Aces High Bulletin Board
Special Events Forums => Friday Squad Operations => Topic started by: AKKuya on January 26, 2011, 02:02:32 PM
-
Has any CM ever though about a 3 frame event with ground vehicles only? Just for a little diversion from the normal setup.
-
The most I have ever done is 3 frames with both air and ground components. Haven't done only GV based FSO. Not sure what the majority people would think of it since some people like GVs and others don't.
-
Not sure how the GV experience would be, but how about this...
Along with side preferences, squads can choose GV or Air. Setup would be GV on GV battles (tanks, m16's, wirbles, whatever) in pockets around the map so not everyone is in one sector of the map. You could have the air elements to accompany the GV groups - some tasked with ground attack and some to protect the ground attack planes and/or friendly GV forces.
Although it would be cool to have an air war going on overhead the GV battle, I'm afraid it would be a short night for GV'ers (unless you allow 2-3 lives). A GV that stays alive for the night is worth more points than one that has re-spawned.
Make it either a slugfest or, as in the past, a capture-and-hold of a neutral base. Planes would be forbidden to de-ack or take down town buildings.
-
Air and Ground is a lot of fun. i remember WAY back in the day we did an Eastern Front FSO with both GVs and planes. It was fun for the GVs had a totally separate objective than the planes. The squad that took GVs were allowed a certain plane after their GV death. I liked the idea although I never was put in a GV. Doing this a few times a year would be ok but I do not think every FSO should be this way. And i do not think an all GV FSO would be good either.
-
Although I like this idea, I think that there should be a rule or an incentive not to bomb GVs. That is the biggest turn-away for GVers is getting bombed.
-
Yes, because the one thing that disrupted or destroyed more tanks and armor than anything else in all of WW2 (attackers/bombers) should be disabled in something intended to simulate the same type of combat?
The problem with GVs (forget about getting folks in them in FSOs, doubt it'll happen for a pure-GV FSO) is that they are unrealistic and unhistorical. The optics are far superior in-game to anything in the real world. There is very little variation to the trajectory -- other than a random aimpoint offset after you fire, every round at any range is laser accurate. There is not much fidelity with hit detection. There's almost no historical battlefields or environments.
GVing in Aces High is 99% spawn camping. When you try to force it into an event it often falls flat on its face.
Then there's the crybabies whining they got spotted by a plane! OMG! Haxx! Noes! I was killded!!!! Waah! (even if the plane was 5k away and never saw them)
-
I was thinking that the rhinewin map for 4 to 6 capture the flag assignments with players having 3 quarters in their pocket. Each quarter representing one life. Of course no planes.
Good to see some interest in this for a break in the normal FSO setups.
-
Yes, because the one thing that disrupted or destroyed more tanks and armor than anything else in all of WW2 (attackers/bombers) should be disabled in something intended to simulate the same type of combat?
The problem with GVs (forget about getting folks in them in FSOs, doubt it'll happen for a pure-GV FSO) is that they are unrealistic and unhistorical. The optics are far superior in-game to anything in the real world. There is very little variation to the trajectory -- other than a random aimpoint offset after you fire, every round at any range is laser accurate. There is not much fidelity with hit detection. There's almost no historical battlefields or environments.
GVing in Aces High is 99% spawn camping. When you try to force it into an event it often falls flat on its face.
Then there's the crybabies whining they got spotted by a plane! OMG! Haxx! Noes! I was killded!!!! Waah! (even if the plane was 5k away and never saw them)
You don't GV much.
-
I do on occasion. The 7k instant single ping hits are the norm on moving targets. In real life the optics would barely let you aim at something stationary 3k out for the better tanks. The Sherman would have a hard time hitting something outside 1.5k
In THIS game? That's well below lethal instant-death range.
-
GV's and goons,, a heavy, cloud layer down low, with fog, the goons could land and spot from f-3 or f-5, make the clouds go away at 1.5 hours, if the aggressors have not captured it by then, they get bombed unless they have already got shot down!
something similar to Battle of the bulge try to capture Bastogne with heavy armor under the cover of bad weather, fighters could fly above it, and the fog would fix the optic thing for Krusty
the bad side is the frame rates in fog in anything,
I missed it in AvA the other day, wish I would have made it !
-
Adding fog to the setup would take away alot of long distance shots.
-
You would think the same thing happens for trees and bushes, but no. Different systems see the "view limiters" in different ways. I'm kind of doubtful pea soup fog really helps. plus it just makes the rest of the event not very realistic (assuming you have an objective, you couldn't even see it with that kind of fog needed to reduce visibility to 3K or so).
-
I'm for the GV battle concept as well. However given the FSO main rule to have a fun event for all there would have to be a plane set as well. Probably the best way to handle it is in the same manner as before with a separate GV battle space. About 3 squads each is the right size I think.
Now as for the terrain and type of engagement: Having GV'ed in both type of scenario's we have had in the past the GV battles that took place in the desert terrain (North Africa) lastest the longest and the guys had the most fun. It went on for nearly 60 minutes with guys down to the last rounds and the base capture happening in the last few seconds. A real nail bitter!!! We had a base placed in the middle and dash to capture and hold until the H+60 horn was sounded. It was nothing but maneuvering in formation and long range shotting combined with fire and maneuver. Classic GV battle.
