Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Stalwart on July 12, 2010, 01:00:51 AM
-
The last few nights online I've noticed our Rook CVs keep getting tasked to areas behind our "continent", where they are fairly useless.
I hope there more and better ideas to address the issue of CV hijacking, but for the moment, can we at least have a log of who, when, and to where CVs are tasked?
:salute
Stalwart
-
Some people like to save CVs, what for I dont know. I can sort of understand moving one back that the enemy owns the port of but they are there to fight with not hide. May as well take them out of the game if thats what happens to them because you can't do squat with them while they are hidden.
-
"The wheels on the bus go round and round".
-
"The wheels on the bus go round and round".
"The wipers on the bus go "Swish, swish, swish"
:rock
wrongway
-
"The wipers on the bus go "Swish, swish, swish"
:rock
wrongway
All the live long daaay!
Oh, wait...
-
Its either they are moved to where they are hidden from everybody, or bunched up together so they can be sunk by one set of lancs. answer is sadly only when they get bunched up together it is against the rules to do both.
semp
-
LOL
I just read my post a few hours after I posted it. I could almost pull off a squeeker wall of text shade. :devil
:bolt:
-
Well said, I couldn't agree more. It follows that just because someone might be an AH 'high-scorer' in the air, that doesn't qualify them as the same on water. This ol' cat knows a thing or two about naval warfare and has controlled Task Groups in not a few bombardments and hard-fought sea actions. He and the crew would have had even more fun if only various nautical dim-wits with higher AH scores hadn't suddenly hi-jacked the TG and sent it either headlong to its doom or away from the action to where it could make no further useful contribution.
The hi-jackers are also usually too lazy or rude to let the previous Admiral know that they're taking over the helm. If there's one type of battle in AH where co-operation between players can lead to great amusement and satisfaction for all involved, it's a sea-fight between Task Groups or defending a TG against air attack while attempting an amphibious landing in the best Saipan style - but all too many such have been spoiled by the selfish action of a twonk who fancies himself as another Bull Halsey but hasn't even the knowledge to con the Gosport Ferry, let alone a warship.
It shouldn't be too hard to code the scoring system so it's the highest-scoring 'nautic' who has precedence for Task Group control and not the 'greatest tanker/air-ace' - how about it, HT?
:cool:
-
Perhaps it's time to have people take a test and submit a request for a "license" from HTC to command CV group. Only licensed commanders can control them, and if they habitually hide them or park them at PT spawns or in front of a SB, their license gets revoked.
Or, perhaps we can just come to the realization that this is a game, and get over it.
-
I love people ranked under 10 who take control of the CV, won't give up control, and run it right up to an enemy base, in front of the shore battery and leave the ord up. I've seen alot of this as of late. I fully agree that the ranking should not have anything to do with the control of the CV because of such putzes.
Maybe something along the lines of: you can "own" control so long as you are in, or around the CV group (not sure how far out) but once you leave said area, the CV retains its current course, but control is lost. Then for those who want to grieve while afk and thinking "I have a rank of 6 and I'm going to sleep, so I think I'll sit in the CV's tower and keep control." HTC could make it so that a certain amount of inactivity, you lose "ownership."
PS: it's also hard for someone in a dogfight to maneuver the CV defensively as needed during a simultaneous bomb run.. no Admiral in their right mind would fly and try to be a Captain.
-
Spider1 Alert! :rofl
(http://fidgit.com/spider-sense.jpg)
-
"The wheels on the bus go round and round".
Thanks alot guys, now I got that dammed song stuck in my head for the rest day!!!!...lol
-
Perhaps it's time to have people take a test and submit a request for a "license" from HTC to command CV group. Only licensed commanders can control them, and if they habitually hide them or park them at PT spawns or in front of a SB, their license gets revoked.
Or, perhaps we can just come to the realization that this is a game, and get over it.
+1
-
Maybe cv's should be coded so that you cannot take them behind your front line bases. Or people that are here that do not like it, take control and bring them back down to the fight.
semp
-
Please understand. I'm not talking about differences in opinion about how to fight a CV group in the conflict area. I doubt we'll have agreement on that. What I'm talking about is completely removing the CVs to the back edge of the map. The night this thread started there were FOUR CVs way behind the Rook continent.
I don't think any Rooks would have put them there, but rather I suspect an agent of Knights or Bishop tasked them there just to get them out of the fight.
-
If a knight or a bish did a side swapping manuever just to "hide a rook cv, wouldn't it be more likely that they place them in an area to be sunk?
