Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: VERTEX on April 16, 2007, 03:24:08 PM

Title: Why not add???
Post by: VERTEX on April 16, 2007, 03:24:08 PM
With all the recent changes in TT there have been a number of suggestions on how to fix it.

Heres my solution.

A soldier running around with sticky bombs. No need to model, a new Gv or anti tank gun.

Just sneak up behind a tank place bomb and run away. You would be small and hard to see. Just like its hard to see a bailed pilot vulching planes with his .45.

We seem to be heading in the direction of a more comprehensive WWII battle simulator as opposed to the WWII Flight Simulator I signed up for 5 years ago.

So why not create a 1st person shooter with ground soldiers, artillery, anti tank guns etc etc etc.

With the large number of players in TT it seems thats what people want anyway.

Does anyone else remember the good old days when GV's were here to support the aerial combat portion of the game. When the goal was to capture bases, and win the war.

I believe the game is still called ACES HIGH, or did I miss the change to TANKERS LOW.
Title: Why not add???
Post by: Casper1 on April 16, 2007, 03:27:00 PM
good point.  i agree 150%
Title: Why not add???
Post by: Husky01 on April 16, 2007, 03:29:13 PM
NO:furious
Title: Why not add???
Post by: Harp00n on April 16, 2007, 03:31:55 PM
Go play WW2Online...and weŽll await your apologies after you tried it :D
Title: Why not add???
Post by: Brenjen on April 16, 2007, 04:14:16 PM
I started playing in '04 & I like all the changes save two; I absolutely hate the split up arenas & the in game stick set up from a version or two ago was a royal p.i.t.a.

 The split arenas wouldn't be bad if the caps were higher, I just hate signing in & finding one arena packed & unable to enter it while the others have only a few people in them. The in game stick settings that changed caused me problems because I was using Saiteks programming & I was forced to re-program my stick when I didn't want to. I got used to the stick programming changes & now I like it because I can adjust my stick in game if I want to change something, the split arenas otoh suck...hard. But I (& you) have options, if I (you) don't like the way the game is I'm (we're) free to quit paying for it & leave. :aok
Title: Re: Why not add???
Post by: Donzo on April 16, 2007, 04:23:25 PM
Quote
Originally posted by VERTEX
I believe the game is still called ACES HIGH, or did I miss the change to TANKERS LOW.


Very funny :rolleyes:

What is it that bothers you?  The fact that a lot of people go to tank town for whatever reason not leaving enough outside of TT to fly and fight?
Title: Re: Re: Why not add???
Post by: VERTEX on April 16, 2007, 04:36:25 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Donzo
Very funny :rolleyes:

What is it that bothers you?  The fact that a lot of people go to tank town for whatever reason not leaving enough outside of TT to fly and fight?


Actually I like TT a lot. Play there quite often. I just think Aces high has lost its focus, and has forgotten where it came from.

I would like to see less focus on making the game work for GVs and more focus on making the game work for air combat.
Title: Why not add???
Post by: Brenjen on April 16, 2007, 04:56:02 PM
Can't we have both? :)
Title: Why not add???
Post by: VERTEX on April 16, 2007, 04:58:27 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Harp00n
Go play WW2Online...and weŽll await your apologies after you tried it :D


Not sure what you mean.

I am NOT saying aces should become a first person shooter, rather the opposite.

More Focus on making the game work for air Combat, not ground combat.
I think ground combat has been favored for at least a couple of years. ever since more detailed ground terrains have been introduced.

From the air it all looks flat anyway. I would much rather have boring ground and high frame rates in a fighter on the deck. Than ground that is interesting when in a GV and slower frame rates in a low alt fighter.
Title: Re: Why not add???
Post by: 5PointOh on April 16, 2007, 05:10:54 PM
Quote
Originally posted by VERTEX
When the goal was to capture bases, and win the war.


I like that idea. I like tank town, but I also like to win maps and see resets, and team work to win the maps.  Whether it be the rook, knits or Bish, I'm always impressed to see team work to take a base, or win a map.:aok
Title: Why not add???
Post by: DaYooper on April 16, 2007, 07:24:33 PM
The map with Tank Town comes and goes.  It's novelty and rareness is part of the appeal as well as a good source of vehicle perkies for buying Tigers later.

If a guy doesn't want to furball or take bases, eliminating tank town wouldn't force him to.  Subscriber activity is not a zero sum game.

When Tank Town is not available, the guys with the gv bent give me targets in my 110.  I enjoy that.  Sometimes I take gv's out.  I like the options available.

