a fighter hangar (2500lbs).... but this will do nothing
-
Originally posted by Kermit de frog
I believe Auto-Level is automatically engaged for you once you go into the bombsite. Make it so that you can't drop bombs unless you are in the bombsite.
Crap, I don't mean to hijack this thread.
WHAT a GREAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT idea!!
-
Hitech - I think the solution you seek needs to be simpler to address a gameplay issue like the kamikaze attacks on airfields.
I had a couple of good postings in the Wishlist forum that were well received:
First - Big Strategy Change (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=165004):
Addresses those who wish to pork airfields by hitting the troops and ordinance. It also puts long range bombing strategy back into the game. Instead of defending your HQ, you also have to defend your factories.
Second - Airfield Resources (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=177985):
Addresses porking issues by having a set amount of ordinance, fuel, and ammo at every field. Up an aircraft, it depleted area/field resources (i.e I.e. if 10 P-51's up at airfield A17, they take up 15'000 rounds of MG ammo, 20 1000lb bombs, and droptanks for 4000 gallons of fuel and TEN pilots. The airfield supply count goes down for each amount. Some ups a formation of B-17 bombers with 8x1000 bombs, that 24 x 1000lb bombs, 19140 rounds of MG, 30 pilots, and 8430 gallons of fuel.).
If you tied the strategy chances and the airfield resources together, that would have a huge impact on how this game is played. More strategy - less airfield swarming, less 30 on 1 fights, less swarms of killer spits attacking a Bf-110, less gamey play, and more thoughtful engagements of the enemy in order to win the war. Besides, isn't that the goal of every map? Win the war?
HT: I think you're after something a little simpler, but you're taking off your arm to fix a cut finger. I think we just need a better bandage to fix this systemic problem. :D
-
Lol delaying destruction until the time period is up - NOW I'VE HEARD EVERYTHING.
This is by far the most ludicrous idea I've ever heard on these BB's.
Like I said, why shouldn't GV's benefit from the same 'protection'?
How many guys have been dive bombed by buffs or jabo'd by guys who know they can't pull out?
Funny how a 'tweak' can be proposed to a single part of the game WITHOUT and consideration to the identical sitaution in other parts.
If ALL you are trying to stop is the pork and auger guys, at the max all you need is a five second, not 1 minute or 2 minutes delay.
Pork and auger guys usually follow their eggs right into the ground.
Sorry this 'idea' (an I use the term loosely), needs to go the way of the Dodo. (or is that Doodoo) :)
-
Originally posted by hitech
And so far from the responses and resones im leaning more to doing the implemtation.
HiTech
YOU [size=18]ROCK[/size][/color] Hitech!!....... no wait, CT's delayed.
Your a SWELL guy HiTech :)
-
Wanna end suicide porking? Bomb and Augers?
Make the FH's, VH's and BH's harder. No point in coming in with a pair of fighters to knock out a field, what type of planes carry that amount of payload to destroy those hangers...BOMBERS.
Now, here is where you'll have to implement changes for the bombers themselves: Bombs need a certain alt to detonate, and can only be dropped from the F6 position or if the angle isn't more than 15 or 25 degrees.
The hangars can still be dropped with heavy fighters, it'll just take a number of people to do it.
-
Well I guess you can kiss NOE's goodbye.
2 minutes during which GV's can spew outta the hanger.
Plus kiss GHI's famous B26 raids bye bye.
Sorry this kills one of really fun part of the game, NOE's.
-
Originally posted by cav58d
I think we all need to be honest with ourselves...Our complaint is that the troops or ords have been taken down...
Not really.. the complaint is people doing it in a gamey way. This "silly" solution will at least force people to re-think the approach they take that will benefit everyone.
This is a strategic part of game play, and I can assure you even if this silly idea is brought into the game, you will still see porking going on to stop advances.... This is a "solution" that will do nothing more than divert attention from things that should be getting done in the office!
Actually... what this solution will do is snuff the pork'n-auger folks. The point being, you can STILL get your jollies following your bombs all the way to impact, re-up, rinse & repeat. However, your efforts do not affect the opposition who would at least like a "chance" of defending thier property. So, you get to pork'n-auger all you want, & the opposition doesn't have to worry about you causing damage they have little chance of defending against. Everybody wins!! :)
Porking is a major part of the game and will never end...If I see a reset coming I will help save my country and pork front line bases...Its inevidable (SP)
But... at least you'll have to WORK at porking to make a difference, like the defenders have to WORK at defending.
The only solution would be to harden all objects in question....Hell, make an ammo bunker or troop barrack the same hardness as a fighter hangar (2500lbs).... but this will do nothing
I don't think it's near as bad an idea as you think... the only real difference you (this of course is IF you're a pork'n-auger guy) have to deal with is to simply line up, release your bombs and continue flying. Why is it bad if you get to keep flying AND help out your country? This is why we have AH, no?
-
Originally posted by hitech
At the con we were discussing changing building down times based on how long you lived after destroying a target.
After doing some detailed thinking about it, relized the down time is problematic when mutliple people have hit a targe. But was wondering what people thought of the following.
Based on how long you lived after hiting a target, currently im thinking around 2 minutes. If you die a portion of your damage is removed.
As an example 2 people drop bombs on a hangar. 1 does 2k damage, the last does 1k damage and destroys the hangar.
The 2nd player dies after 1 min. The system would remove 1min/2min i.e. 50% of the damgage aplied to the hangar. The hangar would then reserect with 2.5k damage left on it.
Thoughts?
HiTech
I think my thoughts have been said by others and I think this is a fine idea. However, since there is no mention about CVs in the original post, I just want to know how Hitech thinks of applying this idea on CVs and torpedo platforms such as TBMs, B5Ns, Ju88s, and Ki67s? And PT boats too!
There are some wonderful ideas already mentioned on this thread, eg. CV listing on damage, perhaps the damage control crew can get the CV back on track if the bombers die before the two minutes are up.
However, with a torp platform this is slightly different. 5in guns are nasty and there is almost no way of surviving. Also, there are delayed hits after the torp platforms die. Torps take long for it to hit the target.
For these questions, I think torpedoes should not be considered in this fix if it is possible to put it out of scope.
Now that I mentioned delayed hits... I forget how things work... if you die before the eggs hit the hanger, do the eggs disappear or is it an effective hit? How to handle this is also a question... (which I have not read the entire thread for an answer yet). Also, how to handle a guy who resets his computer after he releases the eggs is also something to consider... just a thought that came to my mind as I wrote this...
-
My perspective I see several problems :
Make fields invalid target for bomber (I mean a bomber can't destroy anything on a field) it's a jabo role.
Make town and strat target rewarding for bombers (provided they are not bombed by 30K or 5K dweebs) and give them back impact on the overall target country.
Make mission system more interresting ,give some reward to the people involved in a successful mission (a simple system message can be enought)
Even if it's not realistic make torpedo the mean of choice to destroy CV (reduce ack efficency on low target)
Forbid the CV to be closer than one sector to an enemy field.
Make ack-ack respawn time and accuracy fonction of the attacker ratio
- If there is 1 attacker/ 1 defender : accuracy is 1, respawn is 1
- If there is 10 attacker/ 1 defender : accuracy is increased by a factor of 10, respawn time is decreased by a factor of 10
- If there is 1 attacker/ 10 defender : accuracy is decreased by a factor of 10, respawn time is decreased by a factor of 10
Fused bombs !
-
Originally posted by cav58d
Its a waste of time....The complaint isnt with suicide porking...It's with porking in general...If troops or ords get porked, does it really matter whether they are done by a suicide pilot, or by a guy who last 120 seconds afterwards? NO! In the end the strat is still down, and someone complains
Actually, the complaint is with suicide bombers. I could care less about strat or porking and I'm the guy that made the suggestion. BTW, it is my understanding that the majority of the work left to do on CT is not coding....but graphics. Here's a clue for you....HT's art sucks worse than his spelling. If it was taking away from CT he wouldn't be thinking about doing it.
-
What jumps out at me on this is that the intended target - suicide bombers - may not care about the consequences this "fix" implements. I mean, why would a griefer care how this affects other people in his/her country (in terms of creating uncertainty regarding object down time)? Do griefers even pay attention to team-related gameplay factors?
culero
-
Yeah but it does reduce their effectiveness. That is a good thing.
-
Originally posted by mars01
Yeah but it does reduce their effectiveness. That is a good thing.
Agreed. But, flip side: it affects members of their own country who are playing "properly" adversely.
What about imposing a perk penalty for ordnance-delivery flights that end in death too soon after the drop? Make it possible for bomber perks to go negative, and limit ordnance to anyone who has less than a positive bomber perk balance? Set a range: 0 to -x = no 1000lb bombs, -x to -y = no 500lb or 1000lb bombs, -y to -z = no 250lb, 500lb, or 1000lb bombs, etc.
This way, suicide griefers soon exhaust their bomber perks and can't get the ordnance they want unless they do some missions "the right way" (but with smaller eggs and/or rockets) and earn some bomber perks back.
I'm trying to think in ways that penalize *only* those who need to be penalized, and that encourage "acceptable" behavior.
I realize that (as others have stated) many new players gravitate to bombers as they build skills. This approach wouldn't prevent that, but it would encourage them to strive for excellence in the A2M category, rather than be happy with simply "Hey it go BOOM and I pissed somebody off!" By encouraging survival with a penalty system that affects the offending pile-it personally, perhaps we can cause them to willingly act in the way we want them to.
culero
-
I dont like it. Id prefer just making things harder, but with longer downtimes. Make it so 1 porker can't destroy the hangers. Make it so it takes a few bombers, but if done they stay down 30 minutes.
Its bad enuff that what we bomb now is back up before we rtb. To add this to it you may as well remove bombers from the menu.
-
Put me in w/ the "I don't like it" crowd.
Might I suggest working on the resupply end? Make it slightly easier/faster to resupply a field. Possibly tie FH/VH/BH re-up times to Field Supplies.
Encourage people to hop in a LVT/M3/C47 and resupply.
Upset someone just porked your ammo? Grab a M3 and resupply the field. Easy fix. Heck I do this already.
(also, the only can bomb while in the bomb site is a great idea. I also like the concept of bombs not being able to release at certain angles.)
-
1) Making resupply a bit more effective.
2) limiting angles for bomb drops, and no it does not have to be exact for each bomber.
3) allowing bomb release for level bombers to only occur from the bombadiers position are all great ideas. Each of them is a realistic fix to a gamey problem.
There just are not a lot of folks dropping bombs and delibertly auguring. There are far more using tiffy's and la7's to gun down troops etc. This would have no effect on them. There are some great field designs out there thanks to the scenario team that are far better than the long past stale ones we have seen for the last 3 years plus in the MA that not only look a lot better but would make suicide porking much more challanging.
Trying to game a solution to a gamey problem just escalates into greater gameyness. Dysfunction + dysfunction = greater dysfunction. No one is happy and it all sucks worse than where it started.
-
Originally posted by WMLute
Put me in w/ the "I don't like it" crowd.
Might I suggest working on the resupply end? Make it slightly easier/faster to resupply a field. Possibly tie FH/VH/BH re-up times to Field Supplies.
Encourage people to hop in a LVT/M3/C47 and resupply.
Upset someone just porked your ammo? Grab a M3 and resupply the field. Easy fix. Heck I do this already.
(also, the only can bomb while in the bomb site is a great idea. I also like the concept of bombs not being able to release at certain angles.)
Thats a slightly different problem -
Everyone wants:
The capture points
The vulches
For the all important score/rank.
Re-supplying a field is generally "someone elses job". Takes 5 guys, 1 run to bring a field up, try getting 5 guys to do it.
