Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Atoon on September 17, 2006, 02:44:16 AM
-
So we have this game with 3 countries at war, why is it Rooks insist on dividing the knits & bish? more often than I care to count I have logged on & seen that the rooks have taken most if not all fields between the bish & knits. What could possibley be gained from this strategy?
A few rooks tried to take an outside the middle base, and we came very close to doing so, but the knits were able to switch to defense as they had available resources due to the fact they were only fighting 1 front. They had only 1 front because rooks had separated them from the bish. Meanwhile the bish & the knits BOTH held bases on the outside edges that were originally Rook bases.
This scenario happens often & I just can't comprehend why.... whats the logic?:O
-
Naw, I got a better one for you.
Rooks have like.. 4.5/9 of the bases, Knights have 3/9, and the Bish have like none. They have one zone base left though. What do the knights do? THEY ATTACK THE FRIGGIN ROOKS!!! We had a CV moving in, we troops AT the zone base, we just needed a few more people, but NO! The retards wanted to hit the ROOKS!!! WTF?!? Plus, nowadays, no one cares about friendly carriers, so why have them?!? Knights need to learn some tactics...
-
" So we have this game with 3 countries at war, why is it Rooks insist on dividing the knits & bish? more often than I care to count I have logged on & seen that the rooks have taken most if not all fields between the bish & knits. What could possibley be gained from this strategy?"
World domination :noid
u guys have alot to learn about being a Rook ... We're hated by the bishnits and they will conspire to kill us at anytime :D
-
Haven't you heard? There is no more strategy, furball and like it or you can take your ball and go home lol
-
Originally posted by DaPup
Haven't you heard? There is no more strategy, furball and like it or you can take your ball and go home lol
There's no less strategy then there was before.
-
lol, this is always how strategy worked in AH.
-
Originally posted by Atoon
So we have this game with 3 countries at war, why is it Rooks insist on dividing the knits & bish? more often than I care to count I have logged on & seen that the rooks have taken most if not all fields between the bish & knits. What could possibley be gained from this strategy?
A few rooks tried to take an outside the middle base, and we came very close to doing so, but the knits were able to switch to defense as they had available resources due to the fact they were only fighting 1 front. They had only 1 front because rooks had separated them from the bish. Meanwhile the bish & the knits BOTH held bases on the outside edges that were originally Rook bases.
This scenario happens often & I just can't comprehend why.... whats the logic?:O
Dunno, starting to piss me off though.
-
Originally posted by Shifty
There's no less strategy then there was before.
lol, righhhttttttt :huh
-
What is this strategy you speak of?
-
the best thing to do when you are outnumbered by both the rooks and the bishops is ---ATTACK BOTH !! :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by DaPup
lol, righhhttttttt :huh
Shifty is right ... splitting fronts has been a strategic death knoll since the dawn of Aces High ... nothing new there that can be directly related to the recent changes.
Whatever team splits the fronts by base capture ... is to blame.
-
The splitting the map is lame I agree but I say that with the lower numbers in each arena now it will limit any strategy. I am not into landgrabbing so it won't effect me but to say that it isn't changed with the new arenas is laughable.
-
this is a common way of doing things on all the countries i think. has been going on more and more from the time i logged in the first time to aces high . nothing new here but with the changes to the arena and the lower numbers it brings it more and more to the front of the class
-
Originally posted by DaPup
The splitting the map is lame I agree but I say that with the lower numbers in each arena now it will limit any strategy. I am not into landgrabbing so it won't effect me but to say that it isn't changed with the new arenas is laughable.
You don't get it ... its the players (whatever country ... whatever arena) that choose to take the bases that splits the fronts. They still, and always will, have a choice NOT to get stupid and take bases that will split the front.
The new arenas DO NOT force them to take bases that split the fighting fronts ... get it ?
-
Originally posted by 332nd outlaw
this is a common way of doing things on all the countries i think. has been going on more and more from the time i logged in the first time to aces high . nothing new here but with the changes to the arena and the lower numbers it brings it more and more to the front of the class
Then blame it on player stupidity and greed to W1N TH3 W@Rz!!!! for the almighty 25 perk reward ... not the arena ... nor the amount of people in the arena.