-
I don't think any Rooks would have put them there, but rather I suspect an agent of Knights or Bishop tasked them there just to get them out of the fight.
Wrong Wrong Wrong. Rooks do it all the time, so it can only be a spy? :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Please understand. I'm not talking about differences in opinion about how to fight a CV group in the conflict area. I doubt we'll have agreement on that. What I'm talking about is completely removing the CVs to the back edge of the map. The night this thread started there were FOUR CVs way behind the Rook continent.
I don't think any Rooks would have put them there, but rather I suspect an agent of Knights or Bishop tasked them there just to get them out of the fight.
NO, rooks put hem there to hide them, the same way Bish and Nits do.
-
Perhaps provide an option to buy Task Force Mission time for $$$ perks.
Anyone who coughs up the perks immediately assumes command over anyone else who has not paid, no matter what the rank. When a Task Force is in a "paid-for" mission, no one else can hijack it. Presumably people who pay for a Task Force mission would want to accomplish a mission - probably great for squads or joint squad ops.
Make the CV perk loss price equal to the perk price of an airbase. If you take a base but lose the CV, the Task Force commander breaks even. If you take a base and all vessels are in tact, woo hoo, you clean house.
Lesser vessels are less of a perk loss. Ports could be something a bit less valuable than an airbase, as could Vehicle bases.
Planes, PT boats and LTVs are the individual's responsibility, and if downed are not counted against the Task Force commander.
Best.
-
:aok perk CV command.
Points per nautical mile?
Points per segment?
-
Think about it this way (as I am sure we all do). People hide the carriers to deny the enemy the use of the carrier after a port is taken. Is it a gaming thing? NO, it isnt but it is a tactical advantage because you deny the enemy the carrier and the air armada it can provide for as long as you keep it afloat. Now as far as maybe addressing a prior post where you have to be on the carrier to contorl it that sounds good but I dont know how it could be programmed? Maybe we could chrage perks to control a CV?? You get control of it for one hour or something like that? I dont like the idea of hiding CV's but then again I do see its advantage at times when we have maps that the enemy is limited to the number of ports but yet your side controls the CV. Anyway all it takes is a little deductive reasoning to find where it is at and go sink it.
BigKev
-
:aok perk CV command.
Points per nautical mile?
Points per segment?
buy your cv for say 100 perks, you sink it, you lose them. Or if someone wants your Cv you can sell it on. Just a thought.
-
buy your cv for say 100 perks, you sink it, you lose them. Or if someone wants your Cv you can sell it on. Just a thought.
(http://www.financegetspersonal.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/ticket-scalper-400x300.jpg)
Yo...you wanna buy a CV.I got one here cheap!
-
Maybe cv's should be coded so that you cannot take them behind your front line bases. Or people that are here that do not like it, take control and bring them back down to the fight.
semp
Maybe you have to be part of that country for X amount of time before you can move them in any way?
Perhaps provide an option to buy Task Force Mission time for $$$ perks.
Anyone who coughs up the perks immediately assumes command over anyone else who has not paid, no matter what the rank. When a Task Force is in a "paid-for" mission, no one else can hijack it. Presumably people who pay for a Task Force mission would want to accomplish a mission - probably great for squads or joint squad ops.
Make the CV perk loss price equal to the perk price of an airbase. If you take a base but lose the CV, the Task Force commander breaks even. If you take a base and all vessels are in tact, woo hoo, you clean house.
Lesser vessels are less of a perk loss. Ports could be something a bit less valuable than an airbase, as could Vehicle bases.
Planes, PT boats and LTVs are the individual's responsibility, and if downed are not counted against the Task Force commander.
Best.
This is a good idea, but it brings the element of commerce into the game...
but if it does go ahead, the person who purchased their fleet should be able to customize their new fleet? or pay on a 'per ship' basis
eg; CV = 20 (only one and must have), Crusier = 15 (max 3 crusiers) and so on
what perks would you be using? vehicle perks?
-
hmm, i gotta give a +1 to the "you have to be in a country for x amount of time to take controll of cv"
That should mess up hijackers
-
yea i had to take the cvs and pull them away from the OPPOSITE side of the land mass and make them move so they can actually be used.
-
NO, rooks put hem there to hide them, the same way Bish and Nits do.
Since coming over to Knights as a member of the Widowmakers, I have YET to see a single CV "hidden" when playing. They are used as they should be. Only a fool would have a free resource and not use it.