Want to stop a porker, two ways -
1) High cap over field
2) See one incoming, grab an M16 or Osty and park it by the barrcks. Quite effective, ask the barracks porking Knit 262 I shredded last tour. (and saved the troops).
For the 'true' pork and auger dweeb it only needs at max a 5 sec delay, they follow their eggs right in, anything else penalises guys trying to pork without augering and maybe getting nailed by ack.
-
I think this is a great idea.
It gets rid of suicide attacks.
It makes level bombing preferable over divebombing in level bombers.
It does not rule out NOE sneak attacks, NOE with escorts or NOE on suppressed fields.
Though it does hurt the suicidal NOE runs when bomber pilots drive their wing of B17/B24s into a base that isnt suppressed with the single objective of downing a hanger before they go down. These NOE attacks are pure lazyness attacks where the bomber pilot is to lazy to climb. Its not a realisitc NOE and its just a desperat gamey way of quickly hurting the enemy.
Good idea.
Implement it please.
Tex
EDIT: I would guess that the serious bomber and jabo pilots would actually appriciate that HT is trying to stomp on the gamey bombertards. Sure it will bite the serious bomber once in a while if he dies right after his drop. But heck aint it worth it????
-
It totally nerfs NOE, think about it -
Buffs and 110's go for the town.
Jabos normally go for VH then de-ack, then cap the field.
Difference with timer -
VH doesn't go down right away, GVs continue to spawn for 2 mins, some towns are real close to fields.
What if after hitting the VH that guy gets killed within the 2 mins deacking the field, or hit by ack after hitting the VH? Yup the VH doesn't go down at all.
What it will encourage is a lot more buffs/jabos to MAKE sure the target is going to go down.
Whole idea needs a lot more thoguht, timer will just screw up other aspects of the game.
Please stop referring to 'realistic' -
A timer is very unrealistic.
Flaming planes flying around chasing other planes rather than bail is unrealistic
Perfect summer days every day is unrealistic
Planes sitting off a buffs 6 with oil/fuel leaks, pilot wounds, bits missing etc rather than RTB is unrealistic
Loadouts of 75% fuel (or less) + DT's (been commented on lots of times)
'Realism' has nothing to do with it, people invoke the 'realistic' tag when it suits their agenda, and ignore the totally 'unrealistic' features currently in the game.
-
I'm at 25k in buffs,.. I salvo all my bombs just as a couple of 163s start hitting me. I am ded BEFORE my bombs hit the ground. What now?
-
Originally posted by Dace
I'm at 25k in buffs,.. I salvo all my bombs just as a couple of 163s start hitting me. I am ded BEFORE my bombs hit the ground. What now?
Easy one Dace -
If you are dead within the 2 mins, you just wasted your time. Bombs will land, timer will start, if you get killed, your bombs essentially do nothing.
-
The point being you get punished despite not engaging in the issue being addressed.
Dysfunction + dysfunction = greater dysfunction
might I also add:
4) No one gets perks unless they land them. Think about what that will do to suicidal behavior across the boards.
-
I gather that HT's thinking most about the time limit, with delayed application of damage. Earlier in thread he also said 30 secs seemed too short a delay.
It occurs to me that at a conservative 240 mph ground speed, an attacker woudl cover 2 miles in 30 seconds, and 8 miles in 2 minutes (his inital thought).
Do we really need to make attackers get that far away from target for damage to count? With a stated goal of preventing suicide attacks -- which to me means very quick deaths after damage -- that much delay seems excessive.
As others have said, 15-30 secs ought to be plenty and woudl be much less disruptive to the flow of the game.
-
Kev your right the term realistic is miss used.
I should have used "less gamey tactic".
Flying NOE with a bomber wing into a base where there is a fight between 0k and 5k is a gamey tactic which is used just out of lazyness.
NOE is a good and non gamey tactic for the situation you describe where a wing of heavily armed planes (buffs, mossies, 110s, Jugs, ect) come in and quickly hit the town and VH inorder to create a quick take.
Yes 2 min of extra spawning time on VH is a problem, but you can just hit the VH right away. This is actually the tactic I do prefere because if you spend time working on the town BEFORE you take down the VH they might still crawl out.
So I really dont see the problem. Hit VH, hit town, de-ack, have goon come in.
Unfortunatly in the MA of gamey hoard base takes we dont see this tactic used much more. What we do see is 50 planes comming in on the same base smashing their bombs into every building including Old McDonalds farm and then they spend 30 min wondering where the goon is. Alternativly 1 plane that runs from own base to enemy base porking and smashing him self into the ground inorder to pork more stuff per time unit.
Personally Id like to see this timer combined with scoore for attack and bomber only beeing rewarded on landing the sortie.
Tex
-
Originally posted by Simaril
I gather that HT's thinking most about the time limit, with delayed application of damage. Earlier in thread he also said 30 secs seemed too short a delay.
It occurs to me that at a conservative 240 mph ground speed, an attacker woudl cover 2 miles in 30 seconds, and 8 miles in 2 minutes (his inital thought).
Do we really need to make attackers get that far away from target for damage to count? With a stated goal of preventing suicide attacks -- which to me means very quick deaths after damage -- that much delay seems excessive.
As others have said, 15-30 secs ought to be plenty and woudl be much less disruptive to the flow of the game.
To stop the 'pure' pork and auger guy who 9/10 times follows his ord right in, you only need 5 secs.
-
99% of the pork and auger crowd I see are gunners with typhies and lala's who dive in from 5k and pork until they die, rinse and repeat. Bomb delays have no effect on them at all. Not really solving the problem.
-
Originally posted by rabbidrabbit
99% of the pork and auger crowd I see are gunners with typhies and lala's who dive in from 5k and pork until they die, rinse and repeat. Bomb delays have no effect on them at all. Not really solving the problem.
Wouldn't agree that's pork/auger, thats pork get shot down.
Problem with that is related to poor field defences, not timers or anything else.
For me pork/auger is the guy who dives in from a great alt, releases his ord, then follows it right into the ground.
See a lot of P-38s doing it, probably misjugded compression.
-
Originally posted by TexMurphy
I should have used "less gamey tactic".
If it was to fight gamey trick it should also adress : hording,CV parked on shore (aka floating ack-ack),vulch session,shade account,spawn camping and all that generate whine on this BBS :)
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Easy one Dace -
If you are dead within the 2 mins, you just wasted your time. Bombs will land, timer will start, if you get killed, your bombs essentially do nothing.
Ya ..that sux.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Wouldn't agree that's pork/auger, thats pork get shot down.
Problem with that is related to poor field defences, not timers or anything else.
For me pork/auger is the guy who dives in from a great alt, releases his ord, then follows it right into the ground.
See a lot of P-38s doing it, probably misjugded compression.
Thats pretty much my point.
So newbs and sometimes others misjudge on occasion and compress. Whenyou compress you will have a lot of trouble hitting anything anyway. Its not a systemic exploit. I have not seen people repeatedly bomb and augur much at all OTOH, dive bombing and sucidal heavy bombers as well as pork until die crowd who game the game are.
-
Originally posted by Dace
I'm at 25k in buffs,.. I salvo all my bombs just as a couple of 163s start hitting me. I am ded BEFORE my bombs hit the ground. What now?
Nothing. It shouldn't impact high alt, level bombers at all.
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
Nothing. It shouldn't impact high alt, level bombers at all.
Of course it will.
If you get jumped and killed before the timer is up your bombs are pointless.
Plus your earlier argument for 2 mins simulating "delayed aciton" fuzes is flawed.
Even if delayed action bombs were dropped, they would still go off whether or not the plane dropping them was alive or not.
-
Originally posted by rabbidrabbit
Thats pretty much my point.
So newbs and sometimes others misjudge on occasion and compress. Whenyou compress you will have a lot of trouble hitting anything anyway. Its not a systemic exploit. I have not seen people repeatedly bomb and augur much at all OTOH, dive bombing and sucidal heavy bombers as well as pork until die crowd who game the game are.
Suicidal heavy buffs are easily fixed with the bomb from F6 view ONLY.
Not just strats that suffer from them, GV's AND CV's do also.
As for pork until die -
Well in that case the problem is poor field defences, all we need is heavier and more field guns.
Just seems as though HT is trying for a quick/nasty 'fix' rather than a well thought out all round strategy.
Frankly if it meant waiting some time for a proper solution I'd rather do that than the current heavily flawed proposal.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Suicidal heavy buffs are easily fixed with the bomb from F6 view ONLY.
Not just strats that suffer from them, GV's AND CV's do also.
As for pork until die -
Well in that case the problem is poor field defences, all we need is heavier and more field guns.
Just seems as though HT is trying for a quick/nasty 'fix' rather than a well thought out all round strategy.
Frankly if it meant waiting some time for a proper solution I'd rather do that than the current heavily flawed proposal.
I agree, a few fixes like those pointed out here would go a long way towards improving what have been long considered gamey exploits by most players.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Of course it will.
If you get jumped and killed before the timer is up your bombs are pointless.
Plus your earlier argument for 2 mins simulating "delayed aciton" fuzes is flawed.
Even if delayed action bombs were dropped, they would still go off whether or not the plane dropping them was alive or not.
Geez Kev...try reading the thread. It has been stated, more than once, in this thread that HT plans for this to not impact level bombers. My guess (and it is just that) is that HT would make so that anyone dropping from the F6 view would not be affected.
The delayed action fuse thing was not an "argument" it was something HT and I spoke about as an alternative to reducing downtime.
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
Geez Kev...try reading the thread. It has been stated, more than once, in this thread that HT plans for this to not impact level bombers. My guess (and it is just that) is that HT would make so that anyone dropping from the F6 view would not be affected.
The delayed action fuse thing was not an "argument" it was something HT and I spoke about as an alternative to reducing downtime.
Well I checked HT posts -
None of them mentions it will not affect level buffs, only yours.
If this is the case whats to stop a low alt buff coming over the field and dropping F6 view anyway.
You only have be high enough for your drones to attach and your high enough to use F6 without fear of blowing yourself up.
So instead of pork/auger jabos, you get mass porking buffs.
In fact his details are rather sketchy to be honest.
Maybe a more detailed post from HT would help us, at the moment we are assuming a lot of the details.
I'll give you an example -
Quite possible to come into a field low level with Lancs, pop up last moment, quick calibration, drop eggs from the F6 view and take out all FHs on a med field 1 pass, still make it out with 1 or 2 buffs 95% of the time.
Problem isn't pork/auger its FIELD DEFENSES, they are woefully inadequate.
-
Since HT is talking about more than 15 secs, he's thinking about more than just suicide porkers. It would appear that he wants to discourage suicidal attacks in general. Remember, he opened the thread saying he'd done detailed thinking about this issue even before posting.
So it seems to me that HiTech may specifically addressing low-survivable strat attacks for gameplay reasons alone -- and that trumps any complaints of "It's not fair to the porkers to ignore suicide fighters", etc.
So some thoughts about implementation of whatever idea HT adopts.
--- Jack-in-the-box hangars (down, but back up if attacker dies) stink.
--- Need to let the attacker know the timer has started -- so further ord can be called off, and to give sense of predictability. Maybe a system message like "Vehicle Hangar Destruction Timer Started".
--- IMPORTANTLY: the defenders do NOT need to know that the destruction threshold has been crossed. They wont be able to tell right off if it was a miss, if there wasnt enough damage, or what. That alone should cut down on hordes upping during the delay, whcih would be a major problem if visible notification was given.
