Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Rich52 on September 14, 2011, 06:42:38 PM
-
How would you compare play quality compared to a couple, 3, 4 years ago? Maybe even longer? I dont mean the game itself, which has improved, or even individual players. Im asking about how the player base now plays the game compared to years ago?
-
umm there is less players i know that...
its hard for me to tell the skill level or timidness compared to 3-4 years ago, but i do see alot more running lately
-
I've only been here 2 years 6 months....... but other than the graphics upgrades and new toys, I really don't see anything different now than in March, 2009.
Same game, just a lot of newer names, a lot of the same names, and some old names from time to time.
-
Ppl still. Horde, run, vulch, troll, whine, and camp
-
there were more players on the non-us prime time hours.
-
Since 2005, i see a huge diffrence. Back then people had skills with out HOing. sigh, sigh.
-
Since 2005, i see a huge diffrence. Back then people had skills with out HOing. sigh, sigh.
Skills???
Really??
Without HOing??
Really???
Sigh, sigh.
Oakranger Babbit made a joke.
-
been here since tour 52......been fighting the hoard since day one :old:
-
Same ole same ole for the last four years. Unfortunately for my wife it's still as fun as ever! :x
-
It is what it is.
Enjoy it. :aok
-
I think somewhere there is a chart with some great math stuff thingy's (insert snailman product here) that expresses perceived play quality in relationship to self improvement. I think that the longer we play, the more (**generalization) we mature in the game, and the more we have a sense to cry foul. Game seems the same it always has, except for now I can't drop an entire town with my M4 with the Calliope.
-
It's the same thing just with different names/squads.
-
Next month makes 10 years as a paying subscriber for me (did my 2 weeks in Aug 2001). Many have told me I look at the game through rose colored glasses, or that my memory is faulty, or that I'm burned out. I think they are full of crap :D
The game hasn't changed other than adding bigger and better things. Considering the size of the company it still amazes me what this group can put out.
The players on the other hand have changed tremendously ! 10 years ago we were all history nuts playing a war simulation game. Today most players are games trying to win the war before they have to go do their homework.
-
Next month makes 10 years as a paying subscriber for me (did my 2 weeks in Aug 2001). Many have told me I look at the game through rose colored glasses, or that my memory is faulty, or that I'm burned out. I think they are full of crap :D
The game hasn't changed other than adding bigger and better things. Considering the size of the company it still amazes me what this group can put out.
The players on the other hand have changed tremendously ! 10 years ago we were all history nuts playing a war simulation game. Today most players are games trying to win the war before they have to go do their homework.
I can almost guarantee you that most wars are won by the 40 and over. I use to hear kids talk on range before for some reason now I hardly do. I normally hear the voice of guys well past their 30's.
semp
-
I can almost guarantee you that most wars are won by the 40 and over. I use to hear kids talk on range before for some reason now I hardly do. I normally hear the voice of guys well past their 30's.
semp
I'm sorry, that might have gone over your head (my aim has always sucked :D ). What I meant was in the old days we were simmers, today its gamers. 30 and under is the "Nintendo" generation. They were brought up on games and gaming systems. They look at games as having a start, and a finish. To a simmer the game never ends, it's a continuing game that is always in a state of flux that you can jump in and join at any time. Games start a game and do nothing but drive to the finish. Then they buy a new game.
-
Im asking about how the player base now plays the game compared to years ago?
Probably about the same, with (for me) three notable distinctions.
There seemed to be more people willing to improve their own skills. People studied Shaw's book. People relied a bit less on numbers to assist them.
There was a significantly greater sense of the historical aspects of the game. This did not necessarily translate into different game behavior - there was still the tension between the "sim" people and the "sport" people - but the WWII knowledge level was higher.
The average player age was higher. Alas, this did not necessarily produce more mature game play.