-
Since coming over to Knights as a member of the Widowmakers, I have YET to see a single CV "hidden" when playing. They are used as they should be. Only a fool would have a free resource and not use it.
Not if we can help it! ;)
-
You better add this then, If you are commanding a TF, that is all you can do. No flying. No GVing. Because it never fails, that whoever has the CV when the buffs arrive, is off some place else and nobody can turn the CV to save it.
LTARsqrl <<S>>
-
I call out on the country channel that the CV had better start heading toward some action. If it does not I will start reporting it's position to the enemy every 5 minutes. Sometimes it works, other times I'll get one guy to tune me up and I guide him strait to it so he can sink it :devil
Ya it's a lame move, but thats the best way to fight a lamer isn't it? :P
-
I call out on the country channel that the CV had better start heading toward some action. If it does not I will start reporting it's position to the enemy every 5 minutes. Sometimes it works, other times I'll get one guy to tune me up and I guide him strait to it so he can sink it :devil
Ya it's a lame move, but thats the best way to fight a lamer isn't it? :P
First Fugitive I agree with you on carriers should be used, but not in your solution. Find a friendly that has the rank to take the CV, and have them move it for you. Simple, no-lameness solution.
:salute
Way
-
First Fugitive I agree with you on carriers should be used, but not in your solution. Find a friendly that has the rank to take the CV, and have them move it for you. Simple, no-lameness solution.
:salute
Way
Unfortunately those are the guys hiding it. I ALWAYS give them the chance to turn it back toward the action, but if they refuse, well lame is as lame does I guess.
-
Unfortunately those are the guys hiding it. I ALWAYS give them the chance to turn it back toward the action, but if they refuse, well lame is as lame does I guess.
Well then...my apologies. This can be frustrating as I really do not care to take the time to game my score for CV control.
-
Perhaps the Con should be another fighting positon. You man the Con. which gives you contol of the TG. You leave the positon you lose control of the TG. The only way you can command the TG is form the Con. If the Con is not manned . then anyone can change the directon of the TG remotely as is down now. But if someone wants to man the Con. They have exclusive control.
-
Perhaps the Con should be another fighting positon. You man the Con. which gives you contol of the TG. You leave the positon you lose control of the TG. The only way you can command the TG is form the Con. If the Con is not manned . then anyone can change the directon of the TG remotely as is down now. But if someone wants to man the Con. They have exclusive control.
I have always favored this approach. I would say the only requirement is that you are located somewhere with in the task group (i.e. con, gun positions, etc.).
-
The thing about CV's are they are there to be used and abused, and not hid behind the curtains like a circus freak.
The easiest thing HTC could do is to add in some islands or other blockage to keep the CV's from skirting around the cape and off to freedom, and/or code the the edges of the maps so that CV's can only go so close. That will limit just how far away the captured CV's can run/evade/hide.
On the note of having control of the CV and getting booted by a player of higher rank... yes, it is not cool to be removed from command. It isnt fun, I've been on both ends of that ship. The only time in which I take control of a CV from a lessor raned player is when they are trying to hide the CV, or otherwise are unfamiliar with how CV's work (trying to take them clear across the map instead of trying for a closer and more feasible target, etc).
Also, there are the bananas that think it is the DRIVER of that CV that got it sunk. Last I knew, it was the enemy that dropped the ordnance on the CV, not the driver of the CV who dropped the ordnance on his CV. The number of accusing PM's that come my way once a CV under my command is sunk is amusing. I could have had that CV doing flips or even submerging like Davy Jone's Flying Dutchman, but the bomber is good enough to land the bombs regardless yet it is *my* fault.
-
I have always favored this approach. I would say the only requirement is that you are located somewhere with in the task group (i.e. con, gun positions, etc.).
Have to disagree with your approach. The problem being it gets back into the “who has control of the CV” No, make a Con position. If you want positive control of the CV you must man that position. Anyone can man the Con. No rank involved. If you leave that position . anyone can take over control as long as they man the position.
Perhaps the Con should be another fighting positon. You man the Con. which gives you contol of the TG. You leave the positon you lose control of the TG. The only way you can command the TG is form the Con. If the Con is not manned . then anyone can change the directon of the TG remotely as is down now. But if someone wants to man the Con. They have exclusive control.
-
So, as long as someone is manning the con, as is with the SB or man-gun, nobody can kick them out and take control? How is that better than what we have now? I can see shades manning the con and never leaving, while they play on their other account.
