Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Killjoy2 on December 07, 2006, 11:30:30 AM
-
We allow the highest ranking player to command the CV's which determines (in part) the strategy of the game.
Why not let the highest ranking player command the air attack also? He would select which enemy bases are available for attack. On a large map, he might have 8 choices to make.
This way he could actually execute a strategy for victory. Once he's selected a base it gets the big icon. Control works the same way as the CV's. If no one takes control, the AI takes over.
Or would you rather have the game strategy run by AI?
-
Can you really imagine Shawk comanding the fight? Roflmao
-
HT isn't AI.
-
And when a even higher ranked player enters arena, he just switches the target, because he doesn´t like the original one? :rolleyes:
-
1) "And when a even higher ranked player enters arena, he just switches the target, because he doesn´t like the original one?"
Thats what rank is about. This works for the CV. Why not the air war?
2) "HT isn't AI."
When strategy is programed into the game he is. Do you really want AI strategy?
3) "Can you really imagine Shawk comanding the fight?"
Just like the CV, the highest rank commands for that country. And yes, I can see Shawk commanding the Air War. But having flown with him, I suspect he would pass it around to who does the best job.
-
No thanks, it's already bad enough when retards take control of the CVs and do stupid things with them.
-
Originally posted by Killjoy2
1) "And when a even higher ranked player enters arena, he just switches the target, because he doesn´t like the original one?"
Thats what rank is about. This works for the CV. Why not the air war?
Player A is highest ranking at current rank 18. Determines a target. About 80 players on your side fight for that target. Battle raging on for 2 hours. Finally your side is getting the upper hand, field is capped, goons are on the way...
Enter Lusche. Lusche currently has rank 17 and is in a baaad mood. He dislikes this Player A, dislikes the whole new capturing order thing and is just looking for some "fun". Lusche changes target base. Lusche smiles when being yelled at by a whole country... :D
I could never wreak so much havoc by just being able to command a lousy CV task group.
-
rank means nothing in regards to intelligence or ability.
-
Ever heard the saying "Cant give rednecks money?"
Well You cant give Shawk power. :D
-
"No thanks, it's already bad enough when retards take control of the CVs and do stupid things with them."
Sounds like motivation to switch sides. I wonder if players would gravitate to the most popular leaders?
Right now we have a possible six fronts against 2 enemy countries. How about six commanders? Each of them have an attack plan. That way you'd have a choice.
Bishop commanders would have to wear the robin-egg blue uniform Goering had.
-
"I could never wreak so much havoc by just being able to command a lousy CV task group."
Good point! Breaking up the command to 6 commanders makes more sense. At least one of them should be a good commander or we deserve AI maps.
-
We need submarines...
-
"rank means nothing in regards to intelligence or ability."
Another good point. We've observed some people "gaming the game" for rank. We dismissed it by saying rank doesn't mean anything.
This is a "Free Market" issue. I suspect you'll find leaders rising to the top. It's a lot like missions. If you don't like the mission leader or the mission, you don't join. With 6 choices for commander, you should find one that you like. The others will dry up and blow away.
Or get run out of town.
-
No Thnx :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Killjoy2
We allow the highest ranking player to command the CV's which determines (in part) the strategy of the game.
Why not let the highest ranking player command the air attack also? He would select which enemy bases are available for attack. On a large map, he might have 8 choices to make.
(http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c62/Masherbrum/supergay.gif)
Where do some of you find time to come up with some of the most ASININE ideas?!!
-
"Where do some of you find time to come up with some of the most ASININE ideas?!!"
Actually, I'm quite well paid to come up with asinine ideas. Have you ever taken an idea to market and made it operational?
Thats what I do.
-
I vote for game strategy run by AI ... for all the reason posted so far in this thread.
-
After being basically told off for not "participating" or "Following orders" if you will by a few fellow knights?
Huh.......no
I spent 4 years doing REAL military stuff.....I have a boss at work....I'll pass on said orders or having my attack dictated to me by some score monger who prolly couldn't capture a cold.
-
Originally posted by Killjoy2
Why not let the highest ranking player command the air attack also? He would select which enemy bases are available for attack. On a large map, he might have 8 choices to make.
Interesting idea... but have you really considered the consequences? :huh Looking at current scoring, when SHawk isn't in the arena to run the war, you do realize that there is a very strong possibility that you would be taking orders from goldelks. :O
Originally posted by Killjoy2
Or would you rather have the game strategy run by AI?
