Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Axis vs Allies => Topic started by: Dawger on May 27, 2010, 06:25:09 AM
-
Anyone know?
-
got any suggestions? gyrene is putting together a setup for June 3. Fork has something planned for the following week. but fud and OM don't have anything as of yet. we have plenty of shifty's setups to use, but if you have a suggestion, we can throw it in the mix. at the very least we can Keep it in the repository for later use.
-
I would suggest that since next week is ETO Late War it be followed by a setup simulating the earliest part of the China-Burma theater with a Flying Tigers Defense of Rangoon setup followed by Salamua-Lae campaign culminating in Operation Postern in New Guinea. You could finish the month with the campaign to capture Rome on the west coast of Italy.
Four major theaters, four time periods. One month.
Just my quick thoughts. The specific setups probably already exist but I have thoughts on that as well. For example, troop carriers in Operation Postern should be LVT's. It would be interesting to design an amphibious assault and capture.
-
Amphibious assault off carriers sounds fun. :aok
-
Funny you mentioned that :cool:
-
Funny you mentioned that :cool:
LVT wARz??
Awesome DoodZ :banana:
-
I would suggest that since next week is ETO Late War it be followed by a setup simulating the earliest part of the China-Burma theater with a Flying Tigers Defense of Rangoon setup followed by Salamua-Lae campaign culminating in Operation Postern in New Guinea. You could finish the month with the campaign to capture Rome on the west coast of Italy.
Four major theaters, four time periods. One month.
Just my quick thoughts. The specific setups probably already exist but I have thoughts on that as well. For example, troop carriers in Operation Postern should be LVT's. It would be interesting to design an amphibious assault and capture.
Flying Tigers setup would be tough since we're missing some key Japanese aircraft...unless we just want to furball over a base...and we have been running PTO setups more frequently than anything else...Rangoon, Midway (twice), Changing of the Guard, Birth of a Legend. I'm looking into a possible Med setup to run starting June 3rd, that would encompass ops from land, sea and air circa 1942-43...but the right terrain is not easy to find.
-
I would suggest that since next week is ETO Late War it be followed by a setup simulating the earliest part of the China-Burma theater with a Flying Tigers Defense of Rangoon setup...
Which terrain are you planning to run it on? Because the distances on the rangon09 terrain are not suitable for the AvA imo.
-
...followed by Salamua-Lae campaign culminating in Operation Postern in New Guinea...
Which terrain are you planning to run it on? Because the Coral Sea terrain is not suitable for the AvA imo.
Edit:
Actually, Coral Sea is much better now that Dux added some bases. There's still not enough to enable capture, so there will still be folks who won't like it.
-
I would suggest that since next week is ETO Late War it be followed by a setup simulating the earliest part of the China-Burma theater with a Flying Tigers Defense of Rangoon setup followed by Salamua-Lae campaign culminating in Operation Postern in New Guinea. You could finish the month with the campaign to capture Rome on the west coast of Italy.
Four major theaters, four time periods. One month.
Just my quick thoughts. The specific setups probably already exist but I have thoughts on that as well. For example, troop carriers in Operation Postern should be LVT's. It would be interesting to design an amphibious assault and capture.
Yes, Italy will work, but Operation Postern goes right back to the lack of a good AvA terrain for that area.
-
LVT wARz??
Awesome DoodZ :banana:
I will pwN ur lvTz with my pTz-109z it will bE ePic. ;)
-
What the &%^$ there's going to be PT boats during LVT WaRz??
That's ghey. I can only imagine what's next for the AvA. :cry
Go wARz!! :aok
-
There used to be a good terrain for a North Africa setup; at least there was back when I was part of the CT Staff (now AvA). Plus there are MANY aircraft that are good for this type of a setup. Italy is a little tougher to do simply because of the map but its not a complete waste since there was just a terrain that ran in FSO for "Breaking Gustav".
-
There used to be a good terrain for a North Africa setup; at least there was back when I was part of the CT Staff (now AvA). Plus there are MANY aircraft that are good for this type of a setup. Italy is a little tougher to do simply because of the map but its not a complete waste since there was just a terrain that ran in FSO for "Breaking Gustav".
All the terrains looked great before the terrain update, they just need to be updated to what they used to look like.