I do think a developed landwar would give the jabo pilots good targets as well as providing funding for further development.
Title: Why not add???
Post by: Brenjen on April 16, 2007, 07:54:28 PM
Quote
Originally posted by VERTEX
Not sure what you mean.

I am NOT saying aces should become a first person shooter, rather the opposite.

More Focus on making the game work for air Combat, not ground combat.
I think ground combat has been favored for at least a couple of years. ever since more detailed ground terrains have been introduced.

From the air it all looks flat anyway. I would much rather have boring ground and high frame rates in a fighter on the deck. Than ground that is interesting when in a GV and slower frame rates in a low alt fighter.


 I have over 100 fps no matter what I'm doing or what setting I use or how many people are around me. Sounds like you just need a better machine.:aok
Title: Re: Why not add???
Post by: Slash27 on April 16, 2007, 07:55:58 PM
Quote
Originally posted by VERTEX

So why not create a 1st person shooter with ground soldiers, artillery, anti tank guns etc etc etc.

 


How cool would that be? What other WW2 would you ever need to play then? I like the way your think.:aok
Title: Why not add???
Post by: _mattsabs on April 16, 2007, 08:28:55 PM
i have the belief that this game will evolve into something much larger over time.
Title: Why not add???
Post by: devild0g on April 16, 2007, 09:27:41 PM
WRONG!!!! YOU KNOW HOW MUCH TECH IT TAKES TO SUPPORT ALL THIS WITHOUT MAJOR CRASHING????? Dont even start with all the bugs.... just imagine the noobs we got now please... you give them bombs... they will place em on runways and own your 262 when you spawn. This is a flight simulator. Until the future comes where computers can process that immense number of proportions, stats, and just basic physics, it will be chaos an unplayable game. The planes will go the way of the dinosaurs. But it would be different if hitech made a separate game which you could play on your aces high account. Now that would be very prosporous but never mix the two nope
Title: Why not add???
Post by: Slash27 on April 16, 2007, 09:42:27 PM
Quote
Originally posted by devild0g
WRONG!!!! YOU KNOW HOW MUCH TECH IT TAKES TO SUPPORT ALL THIS WITHOUT MAJOR CRASHING????? Dont even start with all the bugs.... just imagine the noobs we got now please... you give them bombs... they will place em on runways and own your 262 when you spawn. This is a flight simulator. Until the future comes where computers can process that immense number of proportions, stats, and just basic physics, it will be chaos an unplayable game. The planes will go the way of the dinosaurs. But it would be different if hitech made a separate game which you could play on your aces high account. Now that would be very prosporous but never mix the two nope


Holy crap:huh
Title: Why not add???
Post by: Vulcan on April 16, 2007, 09:46:42 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Slash27
Holy crap:huh


Looks like a case of WW2OL-itis with post-sapper-stress-syndrome to me.
Title: Why not add???
Post by: devild0g on April 16, 2007, 09:54:20 PM
Dayaam was that me???:noid :noid :noid
Title: Why not add???
Post by: Tango on April 16, 2007, 10:25:22 PM
Sappers pretty much killed off the big tank battles in WW2OL. Don't need 'em in here.
Title: Why not add???
Post by: devild0g on April 16, 2007, 10:29:25 PM
Dont play ww2ol i play socom 3, socom ca, battlefield 2142, cod2(3), and thats it ^_^ and i am imagining it means world war 2 online?
Title: Why not add???
Post by: Tango on April 16, 2007, 10:33:06 PM
Nope, WW2OL WAS a pretty good game until the infantry guys started whinning and got the planes nerfed and sappers in game. They didn't even have the patience to make a 5 minute or less ride to the battle so they whined and got insta-spawn action put in game with mobile spawn points.

The infantry model in game is YEARS behind everything available now. However the tank and plane models are pretty good but the ground guys are the ones who the Rats listen to and the pilots have pretty much left and theres not nearly as many tankers as there used to be.

The game is barely making it now.

http://www.playnet.com/scripts/wwiionline/be_info.jsp
Title: Why not add???
Post by: devild0g on April 16, 2007, 10:57:34 PM
Lol we are not ones 2 be talking rofl our infantry looks like it came out of the twilight zone
Title: Re: Why not add???
Post by: 5PointOh on April 16, 2007, 11:12:06 PM
Quote
Originally posted by VERTEX
With all the recent changes in TT there have been a number of suggestions on how to fix it.

Heres my solution.

A soldier running around with sticky bombs. No need to model, a new Gv or anti tank gun.

