Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Hangtime on July 08, 2001, 11:41:00 AM
-
Yah... a LOCK to shut down flight ops would be nice.. here's why.
The Fleet is directed towards a strike point.. the fleets survability depends on it's being able to get close enuff to launch an effective strike without being detected.
You retain command and begin the long wait while the CV closes the distance.. at 50 miles out you intend to launch a mission; a classic naval alpha strike. It'll take about 15 minutes to gain the objective of closing down ops on that field, but you want the CV close enuff to launch amphib ops WHEN THAT OCCURS.. hence the fairly close location of the CV to the target field when you launch the alpha strike.
At 100 miles out, rouge loners and bored newbies begin using the flight deck... surprise is lost; CV group is detected and quickly attacked and sunk, 70 miles short of target... several hours of working the the fleet into position is wasted.
CV commander should be able lock down that flight deck as long as he remains aboard on the bridge of the CV...
Thoughts?
-
Abusable.
-
So I want the CV made useless because one person decides so? Not a workable solution except in scenarios.
-
I made the same suggestion some months ago. I hope you have better luck :) It's soooo fun when 2 or 3 squads are planing an Alpha Strike and 10 minutes before start all is ruined by someone who spawns at the deck, giving the surprise away...
[ 07-08-2001: Message edited by: DA98 ]
-
What Fatty said.
I actually like the idea of not using it until it gets close to shore, and think your point is quite valid in that regards Hang. I just don't see a practical way of implimenting it.
I also question wether the person with the key in the lock would be good at deciding just when to turn it on and off.
AKDejaVu
[ 07-08-2001: Message edited by: AKDejaVu ]
-
Im not sure but I think CMs can disable flight from CVs.
Dont think the game commanders would allow it in the MA tho.
Still, a commendable request from the HangTime.
I would also like to see the Fleet commander have the ability to steer the CV with the JS.
Y
-
It's a good idea but some nonce WOULD abuse it. All it would take is some high ranked monkey from another side to change countries, take over command of the CV and immediately end the attack on his base by disabling flight.
Now if ya put a time limit on things......like for example a delay of 30 mins to flight being disabled. I mean after all, an attack like Hang describes takes hours to get the CV into position. When ya first set the CVs course ya can then issue the DISABLE command and anyone who sets foot on the CV gets a warning that this will happen in X minutes.
(http://www.swoop.com/images/logo_small.jpg)
-
why not add a separate ship group cabable of getting very close to shore and launching lvt's
why we have only cv fleets is a mystery to me
would be nice too also have slow merchant ships to kill that could be player controlled that have no ai acks (player manned only)... you know.. fun targets
-
The commander of the CV or the CAG (Commander Air Group) should make the call to launch and when. Getting the Task Force burned because somebody is impatient is irrational. Will the CAG blow the call on when to launch? Too soon? Too late? That's part of the game. It's historical too.
When the Hornet task force carrying Doolittle's Tokyo Raiders was spotted by a Japanese fishing trawler, an escort cruiser engaged and sank it....but not before it radioed a distress call...and a warning.
Did anyone in Japan hear it? Could they take the risk. They were well short of the launch point for the B-25's and there was a real concern that many wouldn't have the gas to make it to China. As it turned out, many did not. Doolittle made a snap decision to go....and the rest is history.
Who's to say what might have happened if they had steamed another 10 or 12 hours to launch point?
JAS :confused:
-
Far too open to abuse; and I don't like the idea of some one else telling me what to do (out side the contractual obligations in the EULA).
-
Seeker,
Let me ask you. How would you feel about 'being told what to do' if the penalty for getting spotted before you could safely launch an alpha strike was that you had to GO DOWN with the carrier if you got sank prematurely? Everybody who was set to launch from the carrier, in effect, gets shot down and loses points. That's what would happen in real life to the naval personal...aviators included. I'm not trying to be an argumentative tard, but would that scenario give you some pause?
JAS :p
-
why not a vote option? If someone is organizing a mission, then those in mission VOTE to disable the CV launch option until the CV commander gives the go signal. That would prevent ONE person from screwing a Doolittle Raid strike, you wont have one person switching sides and screwing the other team... and you would NEED to have people organized AND voting on your own team to prevent the abuse.
Those voting would HAVE to be in the mission though... and say you need a minimum of 5 votes to disable CV launches.
I agree we should have something else besides CV groups. I think it would be cool to have single player controlled DD's or Naval Perk-purchased BB's :)
-
Nice idea. We're currently unable to recieve perk points if we change sides inside 12 hours of a reset. It's not too far a conceptual leap to disallow command of a cv group inside 12 hours of changing sides?