-
There used to be a good terrain for a North Africa setup; at least there was back when I was part of the CT Staff (now AvA). Plus there are MANY aircraft that are good for this type of a setup. Italy is a little tougher to do simply because of the map but its not a complete waste since there was just a terrain that ran in FSO for "Breaking Gustav".
Do you want us to run nothing but North Africa and Italy setups until we know for sure whether or not HTC will allow new maps that are not made by members of the "map team"?
The only Africa terrain that works right now is Tunisia and it's barely workable for ground battles...it's much more conducive to dogfighting and strategic bombing.
-
Do you want us to run nothing but North Africa and Italy setups until we know for sure whether or not HTC will allow new maps that are not made by members of the "map team"?
The only Africa terrain that works right now is Tunisia and it's barely workable for ground battles...it's much more conducive to dogfighting and strategic bombing.
Where did you even come up with that out of what I wrote in my comment? Geez you guys get so dang defensive about these things it seems. I simply stated that we used to have a "good terrain". NO WHERE DID I SAY run nothing but North Africa and Italy setups. Also I seriously doubt you will get maps approved for online usage in short order unless they come from the terrain team. From what I remember it was also a great GV battle terrain since that is what happened for the large majority of that part of the war.
Now since you brought up a point about bombing in North Africa...specifically Tunisia here is what I have on the matter. (http://www.usaaf.net/ww/vol6/vol6pg16.htm)
If you read your history about that stretch of the war there was nothing truly spectacular or particularly "strategic" about the bombing happening there. Yes the USAAF employed the same bombers but they flew more sorties each day against the same locations due to the relatively short distances and the fact that the battles were being waged in the same areas for those areas being bombed. While they did hit locally strategic points it was more in the vein of tactical air that they knew how to use back in that time frame. They didn't really have aircraft on station being called in on targets like we do in this day and age.
-
I'm not being defensive. I have no reason to be at this point. I just asked a question based on the notion that you probably have not examined the available terrains in the view of "historical setup" for use in the AvA. Right now we have 1 working map that suits the Africa campaign...Tunisia...and it has some glaring holes in it for ground war. The best area appeared to be in the N.W. corner but without being careful about initial base ownership, the setup would allow only limited ground engagements.
(http://i39.tinypic.com/1rqaft.jpg)
The Italy and Greece maps have similar "holes" in the vehicle spawn points.
My version of "strategic" bombing is having strats involved in the setup to emulate the destruction of not just bases but also cities and supplies by bombers that occurred frequently in many battles, not the USAAF strategic bombing initiative version. It would require the setup to include air bases positioned several grid sectors from the "front lines" that only have bombers activated which would need to coordinate with fighters out of other bases for escort if it's needed based on player participation.
But then any setup that I would propose would be more geared toward cooperative effort than just furballing or tank brawling.
-
It would require the setup to include air bases position several grid sectors from the "front lines" that only have bombers activated which would need to coordinate with fighters out of other bases for escort.
The setup would do that?? That's amazing!!
Here I was relying on the players.
-
The setup would do that?? That's amazing!!
Here I was relying on the players.
Fixed Bug...don't bug me. :neener:
-
I guess the "glaring" holes that you see are not there for me to see because unlike other twitchy players or spawn campers I would rather in a GV fight see a manuever warfare type of thing happen. Sure you could end up driving for a few minutes just to die in the opening salvo from the bad guys or you could drive into an ambush but why is that a problem. It is certainly a lot better than spawning in somewhere just for some dipdunk ultra melon to twitch shoot you as soon as you spawn. That isn't even quasi-historical no matter what the setup is.
-
I guess the "glaring" holes that you see are not there for me to see because unlike other twitchy players or spawn campers I would rather in a GV fight see a manuever warfare type of thing happen. Sure you could end up driving for a few minutes just to die in the opening salvo from the bad guys or you could drive into an ambush but why is that a problem. It is certainly a lot better than spawning in somewhere just for some dipdunk ultra melon to twitch shoot you as soon as you spawn. That isn't even quasi-historical no matter what the setup is.
How long are you willing to "maneuver" to get into that fight and have a "dipdunk ultra melon twich shoot" you? 20 minutes, 30 minutes, 45 minutes? Take a look again and think about how long it takes to get to a base on most of the MA maps in a Panzer or Tiger...then look at the locations of a lot of those spawn points, especially the ones that go nowhere. Personaly if I'm doing the gv thing, I don't mind going for as long as the fuel and ammo lasts but that's not like most players.