It's the people.
-
This whole discussion presumes a shared goal of “win the war”. The strategy of the “win the war” game is mind numbingly simple. If players aren’t behaving according to your version of “correct”, it is not that they can’t figure out what to do. It is that they have different goals. They may have the goal. “looking for a reasonable fight”, “looking for a furball”, “looking for someplace I can hover over the airport waiting to pounce”, “ “need to find some bombers to shoot at”, “need to find GVs to fight”, etc.
In short, you need to change your complaint from “they aren’t employing the correct strategy” to “they don’t want the correct thing”. The correct thing, of course, being that which you want.
-
I get it just fine Slap, you said that Shifty was right (There's no less strategy then there was before) when he doesn't even seem to be talking about splitting up the map. He seems to be making a comment about the change in strategy from new arenas to old so when you say he is right I fail to see where...... do you get it?
-
Originally posted by DaPup
I get it just fine Slap, you said that Shifty was right (There's no less strategy then there was before) when he doesn't even seem to be talking about splitting up the map. He seems to be making a comment about the change in strategy from new arenas to old so when you say he is right I fail to see where...... do you get it?
There is no less strategy than before ... in any of the arenas from what I can tell.
If you are referring to "player strategy" then it's all on them.
If it is a change in the internal structure of the game that changed the strategy ... please tell us what you believe HT did to effect that with the recent changes.
-
Limiting the number of players per arena plus having the multiple areans now will fracture some squads. Some squads will not be able to get there squad together and fly a mission the way that they would like to.
Some squads have too many players for sure but if one squad of 30 shows up in early war it will skew everything going on in there. To say that strategy won't change when there are limits now on eny, planes, player caps and arenas is funny to me.
-
Its a game without end....Who cares who has what base...just pick something you like to fight with and enjoy yourself. None of this makes any difference anyway.When you take a base are you going to resupply it and sit there defending it???? This is a game of battles... one side will always be outnumbered ...it just makes it more interesting lol
-
1) I dont think it has anything to do with the new structure, its was stupid before, and its stupid now.
2) I dont see how dividing 2 countries can help you win the war, even if they wanted to fight each other- they cant so they MUST fight you.
3) If winning the war is so important, wouldnt taking the outside bases & allowing the other 2 enemy the opportunity to fight be more logical? I know they dont often choose to fight each other, but at least give them the opportunity.:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by KONG1
This whole discussion presumes a shared goal of “win the war”. The strategy of the “win the war” game is mind numbingly simple. If players aren’t behaving according to your version of “correct”, it is not that they can’t figure out what to do. It is that they have different goals. They may have the goal. “looking for a reasonable fight”, “looking for a furball”, “looking for someplace I can hover over the airport waiting to pounce”, “ “need to find some bombers to shoot at”, “need to find GVs to fight”, etc.
In short, you need to change your complaint from “they aren’t employing the correct strategy” to “they don’t want the correct thing”. The correct thing, of course, being that which you want.
Perhaps in your view, but what good is your view? you can't tell a question from a complaint in the first place-
I dont want anyone to fight any certain way nor did I ask for such. Also I did not ever claim this was to "win the war" please read carefully before making false accusations w/ no fact whatsoever.
I was simply tryin to ask how dividing the 2 opposing countries can have any positive affect. The example I provided was just that- an example.
I myself enjoy most aspects of the game, I fly fiters w/ moderate skill, I buff fairly well & I don't have much interest in GVs whatsoever. It seems logical to me that when im in the mood to furball, if I can find a way to furball & perhaps help the base capture in a logical manner, that would be ideal, as well as helpful to both the game and my fellow countrymen. Its also pretty easy to do-
Its also seems fairly obvious to me, that in order for 1 country to obtain bases in a way that effectively cuts the 2 opposing countries from each other, that both furballers & base capture players would have to work together to do so.