The GV battles in the woodland type of terrain turned into Armored assaults in which massed formations used the trees to close to within point blank range and then overran each other and the battle was decided fairly early by H+30 with most dead a few from each side holding their ground. Not as much fun in the FSO enviroment of 1 life.
I'd like to see a GV battle space in every scenario where the terrain and setup supports it. Our last FSO would have supported a GV battle space nicely with Tigers and Panthers matched against T-34's and T-34-85's.
-
I liked the Idea of open Gv's after T+60 like we did in Dec 2008. It just needs some modifications.
-
Theoretically speaking, mind you (since I am against the general idea for use in FSO, but I'll debate it anyway) it seems to me part of the allure of GVing is the instant reup after the instant death. I think that tempers much of the frustration -- if you can just get THROUGH, etc, that impetus to keep pushing. With 1 life (or 2 or 3) that's heavily limited.
What about unlimited lives for GVs in a localized areas.... BUT only for a set time limit? I.e. you close the field after 30 minutes, or 45 minutes. If the objective is not had before then, the attackers lose, the defenders win.
Just a thought. It does require a CM's efforts, though. Easier to parse the logs -- no need to count lives.
-
I was thinking some objective where the only way you could get it was by M3 or 251, which requires tank defense and tank offense as well. I also like that idea of a cloud layer, maybe at 1 or 2K.
-
Like I said, the last FSO where GVs were involved, the tanks had a completely separate objective than planes. Therefore no planes were in the area.
-
GVs? No, thanks. Don't much care for them.
But thank you for asking. :salute
-
I have no problem with having GV's in FSO occasionally. Done it once or twice myself in my designs.
I don't think I could be talked into an all GV FSO.
-
Well, I think that FSO's are the best part of the game and that GV's of all types are the worst so obviously, NO I would not be interested in doing an FSO. That would change completely if the AK's (my squad) wanted to join because I will follow them anywhere.
-
i did a "all GV setup" in the AVA and it was epic. no planes to bomb them. it was a total blast. even guys that didnt normally use GV's tried it. probably one of the best times we've had in the AVA. 27 m4's, firefly's and such, versus 13 tigers and panzers. it ended in a draw!
just my 2 cents.
(yet another shameless advertisement for the AVA! :D )
-
:rock
I have no problem with having GV's in FSO occasionally. Done it once or twice myself in my designs.
I don't think I could be talked into an all GV FSO.
:rock :aok
-
I have no problem with having GV's in FSO occasionally. Done it once or twice myself in my designs.
I don't think I could be talked into an all GV FSO.
I'd say a second life GV furball could be fun. After a pilot dies he can help the war effort by attacking a ground target with a GV.
-
I wouldnt have a problem with a second life GV fight. It seems one time there was a GV part to a FSO, I cant remember if it was a second life or not but it did give me a good laugh when I drove my M4 straight into a Tiger
-
I have done a couple of designs with GV elements. Basically it was a capture and hold the flag type of mission with both sides having to deploy a few squads in GVs and then take a base and hold onto it up to the T+60 mark. Then they got second lives in planes for the second hour of the event.
2nd life is crucial since most people want to fly and also keeping the GV force to small to mid size level I found was important since quite a few people don't care for GVing. So if it is like 10% to 15% or so a side (20-32) that usually allows a CiC to assign squads who actually like GVing instead of forcing it upon those who don't. Not sure if I would try an all GV event.
I have tried GV second life for people a few times but my implementation of it didn't work well. Tried to use to simulate an amphibious invasion and just didn't really turn out well.
-
If FSO moves to GV-only frames, then reopening my account will have been a huge mistake.
My $.02.
-
I have no problem with having GV's in FSO occasionally. Done it once or twice myself in my designs.
I don't think I could be talked into an all GV FSO.
Thank the gods for small favors.
-
yes Nef, I remember that, That was a good one, If we cant do an all GV FSO, then a split sounds good. That worked well and was fun
:banana:
-
The GD set up and scenario I think worked very well. I was on that frame in a GV and both sides had a blast as I remember from the BBS posts following the engagement.
The capture and hold the flag type of scenario worked very well with both sides starting an equal distance from the base. The base being neutral shot at both sides until you captured it. Holding on to it became the real tactical strategy. It required a mix of support vehicles with troops and supplies as the base was recaptured. Then exactly at H+60 who every controlled the base got the points. Then both sides upped in non-ordance carring AC to help our sides. Adding pilots to the late frame in non carring ordnance AC again was a great idea because it didn't swing the frame and allows these additional AC to fill holes in defenses or conduct fighter sweeps.
Overall a very well thought out plan and worked out well also. Now I think it would be even better given the addition of several new GV's since that time.
-
Although I am rarely on the boards in here, I to would like to add my 2 cents worth. An occasional GV aspect to FSO would be a welcome treat to a lot of people. I agree though that a total GV FSO is not the way to go. Like WWhiskey said earlier, lay in a fog bank and have a seperate objective for the aircraft that would eliminate the threat of bombing. The capture the flag thought has merit. I know I for one would up in a GV in that type scenario.
Just my 2 cent's....and no i'm not a noob, just havn't been in here in a few years...LOL