-
So, as long as someone is manning the con, as is with the SB or man-gun, nobody can kick them out and take control? How is that better than what we have now? I can see shades manning the con and never leaving, while they play on their other account.
What we have now is someone taking command of a TG and then flying in a mission on the other side of the map or just directing the CV out of the fight to no man's land. Because of their rank noone can regain cotrol and they tie up the CV for hours. With my suggestion the Con is a manned position and the player has to stay in that positon to have contol. Could a shade account take control. As long as they are paying their 14.95 a month, yes. But isn't shade accounts a different porblem than a non attentive player taking and holding control of a CV.
-
So, as long as someone is manning the con, as is with the SB or man-gun, nobody can kick them out and take control? How is that better than what we have now? I can see shades manning the con and never leaving, while they play on their other account.
There is no way to stop this, and I do not think HTC would change anything in relation to this particular wrinkle.
-
Yep, my point exactly. It is what it is and we just deal with it best we can.
-
Yep, my point exactly. It is what it is and we just deal with it best we can.
My mistake, I thought your point was:
So, as long as someone is manning the con, as is with the SB or man-gun, nobody can kick them out and take control? How is that better than what we have now? I can see shades manning the con and never leaving, while they play on their other account.
-
I was just trying to say that by having the con as a manable position, like a field gun, you're even more stuck than now. You can't kick someone out of the shore battery if they're sitting there doing nothing while their buddy brings the enemy CV up to the town. At least now someone with a higher rank can kick someone out of control of a CV. It's still not perfect, but I don't think there's any way to make it so someone can't game the game to do dweeby things with the CV.
-
just find out who is doing it and ban them from using the CV from then on.... and if that isnt deterrent enough and they choose to still do this crap, they will never be able to control a cv again...
Though i doubt this would ever be implemented, its the same thing we do to people who abuse the chat feature so why not do the same for people who abuse the cv. I mean the people chatting can simply be tuned out, and really dont impact the game that much, while the cv hiders impact the game on a much higher level, than people who choose to mouth off, or troll, since their is an easy solution to that, and it hardly effects game play.
-
just find out who is doing it and ban them from using the CV from then on.... and if that isnt deterrent enough and they choose to still do this crap, they will never be able to control a cv again...
Though i doubt this would ever be implemented, its the same thing we do to people who abuse the chat feature so why not do the same for people who abuse the cv. I mean the people chatting can simply be tuned out, and really dont impact the game that much, while the cv hiders impact the game on a much higher level, than people who choose to mouth off, or troll, since their is an easy solution to that, and it hardly effects game play.
Honestly, they are one and the same. Your "mouths" (Desktop Generals) are the one's with "the Master (Bucket full of holes) Planners" and are the ones putting down the Chesspiece they're on. Most of these geniuses have managed to piss off all 3 and are 99% squelched. You always have the gullible who cling to them though.
-
Actually I never squelch people I find most of their trolling attempts to be quite funny, and the reactions they get from many people is even better.
I like it, it adds some spice to the game, watching their banter makes flying to where the action is at bearable. But when all the CV are all directed far away from any where its a pain because if you want to use one of those CVs or at least put them in range so if they needed to be used they could be, without having to wait an hour for transit, is just annoying, foolish and harmful for the team.
-
I was just trying to say that by having the con as a manable position, like a field gun, you're even more stuck than now. You can't kick someone out of the shore battery if they're sitting there doing nothing while their buddy brings the enemy CV up to the town. At least now someone with a higher rank can kick someone out of control of a CV. It's still not perfect, but I don't think there's any way to make it so someone can't game the game to do dweeby things with the CV.
I think the manable position is better then what now exists for the reasons I"ve stated in the earlier posts. I really don't see anyone now doing the things you discribe, I do see people with the rank grabbing control and sending it to never never land and they can retain control and do anything else that they feel like doing. Drive tanks, fly planes, man field guns and they lose track of the CV and end up getting it sunk. I just think it should be like any other position in the game. They get total control as long as they are in the position. I'm not worried about spys or shades or any of the other crap
-
Just a little, historical note, Invasion of Guadalcanal:
After these clashes, Fletcher was concerned about the losses to his carrier fighter aircraft strength, anxious about the threat to his carriers from further Japanese air attacks, and worried about his ship's fuel levels. Fletcher withdrew from the Solomon Islands area with his carrier task forces the evening of August 8.