I *like* this deck-lock idea a lot. It would need to extend to PT boats as well i guess?
Maybe if Hi-tech is tinkering with cv's he might like to add:
1. "evasives" buttons which would cause the TG to make random left/right 270 degree turns, or (button 2) to assume a zig-zag along preset course.
2. A "make smoke" button to cause all ships to create dense smoke to surface level. Reload time, once per hour, duration 10 mins. Very handy to try and pull a TG away from a port raid gone wrong?
Fidd
[ 07-08-2001: Message edited by: Fidd ]
-
The only way to have historical realism is in a Historic Scenario. You have a command structure, a plan, limited plane set, limited radar, etc. You play by the rules or get ejected. I feel historic scenarios are the high point of the game.
In the MA, it is sometimes frustrating because no one is in charge and cooperation is voluntary. But then you can have a lot of fun because you have control over what you want to do.
I think this is a good idea, but it could be abused in MA. Maybe the mission planner could be improved to make it easier to set up, notify others, brief, and launch missions. If others know you have a mission planned at that CV, they would join in, or go someplace else.
Gunner <CAF>
-
argh double post
[ 07-08-2001: Message edited by: Tac ]
-
I like the idea of a rotational freeze on CV command for a country switcher... solves that problem neatly.
Getting and retaining command of a CV is generally aquired via having the rank to do so.. to get the rank necessary to 'command' the current CV group you have to have demonstrated yourself something of a tactician in the first place.. ranks are based on an individuals performance ALL aspects of the game... a tactics test in it's own regard.
Should one guy freeze that flight deck inappropriately; I'm sure the enraged noise on the country channel would attract the attention of a higher ranking individual who could if he chose; kick his butt off the boat and unlock the damn deck. Which seems to have worked ok up to this point. :D
Further.. what I'm suggesting is just plain and simply 'Command' of that CV group in a more true form... not just 'command' of the course it steers.
<S!>
-
Not really Hangtime.
The only real qualification is to play alot and to use a wide variety of vehicles.
I still havent seen corelation between ranking and strategic sense.
...and... it doesn't matter if it is someone switching sides or not... it could be something as simple as a grudge... not enough people supporting someone's missions... someone feeling too many of their countrymates are just furballing from a CV and wants to put a stop to it... whatever. There is no neat solution.
AKDejaVu
-
Hmmm... how many times in the past 8 tours would have you hopped onto a CV and just to piss folks off[/i] locked it's flight deck??
I fail to see why the current critera for 'command' of a CV's helm should not also include giving that same person a switch to control flight ops... they already let us drive it; why not let us control when it's offensive power can be unleashed?
Offering the reasoning that 'some idiot can misuse it' is the same as saying "I'm not crossing the street because 'some idiot' might run me down". You'll never get to where yer going and we won't find out if it'll work till we try; right?
And speaking of abuse... in a sim where 'car bombing' is still possible, how can the objection of 'possible abuse' be made in this circumstance?
Freeze CV command for a country switcher for 12 hours.
Enable fight deck lock for CV only if a mission is posted by the CV commander with the CV as launch point.
Auto unlock the flight deck if the commander disco's or leaves the carrier bridge. If he wants that deck locked; he'd better stay aboard and have a damn plan we can all see.
Seems kinda simple; really. Less likely to be abused than carbombing; certainly.
[ 07-08-2001: Message edited by: Hangtime ]
-
Hangtime.. its not about how many times it happens.. its about what happens if its done once.
Its also about giving a player the ability to deny other players to fly from a field.
Really.. think about it a bit.
AKDejaVu
-
Jeeze; I have thought about it. Really.
They haven't addressed the infamous 'country switch and grab the CV' senario that occured recently... and they haven't addressed the 'carbombimg' dweebery.
What I've suggested fixes one, and creates no new ones that I can see.
-
Actually, I think Hangtime's idea has far more positive's then negatives.
The "sneak" attacks would be cool, IMHO. And as far as abuse.....there have already been solutions to the country switchers proposed in this thread.......I think whether or not the lock on flight operations gets implemented, the lockout of someone who just switched countries should be implemented.
From where I am, I see it as a great idea.
-
Allowing Squads to buy CV TGs with their perk points would solve this problem.
Let's say a CV TG costs 1000 points.
Every squad member online would be asked if they want to contribute to the perk pool..
Then the CO of the Squad can disable/enable flight, and direct the CV where ever they like.