--- When timer successfully expires, damage ought to apply to everything in the balst zone - -so if bad guys were upping at the time, they'd be kills
-
From a primarily base taker point of view what I would like to see is:
1. Increase Field ack hardness/number. Make a small field have the defense of a CV group.
2. Program Random Dud bombs. This forces people to not min/max bomb drops.
3. Revert to the old bombsite (the one that took skill)
4. Increase the required troops from 10 to 20.
5. Put some non-puffy ack in towns.
6. Arange the field buildings so that it makes more sense to carpet bomb a strip than to pinpoint bomb hangers. Maybe more but softer strat targets.
7. Runway damage would be nice. Have it take alot of ord but make the runway unusable for 20 mins.
Just dont put in the proposed system.
-
Again...This is a waste of time! Whether you admit it or not, your complaints are with the strat being down...Not the way the strat has been taken out... If this waste of time idea is implemented, I want all of the guys who are 100% for this to promise with their account that they will never complain when troops are porked for 5 sectors from the front, and will always be the first to re supply without question....deal?
-
Troops, ordance, radar, and fuel should be nearly impossible to destroy with guns. It should take nearly a full ammo load from something like a 110 to destroy ONE bunker/barracks/tower. No one plane should be able to take out all of any resource at even one base, never mind having one or two run along an entire front and take out ordnance and or troops.
The AAA should be accurate enough that an attacker is forced to kill it first in order to concentrate on taking out the bunker/barracks/tower that they want to kill. Ignored AAA (when an attacker zooms in and blazes away at a resource and ignores the AAA while the AAA sprays all around him), should ramp up rapidly in accuracy, simulating the fact that the gunners are not being shot at and can concentrate on their target with little or no fear of being hit by return fire. On the other hand, the dispersion of fire from a AAA installation should increase rapidly as it is being fired upon, especially a manned AAA installation. Or a death in a manned AAA installation should count as a real death in the case of the person manning the AAA, AND as a kill for the attacking plane (or GV). This should apply to both field and ship guns. The person killed in the gun should not land any kills if he is killed and the gun destroyed.
That will prevent the absurd pork runs where one or two slick fighters goes about wiping out resources along a whole front. It should take 3-5 planes to take out ONE resource at ONE base.
A ten second delay should be plenty to deal with the porker/griefer that augers in with his ordnance.
The bombs dropped from a formation should be dispersed AT LEAST as much as the formation is. That way it would be next to impossible for a formation of bombers to get their entire payload on a CV. A formation of level heavy bombers wouldn't be used to take out a single object or building anyway. Think about it, the formations were used when you wanted to cover square MILES with bombs in order to assure destruction, and not to cover square FEET.
Formations would still be useful for attacking large targets like towns and strat installations, or taking down the VH hangars at ports. They SHOULD be useful for large targets, and other than that, formations should be a liability except for their added defense guns.
-
Originally posted by KTM520guy
I'm not a suicide dweeb and I'm always looking to better myself. Each time I up a plane or GV it's never my intension to crash or get shot down. The later happens a lot though. LOL. But, how does the game know that?
:)
I don't consider myself a suicide dweeb, but I'll take on missions that I know are likely 'one-way' to try to put the brakes on a horde overrunning one of our airfields. Since I fight with the Knights, I find myself having to do this more often than I would like since we are often outnumbered.
For game-balance purposes, I like many of the suggestions in this thead. I still do not like the idea of a "damage timer", nor do I think it would stop the porkers who will just extend & evade for 1-2 minutes following a pork mission. I can tell you it sure wouldn't stop me. Stronger ord bunkers, less troop downtime, and some real ack-ack at an airfield would make it a lot tougher on me, and a whole lot more fun.
Frankly I attack CVs a lot because I like the challenge of trying to get through the heavy ack to get hits on target. If I attack alone and get wacked by the ack after dropping the cruiser, I consider that a successful operation because I deprived the enemy of a high-value unit. If I wack the cruiser and get away, even better, but dive-bombing a CV group alone is always a dicey proposition.
The airfields should be just as dicey, and they aren't. What they most need is mannable big AA guns - it is just way too easy to de-ack a field, and existing base AA is NO threat to level bombers over 5K. Give the defense 88mm or 128mm AA guns to man and the base defense has a chance. Leave it as is and I, the unrepentent porker, will not be stopped.
EagleDNY
$.02
-
Originally posted by gsharp
From a primarily base taker point of view what I would like to see is:
1. Increase Field ack hardness/number. Make a small field have the defense of a CV group.
2. Program Random Dud bombs. This forces people to not min/max bomb drops.
3. Revert to the old bombsite (the one that took skill)
4. Increase the required troops from 10 to 20.
5. Put some non-puffy ack in towns.
6. Arange the field buildings so that it makes more sense to carpet bomb a strip than to pinpoint bomb hangers. Maybe more but softer strat targets.
7. Runway damage would be nice. Have it take alot of ord but make the runway unusable for 20 mins.
Just dont put in the proposed system.
1) Agreed - This IS the problem, nothing else.
2) Only if you agree to random failures of aircraft components (engines, guns etc).
3) Think HT has said this isn't going to happen.
4) Not needed, in fact would make situation worse.
5) Put them back they way they used to be.
6) Yup
7) Doesnt work, check various other threads on cratering spawn points.
Seems most agree what IS needed is more and heavier calibre acks at fields. I'd go as far as giving the mannable ack proxy fuses ala CV and crusier guns.
I'd even add mannable acks at the cities.
-
I agree with Kev...The solution is increading the hardness of the ammo/troops...not adding silly timers
-
Kev this is in no way intended to "FIX" dive bombing buffs, thats your pet peve,not mine.
What it is intended to change is the attitude ,if I put orindance on target I succeded even if I die, both in bombers,straffing, or jabo.
As to quick and dirty, Ive only been discussing and working on this issue for over a year. Infact your F6 thought process is the quick and dirty one.
And it in no way addresses the issue/behavior we are trying to change.
As to hardening targets, That would have absoulutly 0 imapct on the suicide behavior, It would just make people have to rinse and repeate more often.
HiTech
-
Hitech...How do you explain what happens to the guys with the right attitude, who go after a target and either compress (by accident), get killed by ack, get shot down, rip wings off ect? Do you just write them off????????
-
EDIT -- typing during HT's post, so didnt see before my post
Cav, Kev, and Harp -- Problems with those suggestions.
First, the F6 only fix WILL NOT WORK. I can hit the f6 key and then the "fire2" key in 1/2 sec., and with slower autotrim in the last patch there wont be any flight path effects. F6 restriction will have NO effect on dive bombing.
Second, harder bombsites will not happen. HT changed them to easier mode on purpose, and has refused to change back. I think thats because of the critical role bombers play in keeping players in the game while they learn. In short, whats a good idea for bombers as simulation may be a bad idea for AH2's survival. Low player retention ----> lower subscriptions == bad for the game.
Third, more difficult fields themselves -- harder bunkers or harder ack DESTRUCTION values particularly -- wil tend to encourage or require hording. OTOH, more autoack streams from the same number of ack locations, same difficulty to damage WILL NOT make fields harder to take. More lethal but just as vulnerable ack will require different tactics, higher alt attacks, whatever.
Fourth, I have to agree that nowhere has HT said bombers wouldnt be affected. The entire point is to stay alive for 2 minutes after the bombs hit. Lets be real -- we all know we can do that, it jusut means different tactics.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Kev this is in no way intended to "FIX" dive bombing buffs, thats your pet peve,not mine.
What it is intended to change is the attitude ,if I put orindance on target I succeded even if I die, both in bombers,straffing, or jabo.
As to quick and dirty, Ive only been discussing and working on this issue for over a year. Infact your F6 thought process is the quick and dirty one.
And it in no way addresses the issue/behavior we are trying to change.
As to hardening targets, That would have absoulutly 0 imapct on the suicide behavior, It would just make people have to rinse and repeate more often.
HiTech
Is there any chance you could take Widewing's post and rebut it? I'm sure you've put more thought into this whole thing than I have but I can't see at the moment what's wrong with his suggestion besides the possible pain it might be to code. I'd like some edumacation on the subject :D
-
I really like the idea of using bomber perks to pay for bigger bombs.
Another idea, is to make the outcome of the run real simple, if you land successfully, you get all the perks from the run. If you bail out, you would have to be at least outside an enemy radar ring for you to get any percentage of the points, or it would be treated like a death, and then that percentage would be based on how far you are from a friendly field.
If you die you don't get squat, and lose what you spent. This could be used on all bomber/jabo runs.
Everyone has bomber perks to burn, but if you knew that you would have to use them carefully maybe things would change for the better.
As far as porking ords and stuff, the big complaint is that it's too easy, which it is. Basically anyone in a la7, typhoon, n1k, or similar plane can de-ack a field, or pork all troops and ord. I think that if it would take like 550lbs of ord to destroy 1 barrack/ammo bunker, it would be an improvement.
This way even if someone dives in from 15k, drops there 500lb bomb and dies, they get no perks, and the bunker is still up. If they had a 1k bomb, they would kill the bunker, but actually lose the perk cost of the bombs, because they didn't land or bail outside of enemy lines.
-
Widewing's changes woudl be great if they affected only experienced players. But I fear they'd hurt AH overall -- because bombers keep early players in the game while they learn their way thru the incredibly challenging curve.
Harder or less effective bombers can only decrease player retention.
Many of you guys have been playing for a decade or more, and I suspect you may not remember or realize just how daunting this game can be when you start. Even though I'm a major aviation history buff, I suspect I might have given up if I didnt find SOMETHING to do well during the hopelessly frustrating times.
Easier bombers help AH as a game business, and that helps us all.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Kev this is in no way intended to "FIX" dive bombing buffs, thats your pet peve,not mine.
What it is intended to change is the attitude ,if I put orindance on target I succeded even if I die, both in bombers,straffing, or jabo.
As to quick and dirty, Ive only been discussing and working on this issue for over a year. Infact your F6 thought process is the quick and dirty one.
And it in no way addresses the issue/behavior we are trying to change.
As to hardening targets, That would have absoulutly 0 imapct on the suicide behavior, It would just make people have to rinse and repeate more often.
HiTech
In all honesty your first post was so lacking in details I just assumed what everyone was. I think if you look back I wasn't the first to mention dive bombing buffs etc (not my pet peve).
By the same token will the timer apply to GV's and CV's also?
They are subject to the same gameyness your trying to stop for strats.
Sorry, I just disagree, the timer idea has just far too many flaws to be a viable solution.
a) Doesn't allow for guy porking getting hit by ack/planes. (unless you've not told us of something)
b) NOE's will become problematic due to VH not going down immediately.
c) Will encourage even bigger hoarding/porking to ensure strats go down
-
Yes they would also apply to CVs and GV's. Any thing that hits ground targets.
And as to holes, quite frankly I realy havn't seen one posted in this entire thread.
Ive seen lots of posts trying to change game play other than suicide issues. But nothing that points any holes other than peoples "Selective idea of realism" to accomplish there own wish list.
As to Widewings Idea, Ill just comment on the perk bombs,
If you don't have any perks, how are you ever supoosed to take bombs in a bomber to get perks?
The rest of his ideas would not impact wanting to live in any way, they just impact how hard it is to destroy objects.
The one decent idea in this thread is the smoking buildings before being destroyed, the only issue I have with that idea is the time it takes to implement it.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
Yes they would also apply to CVs and GV's. Any thing that hits ground targets.
And as to holes, quite frankly I realy havn't seen one posted in this entire thread.
Ive seen lots of posts trying to change game play other than suicide issues. But nothing that points any holes other than peoples "Selective idea of realism" to accomplish there own wish list.
As to Widewings Idea, Ill just comment on the perk bombs,
If you don't have any perks, how are you ever supoosed to take bombs in a bomber to get perks?