- oldman
-
I'm sorry, that might have gone over your head (my aim has always sucked :D ). What I meant was in the old days we were simmers, today its gamers. 30 and under is the "Nintendo" generation. They were brought up on games and gaming systems. They look at games as having a start, and a finish. To a simmer the game never ends, it's a continuing game that is always in a state of flux that you can jump in and join at any time. Games start a game and do nothing but drive to the finish. Then they buy a new game.
You know, I agree with this. I've been around AH since March of 2008. All I want, at this point, is to improve my ACM and become a better dog fighter. I really don't care about "the war"... At all. I just wish that HTC would develop some sort of duel match maker where you just click on something and you get paired with someone else who also wants to duel.
I want to learn by experience, but it's nearly impossible in the MA and I guess I'm just not quite cheeky enough to beg for DA time with more experienced guys. I always feel like I am wasting their time, even if I do get something out of it.
I guess I need a FPH to spend time with... But I can't quite bring myself to be quite the ankle humper that a certain someone has become...
-
Largely no changes since AW 1996. The names have changed. The maps/terrains have changed. More has been added. The dweebs are still dweebs. The fighters are still fighters. CZ/Nits still suck. BZ/Rooks are still alt monkey furballers; a controdiction in itself. AZ/Bish still fight outnumbered most often (thank you hoard squads for moving along, the rest of us prefer it this way).
Life goes on just as it's always been.
-
It could be my imagination, but it seems like theres more "screw it, lets just overwhelm the defenders with bodies" than any attempt at victory by skill since the radar changes.
Again, could be my imagination, but it seems like the play quality is slipping. But it could just be that I've become disenchanted with Aces High, and am now actually recognizing the negative parts.
-
Only faces, squads, and planes have changed. New players to hate, old players to miss.
-
The game play hasn't changed since AH was launched. Sure, some of us old timers look at the past years with rose tinted glasses but in reality nothing has changed. It was the same in Air Warrior and Warbirds as well, AH hasn't been any different.
ack-ack
-
The greatest single change I've noticed is since the new ack was introduced to the fields.
There are alot more people now whom when I come across even when they have an advantage to start with who simply make one pass then run or dive to their field ack.
-
AH was $14.95/mo 10 years ago, as it is today. Find another product or service that can claim the same.
-
I think the game play has improved. Sadly I can't put my finger on what makes me think it.
I believe the new layout of the towns has helped improve gameplay, it's more challenging than it use to be compared with the old square layout.
-
I'm sorry, that might have gone over your head (my aim has always sucked :D ). What I meant was in the old days we were simmers, today its gamers. 30 and under is the "Nintendo" generation. They were brought up on games and gaming systems. They look at games as having a start, and a finish. To a simmer the game never ends, it's a continuing game that is always in a state of flux that you can jump in and join at any time. Games start a game and do nothing but drive to the finish. Then they buy a new game.
Fugitive, That is the most profound statement about this game I have ever seen. You are exactly right. I played this game for 5 years and dedicated thousands of game play hours to include some weekend 30 hour stretches.
I left the game because it took on a completely different face over the last two years. My squaddies would ditch a 4 or 5 kill plane/tank to bring supplies and troops. People would ask if you wanted help in a fight instead of diving in for a kill and Ho’ing was a last ditch effort to survive, not a tactical advantage.
I am not saying these things don’t exist but it’s so rare I don’t think it deserves a comment.
I have been thinking of coming back and have been reading the message boards over the last few months but I guess you just have to concede to the fact that the sim days are over and gaming is the order of the day.
Not many people recognize this attribute Fugitive and I agree with you completely.
<in my best Yoda voice>
You are the chosen one my son, go forth and Die many good deaths so these young prodigies may learn from your example. :old:
-
I have been here since 2002 ...
The core elements of game play have not really changed.
What has changed is the mindset of the players that play this game.