I'll take the HAL 9000 approach please. :D
-
All we are talking about is the decision of where the next base capture will be.
Nobody takes orders in AH. Most just want a good quick fight. I think a set of commanders has a better chance of setting up a good fight over AI.
You all seem to be looking at just one arena commander.
I'm suggesting six commanders for each country with six attack points, three in each enemy country. Once a base is captured the commander of that attack line selects another base. This is almost what is happening in the Blue arena.
If you can't find a leader you like out of 18 commanders in three countries that you like, we really do have troubles.
Does anyone belong to a squad? Do you have a CO? Some squads are more formally organized than others some commanders are more organized than others.
-
Originally posted by Killjoy2
All we are talking about is the decision of where the next base capture will be.
Nobody takes orders in AH. Most just want a good quick fight. I think a set of commanders has a better chance of setting up a good fight over AI.
You all seem to be looking at just one arena commander.
I'm suggesting six commanders for each country with six attack points, three in each enemy country. Once a base is captured the commander of that attack line selects another base. This is almost what is happening in the Blue arena.
If you can't find a leader you like out of 18 commanders in three countries that you like, we really do have troubles.
Does anyone belong to a squad? Do you have a CO? Some squads are more formally organized than others some commanders are more organized than others.
You really should stop posting. It's folks like you that sit in a tower, playing "Desktop General" that annoy us. You whine about folks fighting "how come you guys aren't defending!?!! Blah, blah" But, you fail to see sitting in a tower is useless in of itself.
-
I don't see how having stragety decided by a bunch of cartoon napoleons is any better than having HT decide it. At least HT seems to know what he's doing.
-
Originally posted by Killjoy2
"Where do some of you find time to come up with some of the most ASININE ideas?!!"
Actually, I'm quite well paid to come up with asinine ideas. Have you ever taken an idea to market and made it operational?
Thats what I do.
We are all aware of the ideas that come out of Utah...
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
I don't see how having stragety decided by a bunch of cartoon napoleons is any better than having HT decide it. At least HT seems to know what he's doing.
Did you burn da Manuols li3k instruktad?!!!!!1111!!!!OMG!!!WTF???
-
AH I use to have country commanders ... but they didn't achieve that status by what score they had. They got it from running good ops and slowly got the respect by all to actually lead.
I can just imagine out of the 6 per side, 3 of 'em being those squeaky ear-splitting I haven't dropped my nads yet pimply faced kid who achieved his rank by gaming the gaming and spending hours upon hours to achieve such a rank ... when he should have been out playing baseball or some physical activity other than fantasizing about being an on-line WW II commander.
I would log at the first squeak ... in the blink of an eye.
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
I would log at the first squeak ... in the blink of an eye.
:rofl
-
"We are all aware of the ideas that come out of Utah..."
If you are referring to polygamy, that was just a noble attempt to get the housework done. They figured if you just put more wives to work on it the laundry, cleaning and cooking ought to get done.
Sadly it was another example of unintended consequences.
-
Dude, you MAY care about getting "free perks". A lot of us don't.
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
I don't see how having stragety decided by a bunch of cartoon napoleons is any better than having HT decide it. At least HT seems to know what he's doing.
I had to look for one. Kinda like that Cartoon Napoleon comment :)
(http://www.historyonthenet.com/Sources/images/napoleon.jpg)
-
Greetings,
I am, hereby, announcing my quest for the 'leadership' position of the Rooks as the Strategic and Grand Tactical Guru that this game will obviously soon require. I shall become the Dorsai to your willing / learning minds and strong arms! Come, let us join to conquer this electonic and digital land!
Regards,
:noid
-
When the high ranking player who is dictating targets starts paying my subscription fee's, THEN ill be for it....NOT!
Too many desktop generals as it is, definatly wouldnt be good to actually give them some powah!!
-
Cause usually the highest ranking person would take you to hit strats hehe
-
I've been playing in LW Orange from the time the change started being tested and I really don't see what this idea would acomplish... Most of the (cough) high ranking players are just manipulating the score system to get a high rank.. They don't have a high rank because they are the smartest strat thinking player.
I think of myself a strat type thinker. I like to think about what base would be the best to take or what factories we need to hit, strat on a base, that type of thing and I can bomb a pin head from 30K (and could with the old callibration) but my rank is usually around 200 to 500.