The rest of his ideas would not impact wanting to live in any way, they just impact how hard it is to destroy objects.
The one decent idea in this thread is the smoking buildings before being destroyed, the only issue I have with that idea is the time it takes to implement it.
HiTech
Thanks for fleshing thing out a little.
RE: GV's, just how are you going to get this to work?
In 2 mins a GV will be a long way from where the ord was dropped, will you be driving along then just blow up mysteriously?
Meanwhile you might of killed 2 or 3 other GV's, will they suddenly re-incarnate?
-
Kev: by ground targets I was refering to any non player controled targets" like buildings and CV's.
And when I said it would effect CV's and GV's I was referning to if you destroyed a building with deck guns, or destroyed buildings with a GV.
HiTech
-
Ah CC.
So basically GV's still remain subject to the same gamey drop eggs and auger crowd then.
I know I put it ironically, but hopefully you see my point.
I would suggest a 'timer' only has to be 5-10 secs to stop the true pork/auger guy.
As for guys who stay around a field to continue porking - More acks
Any thoughts on making certain objects damagable only by the correct weapon?
-
Thats not the right way of thinking.
The right way who also ads to game play and More War fun is.....
Put more Maned Ack to protect the targets, not only 37s,
but Maned 20mms to protect the hangars.
4 20mms around every hangar, in every corner, would be nice.
Ok the good fighter pilots would kill them again, but someone would
have to swim between hellfire to kill them. More war, more fun ;)
( i love to swim between the wave of fire (tracers) hunting me in the
twightlight of the sunset :)
( warcoholic ? :)
-
So, hitting the building sets it on fire. Your survival is then determing how well the fire fighters work. Kinda like your survival lowers their moral and therefore firefighting abilities.
...that's pretty cool.
maybe the intial bomb does X damage and the fire does Y damage/sec of survival?
-
"As to hardening targets, That would have absoulutly 0 imapct on the suicide behavior, It would just make people have to rinse and repeate more often." HiTech
Not if it required multiple bombers to do it. Or 20 jabos to kill a hanger. When you get up in numbers like that, it takes coordination. The MA is gamey enough as it is. Ever think of possibly making a second area that is the same setup as the MA, but has different hardness, fuel burn, lethality and other settings?
-
Originally posted by hitech
As to Widewings Idea, Ill just comment on the perk bombs,
If you don't have any perks, how are you ever supoosed to take bombs in a bomber to get perks?
I read it as you could take other bombs but not the heaviest w/o a perk.
Thanks for the comments though.
-
Hitech...Your still not addressing what happens to people with "the right attitude" who happen to against his power, die after a bomb drop? Is this players actions to be penalized or just written off? Because if so, I really only see this "fix" as taking away more damage from players with "the right attitude" who so happened to die because of reasons out of his control, opposed to the suicide guys....
And how is the smoke timer going to work with the VH? The crew I fly with ALWAYS goes after VH first...Without question, the VH has to be down to properly attack an airfield...So how do you stop 20 LTARS rolling out flaks in the 2 minute limbo?
-
Originally posted by hitech
And it in no way addresses the issue/behavior we are trying to change.
As to hardening targets, That would have absoulutly 0 imapct on the suicide behavior, It would just make people have to rinse and repeate more often.
HiTech
HT,
I have to disagree with you here - as an unrepentent porker myself, I can tell you that hardening the targets and/or reducing the strats downtimes would definitely have an effect.
If I need 6K of bombs to do in 2 ord bunkers, that limits my choice of aircraft considerably, and gives the defense a shot at me. If I have to come in with a heavy 110 or a P47N loaded to the gills with ordnance to get the job done, I am a lot easier to intercept than I am in a LA7 or Tiffie diving in clean at 450 kts. Maybe I have to do it in level bombers and fight my way in, or maybe I need to put up a heavy 110 mission to take losses on the way to target into account. I think the ord-porking suicide behavior stops because it doesn't work so well anymore - your suicide LA7 just uses up some cannon and dies to no effect.
If I take out the troops and know they are down for only for 15 or 30 minutes, then I'm forced to come back (and the defense knows this) - they can put up a defense, and I don't have the luxury of the next 1:30-1:45 to cruise into the enemy backfield, pork the troops, and disrupt the entire supply line a sector or two back from the lines.
Before you dismiss the idea, consider giving it a try for a week or two and see the effects on gameplay. These changes won't stop legitimate base-suppression missions, but they might lessen the effect of the lone suicide porker on the game.
EagleDNY
$.02
-
Originally posted by EagleDNY
HT,
I have to disagree with you here - as an unrepentent porker myself, I can tell you that hardening the targets and/or reducing the strats downtimes would definitely have an effect.
If I need 6K of bombs to do in 2 ord bunkers, that limits my choice of aircraft considerably, and gives the defense a shot at me. If I have to come in with a heavy 110 or a P47N loaded to the gills with ordnance to get the job done, I am a lot easier to intercept than I am in a LA7 or Tiffie diving in clean at 450 kts. Maybe I have to do it in level bombers and fight my way in, or maybe I need to put up a heavy 110 mission to take losses on the way to target into account. I think the ord-porking suicide behavior stops because it doesn't work so well anymore - your suicide LA7 just uses up some cannon and dies to no effect.
If I take out the troops and know they are down for only for 15 or 30 minutes, then I'm forced to come back (and the defense knows this) - they can put up a defense, and I don't have the luxury of the next 1:30-1:45 to cruise into the enemy backfield, pork the troops, and disrupt the entire supply line a sector or two back from the lines.
Before you dismiss the idea, consider giving it a try for a week or two and see the effects on gameplay. These changes won't stop legitimate base-suppression missions, but they might lessen the effect of the lone suicide porker on the game.
EagleDNY
$.02
Yup my ponit exactly.
Hardening them AND making them only damagable by the correct weapon, not sure I'd mess with downtime considering you can resup, even if you have to start a base or two back.
The correct weapon for the job would fix many other gamey probs also, in particular CV's getting straffed to death.
Although I would change one thing - The base that has 163's should ALWAYS have troops available if it still belongs to the home country. That at least gives them a chance to retake a base or resup with the rest all porked, and another good reason to defend it.
-
HMM
Base the rebuild time on the amount of ord dropped.
Lemme try to explain.
3000 lbs to take down a hanger.
1st guy comes in makes a good drop and hits with 1000 lbs . Damage is added and rebuild time.
2nd guy goes in to fast and compresses 1000 lbs hit but sadly augers.
Damage is added but rebuild time is not.
3rd guy goes in makes a good drop with 1000 lbs . Damage and rebuild time is added.
Net result hanger goes down but rebuild time is 2/3 as long.
This can be scaled to amount of ords used. Different bomb sise = different time on rebuild clock.
1000 lbs on a 3000 lb target = 1/3 of the rebuild time
500 lbs on same = 1/6 of the rebuild time
and so on.
So if the pork auger dweeb does all the damage hanger doesn't go down.
If a team effort was made and 2 out of 3 survive mission is not a complete loss.
This may need to be tweaked for CV's though.
Might need to worked for CV take no damage if the auger occurs.
Bronk
-
As a follow on to my "correct weapon" suggestion -
Here's my thoughts -
acks (fields) - destroyable by all weapons.
Hangers - Rockets and bombs only, no more strafing down FH/BH/VH.
Troops - MG/cannons little effect, rockets/bombs max effect.
Ord - MG/Cannons no effect, rockets little effect, bombs max effect
CV's -
Main and 5" guns - MG/Cannons/rockets no effect, bombs max effect
acks - all weapons
ships themselves - rockets/bombs only.
Put this together with -
increased heavier calibre field ack
increased strat hardness
I think would go a long way, OK its not going to stop the pure pork/auger guys, but IMO they are very very rare. It's the pork and hang around porking guy you see the overwhelming majority of the time.
As a historical comparison - the 367th attacked an airfield and lost 5 out of 12 P-38s to ground defences, in AH2 youd be able to deack even a large field with less, if any losses.
-
in all fairness, if you can't get rid of your ord and then live for another 30 seconds or a minute then you need to go find something else to do. HiTech's not trying to hurt any of the level bombers or anything like that, all he's trying to do is put in place some type of reward system for dropping ord. and actually surviving. Its not like he's even saying you have to make it home or live for another 10 minutes, it's a small time, anything under 2-3 minutes shouldn't be a problem a all... heck even if I'm in a C-hog it still takes a good minute or so to shoot down 3 B24's. It is just retarted to think that you cannot use all that E you have to simply extend away from the target for 30 seconds or 2 minutes, whatever the time is. The typicall suicide porker will come in around 10-15k dive straight down on the VH cause they have no clue how to line up correctly and release when they see the distance marker read about D800 or so then try and pull up... sometimes they do, sometimes they don't make it. If I up a heavy 38L, and the people that are manning the ack guns are all normal shots, no zazens around, then I can usually drop the VH with 2x1000lbers, and about 5-8rockets, then I can whipe out all the field ack with about 20 cannon rounds tops, it only take 1-2 20mm's to kill a field gun, then use my .50 cals and remaining rockets / 20mm's to destroy the troops and or fuel/ammo, I do it all the time just messing around trying to pad my attack ranks.... For level buffs, this will implement the same thing, even if your level at 15k and your planning on doing a regular F6 mode drop, now if you have a fighter on you, you have to decide whats important, your AC/crew or dropping your ord.... the more and more i think about it I really like this idea. Only problem I have with it, Murdr addressed and HT responded in a post and that was about the smoke. The main whine I keep hearing is about the time limit, and its just silly to even think that living for an extra 30 seconds or whatever will be that much harder, if it is then this new timer is most likely being implemented because of your suicide pork flying style.
-
Originally posted by hitech
....snip.....
The one decent idea in this thread is the smoking buildings before being destroyed, the only issue I have with that idea is the time it takes to implement it.
HiTech
HT,
I'm a little concerned with the smoke idea because it might give too much info to the opponents.
If the "met critical damage" message was only available to the attackers there might be fewer unanticipated gameplay effects, I'd think.
Simaril
-
Originally posted by Iceman24
in all fairness, if you can't get rid of your ord and then live for another 30 seconds or a minute then you need to go find something else to do. HiTech's not trying to hurt any of the level bombers or anything like that, all he's trying to do is put in place some type of reward system for dropping ord. and actually surviving. Its not like he's even saying you have to make it home or live for another 10 minutes, it's a small time, anything under 2-3 minutes shouldn't be a problem a all... heck even if I'm in a C-hog it still takes a good minute or so to shoot down 3 B24's. It is just retarted to think that you cannot use all that E you have to simply extend away from the target for 30 seconds or 2 minutes, whatever the time is. The typicall suicide porker will come in around 10-15k dive straight down on the VH cause they have no clue how to line up correctly and release when they see the distance marker read about D800 or so then try and pull up... sometimes they do, sometimes they don't make it. If I up a heavy 38L, and the people that are manning the ack guns are all normal shots, no zazens around, then I can usually drop the VH with 2x1000lbers, and about 5-8rockets, then I can whipe out all the field ack with about 20 cannon rounds tops, it only take 1-2 20mm's to kill a field gun, then use my .50 cals and remaining rockets / 20mm's to destroy the troops and or fuel/ammo, I do it all the time just messing around trying to pad my attack ranks.... For level buffs, this will implement the same thing, even if your level at 15k and your planning on doing a regular F6 mode drop, now if you have a fighter on you, you have to decide whats important, your AC/crew or dropping your ord.... the more and more i think about it I really like this idea. Only problem I have with it, Murdr addressed and HT responded in a post and that was about the smoke. The main whine I keep hearing is about the time limit, and its just silly to even think that living for an extra 30 seconds or whatever will be that much harder, if it is then this new timer is most likely being implemented because of your suicide pork flying style.