Ewe!! Purchasing CVs with perks... <I like that idea>
Or maybe have a separate perk system just for squads - so it's a common perk points.. which allows the CO to buys special things like beer and sheep.
Nexus
-
Actually I like Hang's idea, especially with
tac's "vote" by those in the mission as a modifier.
If 6 guys are willing to sit in the tower to get CV in position for a good sneak attack, let em lock the deck.
Or maybe anyone should be allowed to lock flight opps for 5 minutes. Command won't work but once an hour. So if you want to keep it locked for an hour. You would have to have 12 guys working together to make it so.
One way or another I think it's workable without stepping on too many toes.
-
I like the voting idea, or some varient of it.
Or
Perhaps while plotting the TGs course, the commander could place a large dot on the line (for all to see) that indicates the point at which AC can launch.
If someone tries to take off, when they hit "FLY", a screen pops up requesting them to hold flight so as to not give away the CV's position, also the person requesting the hold name appears, as well as a countdown... "9 minutes till launch".
The pilot can then hit "OK Hold" or "Override" and launch anyway.
This way people can still do what they want, but comunication takes place that may prevent the unaware from giving away the CV's location.
eskimo
-
Use the mission planner thingy.
Someone takes command of the CV, and posts a mission using the CV as the launch point. Some required minimum number (10?) of people sign on to the mission. As long as the minimum number are signed on, the mission commander retains command of the CV, and can lock the flight deck.
If the mission planner discos, the mission times out, or too many people resign from the mission, the flight deck is unlocked and CV command is up for grabs.
Still a potential for abuse, but it will take a GROUP of abusers, and their callsigns will be posted for all to see. :)
[ 07-09-2001: Message edited by: popeye ]
-
Great addition to the original idea, popeye!
Just hope it happens...................
-
Someone takes command of the CV, and posts a mission using the CV as the launch point. Some required minimum number (10?)
Can you be signed up for a mission and still play the game?... or do you have to be waiting in the tower.
What if someone wants to hit a port way on the other side of the map... but someone else wants to hit a base much closer.
You are talking about a player being able to dictate whether people can launch from a field or not. One player.
AKDejaVu
-
Personally, I actually like the premise but sadly I'm not sure this type of thing belongs in the Main Arena. I view the MA as a free-for-all do-what-you-want area and the Historical Arenas (which I wish there were more events and more participation) are for things such as this. What's next, the control of what we are allowed to strike so as to not alert defenses and impede anyone's surprise plan for field conquest?
But I wonder, if you need 10-people to sit and wait on the CV to hold the deck closed, will it really only take 10-minutes for the CV to get into position for a surprise attack or does it take 30-minutes or more with people just sitting there in the Tower View? We all pay $30/month and why is someone's CV sneak attack more important than someone else's single aircraft CV launch into battle? This is just a game and if there were real ramifications to it, I'm certain we'd see a whole lot more strategy going on.
I read what I typed and it sounds like I'm very against the idea, which I'm not. In my own heart, I kinda like it because I in fact prefer the planned missions. I'm just hesitant about restrictions in the Main Arena which is really just a mass furball area where an F-4U can meet an FW190 or LA7 and that's the whole point. Subjectively, I like it...Objectively, I am not comfortable with it.
-Puke
-
"You are talking about a player being able to dictate whether people can launch from a field or not. One player."
Well, if you read my post, you'll see that I'm talking about ELEVEN players being able to take control of the CV -- not one. Maybe that number is too low. Maybe it wouldn't work at all. Just an idea.
-
How about a system that alerts people who go to the carrier to not take off until the launch order is given.
It could be a pop up message like sometimes appear when first entering the game.
This would allow people who really didn't care to still take off and at the same time it would be a mechanism that couldn't shut down the carrier ops.
-
I really think this idea is heading in the wrong direction.
Restriction is bad.
Is the problem that people are launching from the carrier, or that people can bee seen launching from the carrier (via bar-dar) from any location?
I'd much rather see a "curvature of the earth" system implimented for the water. 17 miles is usually a normal limit for ground-based objects to see one another. Half that due to our compressed maps and you have about 8 miles of "On the CV invisibility". This means that anyone that gets on the deck of a CV or mans the guns on the battleship cannot be seen on bar-dar.
Then.. have some kind of linear x*miles from nearest enemy field = x*altitude invisibility from bar-dar while on the water (or over land for that matter).
That way, no issues with a "locked" CV bumping into another carrier that isn't locked and not being able to defend itself... or a CV not being able to launch fighters to intercept incoming bombers... or any other problems that could arise from someone shutting down all operations from the carrier.
AKDejaVu