I guess I've always been the logical sort, that must be why this puzzles me. Still no one has explained why they do it, or what could be gained. Been several wize cracks(big surprise), an unfounded dig that I'm "complaining" & "trying to get people to play "my way", and a few who take this opportunity to blame the new structure(its been happening way before structure change), but not one that can justify the logic.
I should know better than to look for logic or answers in here:rofl
-
Would this happen to be anywhere near A44 on Mindanao?
-
Originally posted by Reynolds
Naw, I got a better one for you.
Rooks have like.. 4.5/9 of the bases, Knights have 3/9, and the Bish have like none. They have one zone base left though. What do the knights do? THEY ATTACK THE FRIGGIN ROOKS!!! We had a CV moving in, we troops AT the zone base, we just needed a few more people, but NO! The retards wanted to hit the ROOKS!!! WTF?!? Plus, nowadays, no one cares about friendly carriers, so why have them?!? Knights need to learn some tactics...
Obviously they (knights) didn't want the reset. Perhaps they wanted to win the reset for themselves instead of letting rooks win it and get the perks. Maybe they didn't want the terrain reset so worked to avoid an end-of-war situation. Maybe the just wanted to furball in a massive way and the biggest fights going were against rooks. Or maybe they just wanted to see someone whine about tactics/strategy on the bbs :D
asw
-
Originally posted by detch01
Obviously they (knights) didn't want the reset. Perhaps they wanted to win the reset for themselves instead of letting rooks win it and get the perks. Maybe they didn't want the terrain reset so worked to avoid an end-of-war situation. Maybe the just wanted to furball in a massive way and the biggest fights going were against rooks. Or maybe they just wanted to see someone whine about tactics/strategy on the bbs :D
asw
You missunderstand. There were enough bish bases left we would have won the reset. The rooks were stuck at another base, while we were free to steamrole them. I was counting, I checked. We would have won. Not the Rooks.
-
yall are BOTH confused, this has NOTHING to do with any reset---
Just wondering what the logic could be, behind dividing the other 2 countries so they cannot fight each other. Thats it.
-
Originally posted by Atoon
So we have this game with 3 countries at war, why is it Rooks insist on dividing the knits & bish? more often than I care to count I have logged on & seen that the rooks have taken most if not all fields between the bish & knits. What could possibley be gained from this strategy?
A few rooks tried to take an outside the middle base, and we came very close to doing so, but the knits were able to switch to defense as they had available resources due to the fact they were only fighting 1 front. They had only 1 front because rooks had separated them from the bish. Meanwhile the bish & the knits BOTH held bases on the outside edges that were originally Rook bases.
This scenario happens often & I just can't comprehend why.... whats the logic?:O
Pthh, we did that before
(before new arrangement, that is)
-
Originally posted by Atoon
I've always been the logical sort, that must be why this puzzles me.
Maybe it puzzles you because you’ve always been sort of logical.
-
Originally posted by Atoon
yall are BOTH confused, this has NOTHING to do with any reset---
A reading comprehension course would likely help.
Just wondering what the logic could be, behind dividing the other 2 countries so they cannot fight each other. Thats it.
There doesn't necessarily have to be any premeditation (and therefore a logical intent) behind it at all. It just is what it is.
asw
-
Originally posted by detch01
A reading comprehension course would likely help.
There doesn't necessarily have to be any premeditation (and therefore a logical intent) behind it at all. It just is what it is.
asw
LOL- My reading comprehension is great, I made the post- it has nothing to do with any reset. In fact most of the time 1 country drives a wedge between the other 2, they lose.
However, your second bit of text seems spot on.
-
Originally posted by KONG1
Maybe it puzzles you because you’ve always been sort of logical.
If by "sort of logical" you mean I have the ability to distinguish a question from a compliant, then call it what you will.
You don't seem to posess any logic regarding the matter. If you do- you have been unable to present any, just derogatory comments with no fact or foundation.
-
Originally posted by Atoon
So we have this game with 3 countries at war, why is it Rooks insist on dividing the knits & bish? more often than I care to count I have logged on & seen that the rooks have taken most if not all fields between the bish & knits. What could possibley be gained from this strategy?