Of course get ready for the all the whines on the BB about 'extending/running' porkers.
Half the time on the BB is spent berating players for extending, then a system may be implemented that actually encourages it.
Well get ready for lots of Tiffies, La7s, D9's, Ponys diving in high, porking a field then 'extending', and don't start whining about it.
Only diff it will make to me for porking - instead of a Tiffy I'll take a fully loaded Pony. Can still take down troops at at least 2 fields, and run fast enough to get away.
Half the fun of porking was hanging around after to see if you could get some kills, looks like best option will be to run now.
Tactic -
Small field - 1 guy: Troops/ord down 1 pass then run.
Medium field - 2 guys: Troops/ord down 1 pass then run.
Large field - 3 guys: Troops/ord down 1 pass then run.
Or if just 1 guy -
Any field - Troops down 1 pass then run.
We will need a visual cue so we can tell if we got a good drop or not though, plus perhaps a countdown timer in the message bar.
-
Maybe making it impossible to dive bomb with heavy buffs which were supposed to only do level bombing could help with that suicide dive porking?
Another possibility might be to increase the time (=altitude) required for bombs' fuses to activate in level bombers... or generally bombs inside the fuselages.
I assume that the suicide porking is not such a big problem with dive bombers which carry only a few bombs.. or is it?
-
Hi-tech
Re-read your original premise:
How about this, just a slight change to your original post -
Difference - Strats and buildings go down right away as per current setup, no delay, does away with need for extra visual cues and this method uses existing visual cues.
a) If you die within 5-10 secs strat immediately rebuilds (stops the true pork/auger guys)
b) If you die within 2 mins the rebuild time is half so for a FH for example
It goes down: normal rebuild time = 15 mins
You die within 2 mins (lets say 1 min) = 15 - 1 (time you been alive) / 2 = 7 mins till rebuild. Attackers and defenders still get the visual cue of the hanger stops smoking to signal it will be up in less than 5 mins.
Doesn't penalise guys who try to do it the right way and get hit by ack or jumped from above.
-
Blauk,
I think HT's saying that the dive bombing is less of a problem for him, but that he doenst like the effects of the "I dont care if I die" attack in general.
If that attitude is the target, it seems that any solution would need to MAKE those attackers care....hence the revoacable damage.
-
I don't like the timer idea for strats...
A little hardening or "correct" munitions to kill it makes sense.
How about a timer for death....
You can't up for x minutes instead!
People will be a lot less likely to want to die.
PLINK
:)
-
Why not make it closer to real life and once you bust a AH or a VH open that base wont get it back up until they have flown enough supply in to rebild it. No time limmit just like real life supply and demand. Just a thought sir??
And I like the(( .fuse ))thing for low bombing runs
-
Originally posted by Simaril
Blauk,
I think HT's saying that the dive bombing is less of a problem for him, but that he doenst like the effects of the "I dont care if I die" attack in general.
If that attitude is the target, it seems that any solution would need to MAKE those attackers care....hence the revoacable damage.
The "I don't care if I die" is part of the game, you can't change it, there is no penalty for any death apart from your stats.
Few examples -
Who in their right mind if they could really die would dive into a mass of red capping a base.
Who in their right mind if they could really die would continue to fly a burning plane.
Who in their right mind if they could really die would sit on a cons 6 with a hoard on his tail.
Who in their right mind if they could really die would do the classic deathstar on the way down rather than bail.
Who in their right mind if they could really die would charge a Tiger with a Jeep.
Sorry the "I dont care if I die" argument doesn't hold up when it is so prevalent in all other aspects of the game.
If your going to hold one particular aspect of game to the "You should care if you die" rationalisation, then it follows ALL aspects of the game should be subject to the same criteria.
-
Red it would be cool but not many would like that job. Leaving the arena up to the players without any guidelines or resupply probably wouldnt work too well.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
...snip....
Sorry the "I dont care if I die" argument doesn't hold up when it is so prevalent in all other aspects of the game.
If your going to hold one particular aspect of game to the "You should care if you die" rationalisation, then it follows ALL aspects of the game should be subject to the same criteria.
Not really - because all your listed examples affect ONLY the guy who died, where base and strat affects MANY more players.
The ability to control other players SHOULD be more tightly regulated, no?
Otherwise, I guess I'd say that HT is a professional game designer, and is far more able to gauge play balance than we are. There's your side of the issue, there's my side -- but in the end the only one who sees the entire game (including the behind the scenes data) is HT. Since the "proof is in the pudding", and since AH2 is THE prime MMO flight sim, I'd tend to trust his judgement here.
As for us, well we're human and we balk at having to change. We'll adapt well enough. We're smart enough as a group to come up with solutions, after all.
-
Originally posted by Simaril
Not really - because all your listed examples affect ONLY the guy who died, where base and strat affects MANY more players.
The ability to control other players SHOULD be more tightly regulated, no?
Otherwise, I guess I'd say that HT is a professional game designer, and is far more able to gauge play balance than we are. There's your side of the issue, there's my side -- but in the end the only one who sees the entire game (including the behind the scenes data) is HT. Since the "proof is in the pudding", and since AH2 is THE prime MMO flight sim, I'd tend to trust his judgement here.
As for us, well we're human and we balk at having to change. We'll adapt well enough. We're smart enough as a group to come up with solutions, after all.
Think I'll wait and see what HT decides to implement, it's a given it is coming in one form or another, then maybe we can all have a more informed discussion.
Too many ifs, whats, buts at the moment.
Look forward to another civilised discussion on it once it rears its head in-game, until then see yas in the very unfriendly skies.
[edit] Editted two corect speeling misteaks ;) .
-
Originally posted by Strykar1
So they end up dropping the bombs make a great run only to have been shot down right right away or even soon after and make all that time spent in the air Not worth a single thing??
I dont mind dieing not in the least. I dont mind cutting infront of a enemy who I know will most likely defeat me just so a fellow Bish may have that chance to fullfill his mission or even make his way back to base. but to spend all that time on a strategic bombing run and make a successful attack but not then all of a sudden I find out it was all for nothing because I was shot down within seconds... Minutes of my bombs dropping?? I really dont like that side of it.
Bingo
-
I think the smoking building does add some stuff that is interesting...........
as I see a working model...........
If the timer runs at the point of adding damage (not point of threshold destruction) on goobers FE
Then
if goober stays alive for longer than the timer then the damage becomes "hard"................
if goober dies before the timer runs out then the damage is "repaired"
during the period that the destruction threshold is reached and various FE timers are still running then the object smokes...............during smoking it is incapacitated................ .......
if the timers run out to bring the total "hard" damage over threshold then the object is destoyed (explodes etc) and the normal repair and rebuild model kicks in.
if not then it simply stops smoking and is re activated with what ever level of "hard" damage is current.....................
This way
players get feedback (both sides) and can react..............
the mod effects all suicide hits and not just those that incurr "threshold damage"
Even the potential suicider has contributed (all but very briefly) to incapacitating the object but his effectiveness is brief all the same if he dies before the timer runs out.
-
Having played a lot of online games, I think the idea of reversing someones bombing/strafing/rocket attack because they die 2 minute later somewhat questionable: Hitech - what do you hope to accomplish with this feature?
I'm sure it will stop some of the kamikaze silliness we see.
Perhaps 30 seconds is more realistic?
30 seconds is a long time to survive a suicide run.
-
I greatly dislike the whole idea and resist this proposal to fix player behavior. This type of stuff would be more suited to TOD. I think the MA should be allowed a considerable level to shape itself.
-
How would this work with bomber formations? If one of the bombs from your drone did the final hit, and then the drone was killed before the expire time, does that count?
Players that fly Bombers the intended way would be penalized, as many times, the fighters attack when the bomber pilot is in the sight trying to do a real bomb run. It's easy to tell when they have no gunner and go auto-pilot to calibrate and drop.
If the timer is 10 seconds, 1 minute or 2 minutes, it won't matter all that much to the pork and auger crowd anyway, all they will do is just modify their behavior to stay alive just long enough to keep their damage done, then auger or bail.
Someone else suggested to make the player use perk points to buy the bombs.
How about, if the player loads bombs, they do not cost anything until they actually get dropped (No loosing perks if vultched or shot down en-route) Once the bombs are dropped, they cost perk points. If the player then gets home to land, all bombs that hit a target get 2x the amount of perks earned for what they cost (I.e. if bomb cost 2 perks, and bomb hit target, and player lands, player recieves 4 perks.) If the bomb missed target, but player lands, 1/2 perks earned back. If bomb hits and player dies, 1/2 perk earned back, if bomb missed and player dies, no perks.)
-
Actually, thinking of this one, it could make level bombing from higher altitudes even less desired.
If a bomber is at 20K and drops, the bomber could be killed before the bombs even reach the ground... what then? the bombs are negated all together?
-
Ok if not that way then have it to were you have to at least fly 3 runs to it or give it like 5 min, till it reups. Then if your bombing it if you hit it you take it out no time limit .
And can we get the .Delay Fuse thing for low level bombing?? That would be great :aok
-
I think the only solution here is more/stronger ack with all positions having an option to be manned. Any sort of timer system will be the worst thing since sliced bread. It will indeed curb the tide of suicide pork dweebs but will punish those who enjoy the base capture aspect of the game.
I salute HiTech for allowing us to fight over this issue. If I ever get to meet you in person, The first round is on me :aok
-
Originally posted by martyb
First my apologies if I've accidently repeated anybody, this thread is pretty long.
It seems the general idea to is discourage the "pork and auger" people. I agree it would add general mayhem to the game if the hangers were popping up and down. Here's my angle.....
1) Make the bombs from bombers (one's with bomb sites) only able to release when viewing the bomb site.
2) Leave the destruction of buildings the way it currently is. It is very realistic and historically accurate (except for the pop back up in 15 minutes, but hey it's still a very cool game). Pilots would die in some instances after hitting their intended target. That IS the cost of war.
3) To discourage the "pork and auger" folks, re-work the perk system to apply a negative score if the pilot gets shot down/augers/crashes within 2 minutes even if flying a non perk plane. Right now, you still get perk points even if you don't land your mission, and have successful hits/objects destroyed. It could be as simple as adding a negative to the perk point gain for the 2 minutes for when you hit something, or even more costly (an extended formula).
:aok
Again, I think the perk system should be looked into as a option to this. In reality, high risk manuvers have high risk costs, however, the gain of a successful high risk raid should be a equally high gain for the risk taker. For the player who takes the high risk without concern of being shot down, or even crashing; in reality, they've forfited their life, but this an online combat sim, hit'um where it'll take notice, in the perk score. Sure this will affect newbies, but I can't tell you how many times I got shot down "de-acking" before I learned the right and "safer" way to do it. A negative perk score for newbies would ideally encourage them fly lower risk missions to decrease their score defecet.
-
Originally posted by Midnight
How would this work with bomber formations? [/QUOTE
If the timer started from the point at which the bombs were released then higher alt bombing would be more benefiscial as the damage would become hard sooner after it was incurred................ where as low alt suicide attacks have almost simultanious timer start points..................
Allocating stuff to formations could be handled in several ways............. the simple mechanism would be to invoke a ratio of 3 :1 for every formation ac killed within the time alloted (1 third of the bombs become ineffective) the other (as you suggest) would be to run 3 timers, one for each member of the formation, for each salvo...............
(for a formation of Ju88's that could be 72 timers...............)
