Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: july865 on February 12, 2007, 12:57:28 PM

Title: suggestion for captures
Post by: july865 on February 12, 2007, 12:57:28 PM
as a suggestion for captures... just a suggestion folks...
.
make the town and the base both a seperate capture, but link them together. i'll explain abit
to take the town, you would level it just like normal. send in troops to cature just the town. that would trigger a timer to cature the ajoining base. send in troops to capture the base. fail to capture the base... loose the town.
this would also work vise-a-versa. capture the base. sets the timer for the town. fail to capture the town. loose the base.
what do ya think???
Title: suggestion for captures
Post by: SkyRock on February 12, 2007, 01:03:43 PM
ney!:aok
Title: suggestion for captures
Post by: DREDger on February 12, 2007, 01:06:24 PM
What a nightmare of an idea.  I suppose you would have to d-ack the base as well.  

Why not just make bases uncapturable, they are hard enough to capture as is, you want to make it harder?
Title: suggestion for captures
Post by: Ball on February 12, 2007, 01:08:48 PM
it is not a bad idea, but i dont think it would work.

more troops could make the timer go quicker.  OTOH, if defending troops are brought in from another base, that should make it take longer or stop the capture all together.
Title: suggestion for captures
Post by: hammer on February 12, 2007, 01:25:04 PM
Has some merit I think. I'd make two modifications: Put an additional VH in the town, and make the airfield inoperable unless both the base and the town were owned (instead of the timer). That could lead to some quick ground battles for final control of a base.

Regards,

Hammer
Title: suggestion for captures
Post by: Simaril on February 12, 2007, 01:31:58 PM
Quote
Originally posted by hammer
Has some merit I think. I'd make two modifications: Put an additional VH in the town, and make the airfield inoperable unless both the base and the town were owned (instead of the timer). That could lead to some quick ground battles for final control of a base.

Regards,

Hammer


oooooo.......this has some merit....
Title: suggestion for captures
Post by: Jaccpot on February 12, 2007, 01:37:22 PM
This is actually not a bad idea i like it. plus the following ideas aswell. i like the idea ok the vh in the town aswell. might have somethin.

I say ney!!
Title: suggestion for captures
Post by: july865 on February 12, 2007, 03:14:31 PM
lol.. wasnt going for a nightmare.. just thinking of a different approach.
as far as field ack. i guess what ever it would take to get the capture.
.
very good suggestions to this.. i like them
Title: suggestion for captures
Post by: ROC on February 12, 2007, 04:05:13 PM
Quote
capture the base. sets the timer for the town.


If you had the base, why would you need the town?
Title: suggestion for captures
Post by: DREDger on February 12, 2007, 04:18:05 PM
To confusing for me, I am a very simple individual.  Would be like trying to convert the USA into metric...everyone knows how this capture is supposed to work, personally rather keep it the way it is.

It is so hard to capture a field anyway.  Drives me crazy you get guys over there to drop a town and airdrop some troops....then one la-7 (probably Ghi) comes screaming off the field and shoots ONE troop and negates the whole capture.

Or you get some friendly who thinks he's a hero and hits a town building 40 minutes ago.  Right when your troops are entering maproom the building pops...no capture for you!!!....sucks.

About once a month I see an enemy goon fly right over the airbase and release troops which is always worth a chuckle; certainly a logical assumption on the Newb's part can just hear his countrymen lambasting him for it.

:rolleyes:
Title: suggestion for captures
Post by: detch01 on February 12, 2007, 04:36:37 PM
Quote
Originally posted by ROC
If you had the base, why would you need the town?