-
I think the overall play quality has diminished only due to the fact that many of the old names that were around when I started have left. There is a definate skill gap between a new player and one who's been in game for a while, even if they're not elite players. Also it seems the Dora has been replaced by the P51, other than that... same tactics. Main difference I see is the BF110 is no longer a mainstay of attack since the cities have changed. It takes a more overall force to properly assault a town than before.
-
IMHO good fights have dwindled since going back to one LW.
They can still be found if you have time and patience.
-
I'm sorry, that might have gone over your head (my aim has always sucked :D ). What I meant was in the old days we were simmers, today its gamers. 30 and under is the "Nintendo" generation. They were brought up on games and gaming systems. They look at games as having a start, and a finish. To a simmer the game never ends, it's a continuing game that is always in a state of flux that you can jump in and join at any time. Games start a game and do nothing but drive to the finish. Then they buy a new game.
Your sweeping generalizations really make me chuckle but assuming you are right, what's so wrong about that? Game play quality is a direct function of both the game itself and the players, not just the players. In fact I'd say it is more heavily based on the way the game is set up to be played. If HTC fails to update the simplistic strategic system they have in the game and continue to live in the Simmer Stoneage where simple mind numbing strategy was good enough for the simmer crowd, then we will become obsolete. Pretty simple really.
-
I had taken a break from AH, when I came back I saw a few of the old names, some of them remembered me, some didn't. I spent some time in the DA To get back into things, before I went to the MA. When we attacked a V base as I rolled in with a load of eggs in my Hog I noticed a few things, the ack was still there, there were 2 ostwinds, and they were shooting at me. The other thing I noticed was once they started upping fighters I actually got check 6 calls from people and they actually kept the enm fighters off of me till I could get light. The dog fights were still there and I think that the group I was flying with were fighting as a team as well as we used to. Over all I think that the game has stayed pretty much the same, it is still well worth my 15 dollars a month, which I paid even though I wasn't playing very much. The wife ACK is still the same caliber and will ruin a good fight quicker than a HOing A-20, and the -16 is still hard to get with a hog if you are out of E. P-51s still BnZ but you can sucker them into a turn fight if they are young, and the 190 is still a bullet straight and level, especially if you forget to pull your flaps up after take off which is really irritating in the Hog.
-
I've been here well to many years, I don't think the quality is what it was 5 or 8 years ago or even back in Air Warrior days, now a few reasons for this.
The economy has really hurt many, I believe quite a few of the quality sticks probably retired or gotten bored with the game.
Thus being said - I don't agree the Quality has changed all to much over the years, I believe its just lack of training and lack of learning that does it.
5 Years ago we had NOE's but not every single mission flown from one country were NOE's, you'd get one or two here and there with a single Squad running them or a pair of squads.
Problem is less then 20% have always been Experts in the cartoon world, 20% or more have been bran new to the game and everyone else is stuck in the middle, whether its lack of interest to learn ACM, or someone who just enjoys flying with his squad and having some time to blow off steam.
Either way I don't think the Quality went down the drain as much in the last few years as the Strategy involved, which really has gone down hill.
When 60 players mass for an NOE, some call this "a mission" others call it a horde, I haven't seen this 5 years ago unless it was squad night for a large squad with 3-4 sub squads, even then there wasn't 40-60 players it was more like 20 was a horde.
Squads arn't training new pilots also, not as effectively as it was 5 years ago, the learning Curve hasn't changed and some either accept the challange or don't.
-
umm there is less players i know that...
its hard for me to tell the skill level or timidness compared to 3-4 years ago, but i do see alot more running lately
You had your typical timid tards back then. But not like you did when I left the game. I can only imagine its even worse now. Another reason I wont be back. I dont like paying to chase cartoon cowards.
-
I have been here since 2002 ...
The core elements of game play have not really changed.
Which is a problem.
-
put out.
The players on the other hand have changed tremendously ! 10 years ago we were all history nuts playing a war simulation game. Today most players are games trying to win the war before they have to go do their homework.