If this is applied to damage rather than threshold destruction criteria then even suicide straffing porkers are effected then we are running timers for each bullet..............!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I still like the concept of perking heavier bombs............ HT's criticism of bomb perking (COADING difficulaties to one side) was that it could deny new players total access to bombs...............
actually rockets and 250 Lb bombs could always be free...............
-
Originally posted by hitech
What it is intended to change is the attitude ,if I put orindance on target I succeded even if I die, both in bombers,straffing, or jabo.
Yes they would also apply to CVs and GV's. Any thing that hits ground targets.
by ground targets I was refering to any non player controled targets" like buildings and CV's.
And when I said it would effect CV's and GV's I was referning to if you destroyed a building with deck guns, or destroyed buildings with a GV.
HiTech
Say three squadmates are trying to take a base, and they up 2 Ostis and and M3. One Osti starts taking down one side of the town and the other Osti takes down the other. While doing so, an enemy notices, ups an A20, and flies over just as the last buildings are going down. He dive-bombs one Osti, and augers into the ground shortly after his bombs. This kills the Osti, therefore half the town pops.
As the second Osti tries to take down all the buildings that just popped, the A20 returns with a second bomb load, and dive bombs and augers, destroying the second Osti. Buildings all pop again. M3 Driver is sitting around going :cry .
Now, WHOSE BEHAVIOR WAS "SUICIDAL"?? Certainly not the Ostis. They drove for perhaps 8-10 minutes to get to the town in the first place. They are after a base. They had every intention of landing after the capture. They are displaying the teamwork and comraderie you would like to encourage.
The A20, on the other hand, was being a complete dweeb with total disregard of his virtual "life", displaying the very attitude you deplore and are trying to "correct" with this rule.
Yet, A20 gets his way.
Originally posted by hitech
And as to holes, quite frankly I realy havn't seen one posted in this entire thread.
HiTech
:confused: :huh :confused:
-
E25280:
In your scenerio, under what I've described above, the buildings would stay down, the damage model would stay unchanged. As for the A20 pilot, he'd get minus perks becase he augered, even though he's about to re-up. As for the first osty, I see what you're getting at. Since suicide attacks are not realistic with GVs (and ship guns for that matter), I would have to say not to apply the negative perk formula to those type units. That may be what HiTech is referring to; if not, I disagree with HiTech.
As for the A20 re-upping and killing the 2nd osty the same way (under my suggestion).....well, I'll have to say kudos to him for taking it BIG in the shorts twice just to prevent the capture of the field. The loss of perks would hopefully generate the deterrent HiTech is looking for. That's a good example of high risk, high reward. That's why I think it should be a thought out formula instead of a straight negative.
Bottom line, the A20 would loose signifcant perks for augering after a kill, while the osties get the few perks they do even though they were killed (just as they currently would in the MA). I feel by adjusting the perk system instead of the damage models, it's less information for the server to track (lag) and less re-programming (coding) for the software folks to generate.
-
Originally posted by hitech
At the con we were discussing changing building down times based on how long you lived after destroying a target.
After doing some detailed thinking about it, relized the down time is problematic when mutliple people have hit a targe. But was wondering what people thought of the following.
Based on how long you lived after hiting a target, currently im thinking around 2 minutes. If you die a portion of your damage is removed.
As an example 2 people drop bombs on a hangar. 1 does 2k damage, the last does 1k damage and destroys the hangar.
The 2nd player dies after 1 min. The system would remove 1min/2min i.e. 50% of the damgage aplied to the hangar. The hangar would then reserect with 2.5k damage left on it.
Thoughts?
HiTech
Ok, after watchin this thread, it seems as tho it's all about dieing.
How about how you die ? (Sorry if I missed any discussion on this).
How about you make it depending on if they hit the ground ?
That's really the problem.
If they get shot down, by whatever, no problem.
If they die by hitting the ground without significant damage to thier aircraft, ord has no effect.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Kev this is in no way intended to "FIX" dive bombing buffs, thats your pet peve,not mine.
What it is intended to change is the attitude ,if I put orindance on target I succeded even if I die, both in bombers,straffing, or jabo.
As to quick and dirty, Ive only been discussing and working on this issue for over a year. Infact your F6 thought process is the quick and dirty one.
And it in no way addresses the issue/behavior we are trying to change.
As to hardening targets, That would have absoulutly 0 imapct on the suicide behavior, It would just make people have to rinse and repeate more often.
HiTech
once again...What will become of the players with "the right attitude" who happen to die in the limbo window? Do their efforts just get written off?
-
Maybe instead of selecting to be scored as "fighter" or "attack" we could choose to be scored as "suicide dweeb" or "worthwhile player" :lol
-
Originally posted by Iceman24
in all fairness, if you can't get rid of your ord and then live for another 30 seconds or a minute then you need to go find something else to do. HiTech's not trying to hurt any of the level bombers or anything like that, all he's trying to do is put in place some type of reward system for dropping ord. and actually surviving. Its not like he's even saying you have to make it home or live for another 10 minutes, it's a small time, anything under 2-3 minutes shouldn't be a problem a all... heck even if I'm in a C-hog it still takes a good minute or so to shoot down 3 B24's. It is just retarted to think that you cannot use all that E you have to simply extend away from the target for 30 seconds or 2 minutes, whatever the time is. The typicall suicide porker will come in around 10-15k dive straight down on the VH cause they have no clue how to line up correctly and release when they see the distance marker read about D800 or so then try and pull up... sometimes they do, sometimes they don't make it. If I up a heavy 38L, and the people that are manning the ack guns are all normal shots, no zazens around, then I can usually drop the VH with 2x1000lbers, and about 5-8rockets, then I can whipe out all the field ack with about 20 cannon rounds tops, it only take 1-2 20mm's to kill a field gun, then use my .50 cals and remaining rockets / 20mm's to destroy the troops and or fuel/ammo, I do it all the time just messing around trying to pad my attack ranks.... For level buffs, this will implement the same thing, even if your level at 15k and your planning on doing a regular F6 mode drop, now if you have a fighter on you, you have to decide whats important, your AC/crew or dropping your ord.... the more and more i think about it I really like this idea. Only problem I have with it, Murdr addressed and HT responded in a post and that was about the smoke. The main whine I keep hearing is about the time limit, and its just silly to even think that living for an extra 30 seconds or whatever will be that much harder, if it is then this new timer is most likely being implemented because of your suicide pork flying style.
Although a good write, this seems to again prove my point. Now don't get me wrong, I'm sure Iceman here is probably 10x's better in a fighter or attack A/C than myself, however it again shows how easily a field can be brought to it's knee's or rendered darn near useless.
I think this scenario would play out a little different if said individual or likewise attacker was met with
FIVE of these (40mm Bofors-Twin mount)
(http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/BoforsHaze.jpg)
A couple of these (Bofors 40mm Single)
(http://www.ra39-45.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/gunpics/bofors40.jpg)
Ten of these (20mm Twin mount)
(http://www.usstexasbb35.com/Stoner-B-W-20mm-drawing-DoubleBarrel.jpg)
And some of these for good measure (Granted the VH is still up)
(http://www.axishistory.com/fileadmin/user_upload/w/wirbelwind.jpg)
-
Greetings,
To cut down on porker (especially the suicide porkers) improve auto AAA ability to hit. Easier than messing with 'who did what and lived for how long and was shot down by what as he/she was doing this to that. . . . .' my penny's worth.
Regards,
-
at 360 mph, you would have to fly 12 miles with a 2 minute timer to have hit count. A 250 mph bomber would have to fly about 8 miles.
5 to 10 seconds should be enough to take care of suicide porker.
-
Lol this certainly caused alot of discussion but one thing you can throw out of the chat straight away is bomber perk points. ???? They mean absolutely nothing. Who wants to fly a jet bomber with a payload able to drop a dog kennel. Hit them where it hurts Lol anyone want my bomber perks ????
-
But hey wait a minute......I have got it........perk the heavy bombers.... that way who would ditch ??????Lol
-
To really weed out the suiciders, wouldn't it need to track how the player died? Otherwise it would be removing legitimate damage infliced by players who gave living their honest best and just lost.
That seems an unfair burden on players who are newer as AH has a steep learning curve as it is.
It seems that as described in the OP this would make the "horde" tactic even more desirable and prevalent as well, something seen, by and large, as undesirable.
-
Originally posted by cav58d
once again...What will become of the players with "the right attitude" who happen to die in the limbo window? Do their efforts just get written off?
Obviously, yes.
Which is why players -- regardless of their attitudes -- will change their tactics to find a method that works.
Same thing we do every day in the MA. We're a clever lot, we'll figure it out.
-
I can't decide if I like your Idea or not HiTech... I can see some good things and bad things...
I would say that if it dosn't take to much time to program, try it for a tour and at the end of the tour put another post up like this one and get some feedback on how it worked out for people...
On the MA message describe new rules and let people know it is not a permenent thing unless you get good responses in the forum at the end of the test....
I think the only real way to know if an idea is good or not is try it and see.
P.S. Please put the HQ damage back the way it was..... It had it's problems but now HQ raids arn't fun any more and are almost nonexistant. :)
-
I dont like the proposed changes.
What I would like to see is troops and strats that are harder to kill. The biggest draw for porking is how easy it is for a single plane (fighter) to quickly and easily shut down a base (in terms of strat making it useless).
What if you made the targets harder to kill and hangars will only come up at all if supplies are brought to the field? Determine a number of supplies for each type of building and let the supplier pick which hangar/building they are trying to supply (FH supplies, BH supplies, ammo supplies,etc)? I know, having to supply your fields is a drag, but that would make the issue of keeping a base useful a function of team effort.
Can the accuracy of field ack be made variable? Say, if the field is completely undefended, the accuracy is higher (to make porking more difficult, etc)?
Just some thoughts....
-
warp,
Changing the fields to some of the ones the scenario team made would do a lot towards that, and I'm pretty sure you can turn up accruracy too.
-
yeah I'm definately with ya on that MOIL, if the bases had defense like that i don't think I would get through the 1st pass without getting popped lol
-
Cheee more gamey crap to pizz off the last of what's good with the game.
Yeah sure introduce this and a few other things to totally script the MA to conform with what the loudest of the loud whiners want. They all want everybody else to be constrained and hamstrung so that everything conforms to their narrow view of the world and how it should work.
While we are on this type of change/improvement to the game - can we introduce the pink doughnuts you fly through to completely restore your health/armour and ammo?
Oh yeah, if you don't completely understand my point of view:
How about fix some of the things that are broken instead of creating newer unreal rubbish concepts designed just to annoy a few more of the players.
-
Originally posted by Dantoo
Cheee more gamey crap to pizz off the last of what's good with the game.
Yeah sure introduce this and a few other things to totally script the MA to conform with what the loudest of the loud whiners want. They all want everybody else to be constrained and hamstrung so that everything conforms to their narrow view of the world and how it should work.
While we are on this type of change/improvement to the game - can we introduce the pink doughnuts you fly through to completely restore your health/armour and ammo?
Oh yeah, if you don't completely understand my point of view:
How about fix some of the things that are broken instead of creating newer unreal rubbish concepts designed just to annoy a few more of the players.
Agreed.
-
Things change, get used to it.
Making bases harder to pork by a lone fighter isn't exactly gamey.
-
Originally posted by AKWarp
Things change, get used to it.
Making bases harder to pork by a lone fighter isn't exactly gamey.
True enough but this way is...
especially when a number of much better ideas abound in this thread.
-
Greetings,
I just got one more question, and then I will leave this to cooler heads. How did we and the bad guys take down the majority of bases in WW II? Was the primary means stafing, dive bombing or level bombing?