So under your system we would have the guys that really care nothing for what the smart base would be to hit was running things. While other more capable strat players with not so good ranks sit there frustrated because they can see where things need to go but have little or no controll...
-
Originally posted by Killjoy2
1) "And when a even higher ranked player enters arena, he just switches the target, because he doesn´t like the original one?"
Thats what rank is about. This works for the CV. Why not the air war?
2) "HT isn't AI."
When strategy is programed into the game he is. Do you really want AI strategy?
3) "Can you really imagine Shawk comanding the fight?"
Just like the CV, the highest rank commands for that country. And yes, I can see Shawk commanding the Air War. But having flown with him, I suspect he would pass it around to who does the best job.
Rank is just for turning cv's when your squadmates takeoff or try to land.
it is great idea tho to make Hitech more money, I can see it now either more 2nd accxounts or squads letting one guy in squad kill them so thier co rank 1......
-
Originally posted by Flayed1
I've been playing in LW Orange from the time the change started being tested and I really don't see what this idea would acomplish... Most of the (cough) high ranking players are just manipulating the score system to get a high rank.. They don't have a high rank because they are the smartest strat thinking player.
I think of myself a strat type thinker. I like to think about what base would be the best to take or what factories we need to hit, strat on a base, that type of thing and I can bomb a pin head from 30K (and could with the old callibration) but my rank is usually around 200 to 500.
So under your system we would have the guys that really care nothing for what the smart base would be to hit was running things. While other more capable strat players with not so good ranks sit there frustrated because they can see where things need to go but have little or no controll...
lol i'm sure u could hit pin head old way lol don't over do statement lol
-
If I did over state it wasnt by much. Thats why I formed the bomber wing of the BOPS because there were so few of us that could bomb really well with the old system.
-
What would you propose that one of these supreme leaders do when someone simply gives him the finger and does what he wants to anyway?
When a guy logs on, and wants to fight in the TT arena, and Der Fuhrer is displeased with players not actually fighting on the front line?
killjoy, this idea is so totally unworkable. Even the Bishops have they're country channel heroes, and confining their power to the mission editor is probably too lenient as it is. Too many of them up a mission, to put the killing blow on a country that is 1 or 2 bases from reset, without making sure that we have more bases than the other winning country. The result?
People quit following them.
On second thought, It makes me wish that killshooter was off, sometimes.
-
wow this is a REALLY cool idea! :aok Seriously
a country commander ... Ive always thought that would be fun.
Go by rank or country votes maybe.
Originally posted by Killjoy2
We allow the highest ranking player to command the CV's which determines (in part) the strategy of the game.
Why not let the highest ranking player command the air attack also? He would select which enemy bases are available for attack. On a large map, he might have 8 choices to make.
This way he could actually execute a strategy for victory. Once he's selected a base it gets the big icon. Control works the same way as the CV's. If no one takes control, the AI takes over.
Or would you rather have the game strategy run by AI?
-
So make it a vote in the game. I have seen VOTE option in other online games. Vote a country commander in or out every 30 minutes maybe.
All that country commander can do is pick those fat icon bases in orange.
That would be wicked! ][/QUOTE] :eek: :O
Originally posted by Shuffler
rank means nothing in regards to intelligence or ability. [/B
-
Originally posted by Flayed1
If I did over state it wasnt by much. Thats why I formed the bomber wing of the BOPS because there were so few of us that could bomb really well with the old system.
posted bombing 101 long before you reg on bbs. Bombing then just about same as now. Its all on speed. if speed stable full power. then bombing easy old way or new way. very simple dive to alt max speed 32k in b17's its indicated 175mph.level off wait 30 secs then calibrate. bingo all bom,bs hit
all bombers dif lancs is about 220 to 240 mph depending alt b24s 190 at 20k plus 205 under 18k.
-
Flayed, thanks for all the work you are doing in the Orange arena.
I am not suggesting an overall country commander.
I am suggesting that a commander based on rank can make one decision. Where to attack next. If you don't want to attack there, go somewhere else. There are a minimum of 6 choices plus the CV's.
There are at any given time 6 attack points in the Orange arena. I'm suggesting that 6 DIFFERENT people be allowed to choose the next attack point. Just like the CVs.
I think real people do a better job at strategy than Connect-The-Dots mapping.