LOl you said put out and the part about winning the war before homework you could not be more wrong about I dont do homewirk as my 9th grade algebra and Introduction to High school Engrish scores..errr Grades can attest to. I have to win the war befor I go play Ace Combat on my console and complain about how slow paced AH is is compared to it as I fire off 8 heatseeking missles that are super manurerable against weak AI with no rearms.(http://magazine.ucla.edu/exclusives/translating-sarcasm.jpg)<--that is sarcasim face
-
LOl you said put out and the part about winning the war before homework you could not be more wrong about I dont do homewirk as my 9th grade algebra and Introduction to High school Engrish scores..errr Grades can attest to. I have to win the war befor I go play Ace Combat on my console and complain about how slow paced AH is is compared to it as I fire off 8 heatseeking missles that are super manurerable against weak AI with no rearms.(http://magazine.ucla.edu/exclusives/translating-sarcasm.jpg)<--that is sarcasim face
for all you guys focused on "what's wrong" in ah...there's one answer.
-
LOl you said put out and the part about winning the war before homework you could not be more wrong about I dont do homewirk as my 9th grade algebra and Introduction to High school Engrish scores..errr Grades can attest to. I have to win the war befor I go play Ace Combat on my console and complain about how slow paced AH is is compared to it as I fire off 8 heatseeking missles that are super manurerable against weak AI with no rearms.(http://magazine.ucla.edu/exclusives/translating-sarcasm.jpg)<--that is sarcasim face
What is wrong with you boy?
-
LOl you said put out and the part about winning the war before homework you could not be more wrong about I dont do homewirk as my 9th grade algebra and Introduction to High school Engrish scores..errr Grades can attest to. I have to win the war befor I go play Ace Combat on my console and complain about how slow paced AH is is compared to it as I fire off 8 heatseeking missles that are super manurerable against weak AI with no rearms.(http://magazine.ucla.edu/exclusives/translating-sarcasm.jpg)<--that is sarcasim face
:headscratch:
-
IMHO good fights have dwindled since going back to one LW.
They can still be found if you have time and patience.
Agreed. The biggest change recently is to LW single arena.
-
Ten years ago there were whines on hordes, ho's, konga-lines, milkrunning and
there being too many timid players.
After popping in and out of AH over several years (usually quit before 2 week trial
is up) IMNSHO the biggest change has been the loss of the folks who prefer fighting
other players. Many grew bored for alot of reasons;
* typical burnout
* the farsical, fantasy MA setup - frustrated with lack of historical play
* unhindered increase of gameyness - augernauts/pork&auger , fleet shenanigans
or 4 engined dive bombers
Now dogfighters (or even those who like PVP combat) are the minority in an arcade,
fantasy "World of Landgrab" An environment that has no resemblance to anything
WW2-ish. Beyond the skin of the ride one.
IMHO of course.
-
oh. and the lack of a perma-squelch is a biggy imo.
No small number I'm sure were fed up with the lack of being able to directly control
the quality of their online experience. Especially vox.
There's more verbal diahrea on vox and radio than ever before. I'd not even consider
subbing again without it
-
It could get a re branding:
Aces High: Blitzkrieg!
Overwhelm your foe's with a lightning strike! Throw crushing numbers against lightly defended Targets! Outflank your enemy and avoid the main force to avoid an indecisive battle. Swarm enemy defense with massive air support! All this and more is available with Aces High... BLITZKREIG!!!!
-
I remember some good fights with BiPolar. He might like to rant a bit (Hence the name, ha ha) but he was always good for real fight and he had the skills to prove it. I too left the game about a year ago. I don't see any reason to come back yet. It just became a 1st person shooter game like Halo. I guess the Xbox crowd kinda moved in a bit and there is nothing wrong with that style of play, just has no appeal to me.
I do like coming to the boards every now and then to see who is still around.
-
oh. and the lack of a perma-squelch is a biggy imo.