I Know Japanese strike on the Midway airstip (a small field?) used 108 planes - escorts and bombers. And the Strike Leader called for a second strike.
What was the primary technique used by the attackers? Level or dive bombing? How long was Midway out of operation?
Concerning the US carrier strike, it took 6 attack squadrons to destroy the IJN carriers. The Essex Class carriers had (approx) 98 airframes available for all missions - 54ish for Torp or Dive bomber missions. Everybody knows the torps didn't fare well, but set the conditions for the success of the Dive bombers - and a that level bombing a carrier group previously failed miserably. (no, no won't hijack a thread!) :D
I could ask the simular questions regarding G-canal, Truk, the Solomans and other places the US reduced IJN and IJA airfields during the Island hopping campaign.
Obviously, this be a game - and play balance is more important than realism. How auto-defensable (i.e. on average how many planes should it take to destroy a base, by type and size) do 'we' want undefended bases from stafing and dive and level bombing attacks? 1? 4? 15? 108?
I would think that, on average, the auto defenses should be able to take out 2-3 lone attackers (pilots with an average skill set and with an average cannon load out), if they get within AAA range with minimum damage to the base.
Regards,
-
Ok, you asked for it :)
It was like this.....
----The Attack of Pierre Closterman Squadron in a German Airfield----
a scenario very close to AH type of attack...
From TEN ( 10 ) Tempests, 8 mia, 2 came back.
Posted by Swoop http://www.flyaceshigh.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2822&highlight=Closterman
**Excerpt from The Big Show by Pierre Clostermann.**
We were at 14,000 feet and kept straight on over to the left, as if we had no intention of attacking. I took a close look at the field: the small crosses parked just where we expected them showed up on the bright green grass of early spring. I particularly noticed one, two, four, seven flak towers. Their shadows clearly projected on the perimeter track by the sun
'Look out Filmstar Leader, flak at 6 o'clock!'
Sure enough, 200 yards behind us five big black puffs from 88 mm. shells had appeared. OK, five more seconds and then I would attack. The objective was behind us and we were facing the sun. Fear caught me by the throat and stopped me breathing. Aerial combat always found me calm -
after the early stages - but flak was quite different.
'Drop your tanks, Filmstar'.
My stomach contracted and a wave of nausea swept over me - the advantage of a single-seater is that you can pass out with fear without anybody noticing.
'Quick. 180 port, go.'
This would bring us back facing the airfield, with the sun at our backs.
'Diving--full out, Filmstar!'
My nine Tempests were beautifully echeloned on my left although we were diving almost
vertically.
'Smell of flowers,' came Bay Adams voice mockingly in the earphones. Flak! Christ, what flak! The entire surface of the airfield seemed to light up with the flashes from 20mm and 37mm guns. There must have been at least 40 of them. A carpet of white puffs spread out below us and the black puffs of the 37's stood out in regular string of eight.
What flak! Physical fear is the most terrible thing a man can suffer - my heart leaped into my mouth, I was covered with sweat, with sticky, clammy sweat. My clenched toes swam in my boots.
We dived desperately into the moke…explosions and tracer to left and right crossing over and under us….bangs around our wings and sinister dazzling flashes.
We were a mile from the perimeter, 150 feet from the ground. Men were running hither and thither.
'Lower for Christ's sake,' I yelled hysterically. The broad expanse of grass, carved by the gray runways, tilted up before my eyes and rushed towards me. We were doing over 450 mph. First a hangar … a bowser … then the Messerschmitts, perched clumsily on their narrow gear, about thirty of them, with men crouching under their wings. Too far to the left, unfortunately, outside my line of fire.
A group of a dozen Arados loomed up in my sight. I fired, I fired frantically, my thumb jammed on the button. My shells formed a ribbon of explosion worming its way between the Arados, climbing up the fuselage, hitting theengines … smoke …one of the planes exploded just as I was over it, and my Tempest was tossed up by the burning gust. A Tempest touched the ground and the fuselage
bounded up in a shower of fragments of smashed wings and tailplanes. More hangars in front of me. I fired a second burst-it exploded on the galvanized iron doors and the steel tanchions.
'Look out , Red 2' My No. 2 was coming straight for me, out of control, at a terrific speed. His hood had gone. At 470 mph 20 yards to my right, he went smack into a flak tower, cutting it in two beneath the platform.
The wooden frame flew into the air. A cluster of men hanging on to a gun collapsed into space. The Tempest crashed on the edge of the field, furrowing through a group of little houses, with a terrific flash of light; the engine had come adrift in a whirlwind of flames and fragments scattered in the sky.
It was all over … almost. One, two, three … the tracer bullets were pursuing me. I lowered my head and hunched myself behind my rear plating … twelve, thirteen, fourteen … I was going to cheat …a salvo of 37 burst so close that I got only the flash of the explosions without seeing the smoke…splinters rained down on my uselage…nineteen, twenty! I pulled the stick back and climbed straight up into the sky. The flak kept on.
I glanced back towards Schwerin, just visible under my tailplane. A thousand feet below a Tempest was climbing in zig-zags, the tracer stubbornly pursuing him. Fires near the hangars, columns of greasy smoke, a fireworks display of exploding magnesium bombs. The lone Tempest caught me up, waggled his wings and formed up line abreast.
'Hallo, Filmstar aircraft, reform south of target, angels 10.'
'Hallo, Pierre, Red 3 here, You know, I think the rest have had it.'
Surely Bay couldn't be right! I scanned the 360 degrees of the horizon, and the terrific pyramid of flak bursts above Schwerin right up to the clouds, hanging in the still air. No one.
1304 hours. We had attacked at 1303 hours. The nightmare had lasted perhaps 35 seconds from the beginning of our dive, and we had lost eight aircraft out of ten….
and to get a feeling of the real ammo....
http://www.daveswarbirds.com/b-17/contents.htm
-
Originally posted by TinmanX
I am hoping you are requiring totally honest opinions?
I hate the idea.
It takes AH further from simulation, closer to game.
Rampant porking makes the MA in some way more realistic?
In the end, its a game, nothing more, nothing less. More importantly the MA isn't a simulation of anything...its a big Quake match with planes. Structuring rules for better _gameplay_ in that environment is a good thing.
I think this the suggestion by HT is a really good one as it does address the porking problem.
-
Originally posted by hitech
As to Widewings Idea, Ill just comment on the perk bombs,
If you don't have any perks, how are you ever supoosed to take bombs in a bomber to get perks?
The rest of his ideas would not impact wanting to live in any way, they just impact how hard it is to destroy objects.
The one decent idea in this thread is the smoking buildings before being destroyed, the only issue I have with that idea is the time it takes to implement it.
HiTech
Dale, I didn't state that I wanted to perk all bombs, just the 1,000 lb and heavier and no perks for level bombers. What I proposed is this:
"1) Place a perk value on bombs of greater weight than 500 lb or 250 kilos for all non-bomber aircraft. Let's say, 3 perks each. Perks are not expended if the pilot lands."
This means that you can still take a pair of 500 lb bombs (3 if flying a P-47), which means it would take more people or more individual flights to destroy a hanger.
Even if the perk on 1,000 lb bombs was applied to heavy and medium bombers, they still have the option of loading a great many 500 lb bombs and will still be able to destroy targets, thus generating perks for future sorties. Add to that, it is a fact that the most commonly dropped bomb by B-17s and B-24s in WWII was the General Purpose M43 500 lb bomb. M44 1,000 lb bombs were used with less frequency, and the M34 2,000 lb bombs were used even less often.
I also disagree that my proposals would not reduce suicide runs.
If a player must risk fighter perks to load 1,000 lb bombs, you can bet they will give due consideration to not losing those perks. If a player has no fighter perks, he will either have to take smaller bombs or actually manage to shoot down some aircraft to generate them. If they're fighting air to air, they're not flying suicide missions. Darn few perks are earned doing jabo only, and those perks are reduced if they do not land safely. Again, more motivation to survive.
In addition, hardening barracks and ordnance bunkers reduces the effectiveness of the attacker. Plus, limiting weight of bombs via a perk system means that one fighter cannot completely disable the entire offensive power of an airfield.
Another fact... Heavy bombers were primarily used as strategic weapons, attacking the enemy's ability to manufacture the goods required to fight a war. In AH2, heavy bombers are primarily used as tactical weapons. Sure, some guys will attack strats, but they do so largely to pad their scores.
If you differentiate between General Purpose bombs and Armor/Semi-armor Piercing bombs, you can reduce the mayhem of suicide attacks on CV groups. GP, high explosive bombs, with thin-wall casings were far less effective at sinking large combat ships. Simply because they were fused to detonate upon contact (if not, the case would rupture, which vastly reduced the explosive order of magnitude). By having different classes of bombs, you can greatly reduce the effectiveness of heavy bomber attacks on carrier groups. The lack of armor-piercing bombs for Heavy and Medium bombers will inhibit suicide, dive-bombing buffs simply because they will not be able to get the desired result without multiple sorties. Plus, if the 1k and larger bombs require perks... Good luck sinking a CV with GP 500 pounders.
Now, add that bombers designed for level bombing should only have bombs released by the bombardier, not the pilot. Also, only the bombardier should be able to open the bomb bay doors while in flight.
This shifts the burden to tactical fighters and light/dive bombers, just where it should be. These types should have access to armor-piercing bombs.
I'm sure these ideas would be difficult to code, but I'm equally sure as to their potential effectiveness at reducing both the number and frequency of suicide runs, as well as limiting the damage they can do. It will force players to organize to be successful.
Bottom line: If you reduce the effectiveness of suicide runs and add a tangible cost factor, you will reduce the number of suicide runs. Win-win.
As an added bonus, you introduce more realism, something many players will gladly embrace.
My regards,
Widewing
-
OK...I damint it...I cant read all 3 bizzilion post in this thread, but heres my 2¢
.
It would be a nice change to see suicide bomb runs being less effective, and it would be a welcome change (at least to test) to see living after your drop meaning something in the MA.
It would also be an interesting gameplay addition if we had different types of bombs: GP for general bombing of hangars and such, AP for taking out vehicles and ships, and perhaps incidiary for extra damage to buildings (prob just reduce damage from other bomb types as bomb screw over the city pretty well now anyhow). This is prob a real beach to coad, so Im not holding my breath.:D But knowing nothing about how your code works, I would think the easiest way to make this work is to have a bombtype check in the damage routine that then adjusts pennetration and total damage by 'X' amount based on target -vs- bomb type.
On the same note, didnt AP bombs have less explosive or wiegh more than GP bombs? Since AP rounds have big metal heads I would think they would have to have less explosives and thus be less effective against soft targets since you dont need an AP nose to go thru a wooden roofed building.
Ah well....enough of the ramblings :aok
-
***I think this the suggestion by HT is a really good one as it does address the porking problem.***
With all my respect to Widewing ( a very knowlegable person here and
usenet ) and HT.....
Perking is Limiting. Limits are not adds to gameplay and reality.
Giving More Options ads to game play and reality. MORE AI and MANED ACK.
They come to pork your field ? Defend it. Givem hell. Grab a 20mm and blow
them out of the sky.
(we need also 88s for High Bombers and Panzer Attacks).
More Fire, more War, more Gameplay, and because in fact It Was Like This
(read 3 posts before, the attack of Pierre Closterman) More Reality.
Perking dont attract players. More fire and war attract players. For this they
are here and pay for it. And More, It Was Like this in reality.
Widewing is right about the strategic bombers.
They do low alt bombings because they have nothing better to do, so
they low alt porking fields.
We have wrong design here.
Strategic Bombers need strategic Targets. The solution Exists in the old AW.
Build Plane Factories in the back of every country (near HQ) and let strategic bombers do their job.