There's no pub on the base. Now, if you've captured the town, you'd need to capture the base too just to protect the pub. Makes sense to me :D



asw
Title: suggestion for captures
Post by: Mustaine on February 12, 2007, 05:11:54 PM
got me to thinking about an idea proposed a long time ago...


tons of tiny little airfields, 1 FH 1 VH and not much ack, maybe 1/2 sector apart. simple grass runway,

this would "do away" with the current small airfields.

medium airfields would be central locations, with possibly 10 of these little fields surrounding each.

all of these would be independent capture.

the "land grabbers" would have a bunch of small easy targets to roll over, but they would be easily defended too, with some decent fighter jocks who want to furball.

the medium / large airfields would be strengthened a bit and still keep the town and all that for capture,

it would be sort of a nightmare to make the map I guess, with so many variables to set, and how GV spawns would work. I would say GV's don't spawn "into" those little bases.

here's a "tiny" field, 2 FH, 1 VH and 2 ORD strats, and 2 FUEL strats.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/180_1171321747_tiny.jpg)

here's a map layout sample, the RED / GREEN are the main medium or large airfields. the blue ones are the tiny fields.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/180_1171321754_map.jpg)

little furballs all over, if the land grabbers go after one, there's another close by to defend. those little ones like I said are easily captured, maybe 5 ack, 2 manned 3 auto, and the map room is right there.

needs alot of working out, but thats the premise.
Title: suggestion for captures
Post by: DREDger on February 12, 2007, 05:14:00 PM
die thread die
Title: suggestion for captures
Post by: crockett on February 12, 2007, 06:14:24 PM
lol it's hard enough to get goon pilots now..and you want to make it harder.. :furious
Title: suggestion for captures
Post by: Rino on February 12, 2007, 06:45:37 PM
Quote
Originally posted by crockett
lol it's hard enough to get goon pilots now..and you want to make it harder.. :furious


     If the pocket napoleons were serious about captures, you'd figure
they'd grab a goon themselves.  I wish I had a quarter for every "Someone
needs to bring a goon to blah blah blah".
Title: suggestion for captures
Post by: Saxman on February 12, 2007, 07:02:10 PM
Generally, said call is being made by guys currently working down town/ack/GVs etc.
Title: suggestion for captures
Post by: july865 on February 13, 2007, 11:19:59 AM
thinking about it. it kinda grows on ya!
Title: suggestion for captures
Post by: DREDger on February 13, 2007, 12:05:17 PM
thinking about it. it kinda grows on ya!

Yes you have point there....and if you wear a hat, no-one will see it either.
:lol
Title: suggestion for captures
Post by: Yknurd on February 13, 2007, 12:23:04 PM
Dropping base acks is not difficult with a coordinated attack.

Unless you have problems with the 'coordinated' part.


BTW, I enjoy sublte changes to the game like this suggestion.  Makes it refreshing.
Title: suggestion for captures
Post by: july865 on February 13, 2007, 12:33:24 PM
i have a feeling that DReDger has been trying to suggest something all along...
Title: UHHGGG
Post by: 4deck on February 13, 2007, 12:51:24 PM
Bad idea. Dont know what country your on. But that knights couldnt capture a base if it was undefended.:aok . I am a knight. Yo should have seen the most ridiculas base capture I never saw. Im laughing now, cause thinking about it was friggin halarious. Some rook base in Orange with a cv, no cap, Rook jumping out of hangers, and rolling on runways. It was like trying to step on cockroaches after a trash bag had been left for a week. Meanwhile the Entire Eastern front got over-run. Such it is to be a knight. Anyway I also must say that I have been guilty of asking for a goon. Never again. Ill either bring it myself or plan ahead.

Anyway cheers people
C U all in my sights sometime
Title: suggestion for captures
Post by: Krusty on February 13, 2007, 01:55:21 PM
Why not revert back to the way it was? Remove the town entirely and put the maproom back on the field?

Why? Because it was TOO EASY. You put a maproom on the field and folks will milk-run their beady little hearts out to take them. Doesn't matter if they revert in X minutes without the town, doesn't matter at all.

The reason towns take the field is because you need to hit a lot more to capture it.

Separating town and field is a step backward. Now you've just added more strat cities to the game -- which do nothing let's be honest.