Just sneak up behind a tank place bomb and run away. You would be small and hard to see. Just like its hard to see a bailed pilot vulching planes with his .45.

We seem to be heading in the direction of a more comprehensive WWII battle simulator as opposed to the WWII Flight Simulator I signed up for 5 years ago.

So why not create a 1st person shooter with ground soldiers, artillery, anti tank guns etc etc etc.

With the large number of players in TT it seems thats what people want anyway.

Does anyone else remember the good old days when GV's were here to support the aerial combat portion of the game. When the goal was to capture bases, and win the war.

I believe the game is still called ACES HIGH, or did I miss the change to TANKERS LOW.


How about an M8 in my disabled M4.  No hard feelings, ticked at first, but laughed later when I got your buddies on the hills in a 87  <> Vertex
Title: Why not add???
Post by: thndregg on April 16, 2007, 11:20:56 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Slash27
Holy crap:huh


I know.:huh

Sounds like King06's twin.:confused:
Title: Why not add???
Post by: Tango on April 17, 2007, 06:43:22 AM
Quote
Originally posted by devild0g
Lol we are not ones 2 be talking rofl our infantry looks like it came out of the twilight zone


WW2OL's infantry model ISN'T much better than the one in here either. FAR from the infantry model that CoD, Red Orchestra, etc.

In here the Air War is the major theme for the game. In WW2OL, its supposed to be a combined actions game. The infantry model is severly hindering the game and they have never done anything about it. The planes and tanks model were pretty good.

The sad thing is instead of fixing the pathetic infantry model in game they hinder the rest of the game by nerfing it or putting in garbage [constant fog for the planes for example] that runs off the tankers and pilots.
Title: Why not add???
Post by: storch on April 17, 2007, 07:21:55 AM
the last thing aces high needs is more ground game.
Title: Why not add???
Post by: Oldman731 on April 17, 2007, 07:47:40 AM
Quote
Originally posted by storch
the last thing aces high needs is more ground game.

Agreed.

- oldman
Title: Why not add???
Post by: Brenjen on April 17, 2007, 08:14:11 AM
Quote
Originally posted by storch
the last thing aces high needs is more ground game.


 I love to play the ground but I have to agree; other than changing the stick figure infantry that all look like downed pilots into something that looks more like WWII army rangers that run instead of slide across the terrain like those old vibrating football games (anyone remember those? lol I loved mine).

 Minor cosmetic changes & increases in the vehicle set both in the air & on the ground would suffice in my opinion. None of us have the answers for what would make AHII "perfect", because what's perfect for you someone else thinks is the worst idea ever.

 Hitech....get busy inventing faster than light connections & then we can throw more super ideas your way :lol
Title: Why not add???
Post by: ColKLink on April 17, 2007, 08:27:31 AM
Heres my idea on tank town. Like anyone cares but here goes .Seeing it is clear that politics wont settle this dispute..... why not have a war over the whole dang island ??? If i remember correctly, that used to create a heckofa battle. Lets just go to war over tank town? (I wont be there but, this may be one area, a war might actually improve the situation.} that is a perfect senerio to start a war over i think. remember free advice is worth exactly what you paid for it,...................... nothing. As you were.
Title: Re: Re: Why not add???
Post by: VERTEX on April 17, 2007, 10:58:34 AM
Quote
Originally posted by 5PointOh
How about an M8 in my disabled M4.  No hard feelings, ticked at first, but laughed later when I got your buddies on the hills in a 87  <> Vertex


5PointOh,

I'm glad you got a laugh out of that. I thought I'd try something different. Had been in TT for a couple of hours killing and dying, more dying I think.

Needed a diversion. Actually had a kill ratio better than most tank sorties.

Would like to know though, why can a jeep kill a tank from the inside but an m8 cant. Musta put a dozen rounds inside your turret, no boom.

Tried the same thing with the guy in the panzer who was beside you but he moved. Noticed he couldnt kill me while I was inside your m4.

Keep having fun.

VERTEX
Title: Why not add???
Post by: DaYooper on April 17, 2007, 12:48:53 PM
they will place em on runways and own your 262 when you spawn

Who takes a 262 from a hot airfield?  If a guy doesn't launch from a safe airfield, it's his risk.  How would a sapper be any worse than an ostie?

So who's displaying noobish behavior?  The guy who made it to an enemy runway or the guy taking off from a vulched field?
Title: Why not add???
Post by: Kweassa on April 17, 2007, 01:00:38 PM
Quote
the last thing aces high needs is more ground game.


 Oh, but 'more ground game' is already here.

 It's a question of high its handled.