...Leaving the invasion transports unprotected. After the Battle of Savo Island the following night, the transports followed leaving the Marines ashore to their own devices. :salute
wrongway
:bolt:
-
In order for you to get and keep command of the CV you must first quit your job so you'll be able to play 18 hours a day to get your rank as low as the other rankmeisters. :old:
-
The last few nights online I've noticed our Rook CVs keep getting tasked to areas behind our "continent", where they are fairly useless.
I hope there more and better ideas to address the issue of CV hijacking, but for the moment, can we at least have a log of who, when, and to where CVs are tasked?
I've been noticing this as well. And when you try change it, it always reverts back when you aren't looking. I have my suspicions as to who the 2 or 3 people doing it are. Just look for the ones that are saying 'hey, C## is getting hit, someone move it' when they are neither up from the CV or in the tower.
And a log wouldn't help, they are convinced they are doing their patriotic duty to keep us to the strait and narrow by keeping us from 'wasting our time with the CV attacks' dispite the fact that they get yelled at when they get caught.
-
Yeah... CV hiding... I remember flying 2 hours in a bomber to kill a CV because the rooks wouldnt give up control of it (after hiding it) and one Rook came over to my team, posted the mish, we went and bombed it.... Good fun- I mean, why not? He wouldnt let his own team use it, just kept it hidden........ but the problem is-
CV hiding will spawn negative actions/reactions among the community.
I think best scenario is man a gun, or the con, and you command....
Fly a plane, enter a GV, or a field gun on a land base- lose control....
no keyboard/joystick inputs in 10/15 minutes, lose control....
-
I think best scenario is man a gun, or the con, and you command....
Fly a plane, enter a GV, or a field gun on a land base- lose control....
no keyboard/joystick inputs in 10/15 minutes, lose control....
The only problem being, who of the manable gun positions has command? Is that based on rank? Better if there is just a Con Positon , whoever is in that position has command. If that position is empty. Let anyone be able to alter the course of the CV as is now done, unless the Con Position is manned.
-
The only problem being, who of the manable gun positions has command? Is that based on rank? Better if there is just a Con Positon , whoever is in that position has command. If that position is empty. Let anyone be able to alter the course of the CV as is now done, unless the Con Position is manned.
No, I know, I don't think I was clear to what I meant... I think if you man the con, you should also be able to man the AA guns for defense of the ships too.... I mean, since you should be stuck to the ships, might as well be able to defend it as well... I just dont think you should be able to fly/gv, etc...
Case in point, earlier today there were like, 120 people in the arena, all fights were over land, so while I took a long long route around my target in bombers, I took control of a TG (noone was using them), and fooled around with it- but that means either I'm not paying attention to my a/c or the TG- one or the other.
-
The problem with having a 'con' possition is that once someone mans it, like a spy or shade account (there are some) or just some idiot, there is no way to get him out of there.
-
The problem with having a 'con' possition is that once someone mans it, like a spy or shade account (there are some) or just some idiot, there is no way to get him out of there.
That's true, but that's all they can do. They can't fly or GV. How long would you sit there?
And everyone would learn who the ID was. As it is now. Someone can grab control and you have the same thing. but now they are free to do other things besides tie up the CV.
-
Well, if it is a shade account, its sole reason for existience is to act as a target for its creator so he can score and perk pad, or to sit in CV guns, SB's, or 17lbers and tie them up. The only other reason one would have a shade account is for spying; you can find CV locations, find who is active at what field, when the next attack is coming, and be directed to defensless C-47's.
-
Well, if it is a shade account, its sole reason for existience is to act as a target for its creator so he can score and perk pad, or to sit in CV guns, SB's, or 17lbers and tie them up. The only other reason one would have a shade account is for spying; you can find CV locations, find who is active at what field, when the next attack is coming, and be directed to defensless C-47's.
Some people have shade accounts to:
1. Fly unmolested without having ankle humping squeakers nag them
2. To allow friends or family to play as well
3. Some dual box and crew their own bombers (was a well known player that did this)
4. For many other reasons not listed above that have nothing to do with cheating or spying
ack-ack
-
1. Fly unmolested without having ankle humping squeakers nag them
2. To allow friends or family to play as well
3. Some dual box and crew their own bombers (was a well known player that did this)
2 I wouldn't really call 'shade' accounts. I will admit I had overlooked the others, but i will argue the "for many other reasons not listed above that have nothing to do with cheating or spying".
If there are more than 5, I will give you the point, but I wouldn't even begin to call 2 or 3 "many".