Well there's been a lot of armchair philosophy & hot air about "strategy" and "winning the war" when the answer is simple & obvious.
Rooks are twice as talented and skilled as Bishops & Knights and therefore in order to bring a little competition into the game must fight on two fronts against twice the number of opponents.
:)
-
Originally posted by Atoon
yall are BOTH confused, this has NOTHING to do with any reset---
Just wondering what the logic could be, behind dividing the other 2 countries so they cannot fight each other. Thats it.
There is no foundation or reasonable explanation for that type of logic.
"Stupid is ... as stupid does"
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
Then blame it on player stupidity and greed to W1N TH3 W@Rz!!!! for the almighty 25 perk reward ... not the arena ... nor the amount of people in the arena.
It's the people.
Answer me this...
Why is there an entire section in the help files for AHII that outlines the capturing of territory?
Why is this a part of the game?
Why does the help file not outline when it is/is not acceptable to capture certain bases?
Where's the section in the help file about furballing?
-
Atool,
Since you “have the ability to distinguish a question from a compliant”, and your “reading comprehension is great”, and being “the logical sort” maybe you can figure out if the following is a question, a complaint, an insult, or a joke:
How come goof-balls assume that if they can’t understand something everyone else is confused?
-
Originally posted by Donzo
Answer me this...
Why is there an entire section in the help files for AHII that outlines the capturing of territory?
Why is this a part of the game?
Why does the help file not outline when it is/is not acceptable to capture certain bases?
Where's the section in the help file about furballing?
1) Because it needs to be explained for those who need to achieve that goal. All games have directions.
2) Because HT made it that way. I have heard that it was introduced to create confict which in turn would result in much Air-to-Air combat and those who fought the best ... got to take the base ... outside of that ... you need to get the reason as to "why" from HT.
3) There is no need to explain when it is/is not acceptable to capture certain bases ... HTC explained the goal, its up to the players to figure how best to achieve the goal ... much like Atoon has ... he has figured out that its not good to split the fronts ... looks like the majority of the others haven't ... live and learn.
4) What does furballing have to do with this post ? ... or are you trying to create a hi-jack of what this thread is all about ? Furballing (Air-to-Air Combat) needs no explaination.
-
how is any of this going to help me shoot down multiples v. me?
-
Originally posted by COBA94
how is any of this going to help me shoot down multiples v. me?
Nothing is going to help you with that. ;)
-
Originally posted by Atoon
In fact most of the time 1 country drives a wedge between the other 2, they lose.
Yep, bad decision. Same bad decision happens all the time. It's nothing new. People will jump from the base they just acquired to the next closest base that happens to lead them up the middle rather than all agreeing to go after some far off base.....that none will agree on which one that should be.
-
Originally posted by Atoon
So we have this game with 3 countries at war, why is it Rooks insist on dividing the knits & bish? more often than I care to count I have logged on & seen that the rooks have taken most if not all fields between the bish & knits. What could possibley be gained from this strategy?
A few rooks tried to take an outside the middle base, and we came very close to doing so, but the knits were able to switch to defense as they had available resources due to the fact they were only fighting 1 front. They had only 1 front because rooks had separated them from the bish. Meanwhile the bish & the knits BOTH held bases on the outside edges that were originally Rook bases.
This scenario happens often & I just can't comprehend why.... whats the logic?:O
Well, if you could understand that, you would also be a General. Just follow my orders and dont ask any questions.
-
Originally posted by KONG1
Atool,
Since you “have the ability to distinguish a question from a compliant”, and your “reading comprehension is great”, and being “the logical sort” maybe you can figure out if the following is a question, a complaint, an insult, or a joke:
How come goof-balls assume that if they can’t understand something everyone else is confused?
I'll just take the high road here, and not make fun of your handle even though several good ones come to mind. I'll also let you think of your text how ever you see fit, it's way more important to you than it ever will be to me.
Have a nice day & thanks for your participation:aok
As for the few possible reasons for this situation, I like whisky58s the best :rofl