(lot of space to climb high).
Imaging all the hordes of spits climbing high to protect their lovely factory,
or no spit. :)
Lot of Fun hidden here but not only.
Ah will become real Aces HIGH and more realistic because it was Like This
in reality. Then we will see real dogfights High for me109s jugs ponys and lightnings. They will fight where they was designed for. High.
AH as is it is,resembles a eastern front realism with low alt jabos be the kings.
We dont change this, we keep it, but we ADD the high alt war witch resembles
the western front (European), because It Was Like This in Reality.
Let the players choose where they will fight. The motivations exists.
Coad ? :) not big deal. Just add some plane factories around HQ and let the lala and spit guys protect them.
Bomber guys will be very pleased to destroy them ;)
No motivations, no war.
At ground a plus to the war in attack mode will be Mobile Artillery, every player commands 6 or 10 cannons in formation mode (code exists).
Lot of work for jabos but also for low alt fighters who want to protect artillery from jabos.
In defence mode a great add will be the 88s for high bombers protection ( Maned ) and for Tank defence.
With right motivations and right weapons you create a great war.
And you have a variety of options for every player and more satisfaction for all
because It Was Like This in Reality.
-
Perking is Limiting. Limits are not adds to gameplay and reality.
Quite the contrary.
Certain logical limitations become very necessary for fixing certain undesirable attitudes the gamers show. In other words, it is the lack of limitations than compared to real life, that is behind the rise of the phenomena we call 'dweebism'. Game pilots are not limited by the fear of death - which causes erratic behavior on the part of the gamers to achieve their game goals. Therefore, a certain method of limiting their actions in some other manner can ultimately simulate (as a result, at least) the attitude of the pilots in the game to match real life more closely.
It adds to gameplay and reality.
-
I too can see several ways that perking ordinance loadouts can be made to discourage the suicide bomber and enable the use of more modest bomb loads when no perks are available.................... ........
This does not discourage the suicide straffer though.........HT's proposal does negate the effectiveness of a suicide straffer and bomber.
I would also agree that manned ground to air defences should be greater than present................... manned gguns are good at this..........simply put there should be more .............much more say 10 per airfield.
Further manned ground guns can be under camo....... and not high lighted with "hit me" pads under them.
IMO there should be more puffy ack than the two presently defencely located in the towns.
As for straffing to pork troops / supplies and ammo...........
Troop barracks at vehicle fields should be trebled if not trebled again...it should be virtually impossible for one or two fighter bombers to eradicate "infantry" as we can now.
Supplies should be a function of hangers......IMO if a C47 can launch then it should be allowed supplies.............. if a GV can launch then the jeep/m3 should be allowed to carry supplies.
Fuel is limited in its strat effectiveness any way.............
Ammo bunkers should be doubled and hardened........... (ammo bunkers do not have to burn....they can explode dramatically then smoke ( a little) a while.......)
-
Hate the idea HiTech!!!
I think a better approach to eliminating the single field porker (if that is what you are trying to accomplish) is to put more accurate and possibly more/bigger ack guns at the fields!!.
Manned quad 50's Acks like the gun package that the M16 use would be nice, especially if it was protected by a hardened bunker that would take at least a 100lb bomb or at leat 5 cannon rounds to take out (acks now that are taken out by a single cannon round are a joke).
-
I don't like the idea.
-
Rabidrabbit,
How is making troops and ammo harder to kill making things more gamey?
I don't like HT's idea, but I do support making porking more difficult, at least to the point that one or two fighters can't do it.
The biggest drawback we have in terms of "realism" is that we don't really die and we are limited by the number of people on each team. In reality, each and every base had people stationed there. In this game, you have to jump around. If everyone responds to a flashing base, then your manpower at the front drops and you get overwhelmed.
The only way to realistically "man" all the bases would be to limit the fields to a maximum of 8-10 fields per team....total. That would be a bloody mess of a map....one gigantic furball (I'm sure that would make some folks happy). Admittedly, if such a map were in the rotation, it would be fun once in a while.
Making AI ack more accurate at fields that are unmanned would make porking more difficult. Decrease AI ack accuracy proportionately to the number of friendlies in the area (down to the level that it currently is at max capacity).
I think take some AAA guns ala the 5" found on fleets and put them at airfields (and make them mannable) would help too.
Make troops and ammo harder to kill.
I don't know if it is possible, but make the base layouts different, even within the same size category. Add more indestructables, but make them look like "regular" hangars and such. That would make things like, communication, more tactics, etc come into play to really knock a base down. As it is now, two flights of buffs can take an antire base down (with the exception of large fields), in a single pass no less.
-
After reading through pages of posts and differing opinions my view on this subject is not changed. I like the idea if it can be implemented without effecting the level bomber guys. There are many folks who only see the downside or want to make more sweeping changes that would cause present game play to be changed. This proposal is nice, simple, and only really causes problems to the folks that actually do the pork and auger runs, the very ones that this is being implemented to address. I don't think HTC wants to make field capture any harder than it is, doesn't want to have to make major programing changes to implement more guns, or have to change all the maps/airfields for more guns. They want to spend as little programming time for this so they can concentrate their time for additional game features we are looking for.
-
I still feel that anything that leaves bases uncaptured while the FH's or the ack is down will continue to support the gamey horde and vulch gameplay.
I would rather that the ack and FH's stay up till everything else is down.
I would also like some maps with the fields 3/4 of a sector apart. On every map where there is such a place... that is where the action is... when a light bulb fragile CV gets close.. the action is there.
If action is a good thing then bases far apart and easily killed ack and hangers is a bad thing. If some sort of board (bored) game is desired then by all means.... make is so there is no chance for fair fights.
lazs
-
Warp,
I don't think I said making those tougher is gamey. Actually I support the more realistic bases that not only look better but are tougher to take down. What I thought was gamey is the die-o-meter clock count down that HT is going with. I prefer a realistic fix over a gamey fix if possible.
-
Originally posted by hitech
And so far from the responses and resones im leaning more to doing the implemtation.
HiTech
ROFLMAO...of course you are. Thats a given
carry on.
Honestly...i see this increasing the hoard mentality even more. Why...strenght in numbers=life=max down time. Its just the basic way of thinking.
-
Salute All
Dont like it very much its a bad idea! ..why dont we just cut to the end and get rid of bombers and Ord all together and make just one big furball !! and for that matter why land just apear in flight.:rofl we will just make the bombers drone's.
leave good enough alone. or make a seperate arena for the landgrabbers?:rolleyes: Fly have fun see yas.
-
FWIW sorry HT i dont like the idea of making something only sort of damaged for any period of time.
I think the real solution to sorting out suiciders is to make a virtual life actually worth something, then people will think a bit harder about wasting them.
Now the problem becomes how to give it some worth...
Another alternative would be to give a person who lands a bomber mission a bigger perk point multiplier and introduce some cool perk bomber rides (Super Fortress for example) and/or weapons (im sure theres something that will fit here).
Just my 2 cents to consider :)
-
Taking a field should take team work. Make the land grabbers use the mission editor. Mission editor should make you specify the target / field
you are after. If you are not part of the mission you cannont destroy
anything at a field. Im sure there is someway you could exploit this
but would make for more realistic formations of planes.
Robert
-
quote:Originally posted by hitech
And so far from the responses and resones im leaning more to doing the implemtation.
HiTech
Originally posted by Mugzeee
ROFLMAO...of course you are. Thats a given
carry on.
Honestly...i see this increasing the hoard mentality even more. Why...strenght in numbers=life=max down time. Its just the basic way of thinking.
_______
I have already put forward my view so a second post is overdoing it, I admit.
People with ideas looking for ways to improve enjoyment perhaps deserve some time. Those looking for changes to curtail others in their enjoyment deserve none. I still wonder at the alacrity shown by the authors to introduce this sort of stupidity.
One point that might have been made earlier is in strictly economic terms, changes like this win you not a single new customer - just further risk the ones you have invested in gaining already.
-
Well I talked about this post with most of the squad last night (squad night)
and I didn't hear a single "Sounds like a good idea" . In fact nobody liked it.
I'm leaning that way also the more I think about it. I think it might be better to just make ack more leathal and or more of it so trying to do a suicide run on a base well would be suicide.
Really how many guys in a single fighter would really dive in on a large field all alone to try straifing down the ord bunkers and then jump out of the plane even though they hadn't even been hit? :lol
Or a flight of bombers fly's over a base and takes little or no damage? Actually last night I went to take down hangers at a medium field in my B24's with 4 2000 pounders. I missed 1 hanger and that made my run at 15K pointless.
As we all know if you don't take all the hangers down at the same time or real close togeather why bother.
So with nothing to lose I went into as much of a dive as I could and got right down on deck turned around and flew right over the base gunned down the last hanger while only taking a few pings. The only reason I lost my drones is that Cashew poped up in a N1K and shot my drones but I got him at the same time. Flew back and landed my kill.
Note: I normally don't come down after my drop I blame last night a bit on that bottle of wine I was working on, seems I value my virtual life less when drinking. :D
My point is that I think the Field ACK should have ripped me a new one flying just over the top of the hangers and not even at full speed.
-
Ok rabidrabbit, then it appears we agree on things....I see now you were talking about HT's proposal (we both dont like it). Sorry for the confusion.
SB, what exactly are the game features "we" are looking for? Who is "we"?
-
Greetings,
Okay, okay, one more post.
Objectives, near and far term.
Please:
Near term:
Up the field ack accuracy (I understand this can be down now with minimum issues)
Harden the troop barracks. (surely, this can be easily done in current code)
Far term:
Implement the smoking hangers / bldgs.
Increase number of AI and Manned Ack at flds.
Regards,
-
I struggled through the first few pages....then exhaustion got the best of me....
Leave it the way it is. If folks can manage to get through then let the damage stay.
If the "defense" can up to destroy the incoming attack then that should be sufficient to prevent the destruction of the targets.
I have been gone for a few weeks on personal issues from the MA but just my 2 cents.
-
That's kinda the whole point here Gutt....you can't up and stop the pork attacks.
One fast fighter comes screaming in from high. It takes exactly one or two passes at a field to pork it (troops). Even if you manage to get 10 friendlies in the air, the porker is gonna get his two passes before he gets killed in 95% of the cases.
I don't know about you, but I see this as a ridiculously imbalanced defense/setup. 4-5 friendlies in the air, AI and manned gun defenses on the ground and a single enemy fighter can render a base all but useless in one to two passes. It doesn't add up well.
-
Originally posted by AKWarp
Ok rabidrabbit, then it appears we agree on things....I see now you were talking about HT's proposal (we both dont like it). Sorry for the confusion.
SB, what exactly are the game features "we" are looking for? Who is "we"?
Oh crap like new planes, new cockpits, features like the new stick stuff that came out, better usability of the terrain editor...should I go on? You interested in that or am I alone here?
-
Originally posted by AKWarp
4-5 friendlies in the air, AI and manned gun defenses on the ground and a single enemy fighter can render a base all but useless in one to two passes. It doesn't add up well.
Maybe I am missing something.
How does a lack of troops make a base "all but useless"?
To me a base is useless when the FHs are down.
-
Originally posted by Edbert1
Maybe I am missing something.
How does a lack of troops make a base "all but useless"?
To me a base is useless when the FHs are down.
Ill take it a step further..a base is useless when all hangers are down at the same time.
You think guys "Ran" and "Avoided fights" before? Wait till this new idea is set into motion.
-
With my pony and other 3 (trained) i can kill all fhs in one dive.
In less than 5 sec im on my way home and the enemy base dead.
( add 1 more pony if you want also vh dead).