No small number I'm sure were fed up with the lack of being able to directly control
the quality of their online experience. Especially vox.
There's more verbal diahrea on vox and radio than ever before. I'd not even consider
subbing again without it
no offense but, if you're that affected by what is said on vox and text, permanent squelch won't do anything for you.
(http://www.google.com/url?source=imgres&ct=img&q=http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_uJC0Cm_WMNE/TVL1OQ5R1ZI/AAAAAAAADVU/QmAZip0pYmM/s1600/dana.jpg&sa=X&ei=0jVyTp7vOYGCsAKznszACQ&ved=0CAQQ8wc4BQ&usg=AFQjCNG7F9d2IWfIkdBMxMkGrvYRvYTWIA)
this is another one of those funny discussions that pop up around here where some try to hold other people responsible for how they experience the game. :lol great stuff
-
Your sweeping generalizations really make me chuckle but assuming you are right, what's so wrong about that? Game play quality is a direct function of both the game itself and the players, not just the players. In fact I'd say it is more heavily based on the way the game is set up to be played. If HTC fails to update the simplistic strategic system they have in the game and continue to live in the Simmer Stoneage where simple mind numbing strategy was good enough for the simmer crowd, then we will become obsolete. Pretty simple really.
Spoken like a true gamer! :neener: You play the one thing you really like about the game, flying fighters. You have become one of the best sticks in the game. You started a game (learn to fly fighters) you practiced and played, and now your at the top as one of the top sticks, end game. You don't really have any intrest in the rest of the stuff that the game offers, and spend very little time playing with them. Which there is nothing wrong with, but expecting HTC to come up with some new challenge for a top notch fighter to bring the "thrill" back is un reasonable, after all the game isn't all about JUST fighters.
no offense but, if you're that affected by what is said on vox and text, permanent squelch won't do anything for you.
(http://www.google.com/url?source=imgres&ct=img&q=http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_uJC0Cm_WMNE/TVL1OQ5R1ZI/AAAAAAAADVU/QmAZip0pYmM/s1600/dana.jpg&sa=X&ei=0jVyTp7vOYGCsAKznszACQ&ved=0CAQQ8wc4BQ&usg=AFQjCNG7F9d2IWfIkdBMxMkGrvYRvYTWIA)
this is another one of those funny discussions that pop up around here where some try to hold other people responsible for how they experience the game. :lol great stuff
But Westy's comments ARE relevant. In the old days sure there was some smack talk on the "ALL" channel but it was in fun and everyone knew it. The "ALL" channel was the "chat room" for the players as they climbed out or flew to the fight. I remember many times telling people to wait, and I'll be back, and they would.... and they'd shoot me down a 2nd, 3rd time :( A lot of "chit chat" went back and forth. As the player base changed the smack talk grew nastier and nastier. HTC had to close off the "ALL" channel and make 200 the "ALL" channel so that you would have to willingly tune it and so accept the sewage that spews forth by the minute. Simmers were all "friends" and spent the nights fighting each other and then talking about the fights on the return trip. Today the only time people talk to the guy that just shot him down is to complain, whine, or list the excuses as to why they got shot down. It's all a big internet ego trip now.
-
LOl you said put out and the part about winning the war before homework you could not be more wrong about I dont do homewirk as my 9th grade algebra and Introduction to High school Engrish scores..errr Grades can attest to. I have to win the war befor I go play Ace Combat on my console and complain about how slow paced AH is is compared to it as I fire off 8 heatseeking missles that are super manurerable against weak AI with no rearms.(http://magazine.ucla.edu/exclusives/translating-sarcasm.jpg)<--that is sarcasim face
Its satire This article is about the genre. Satire is primarily a literary genre or form, although in practice it can also be found in the graphic and performing arts. In satire, vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, and society itself, into improvement.[1] Although satire is usually meant to be funny, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit as a weapon.
A common feature of satire is strong irony or sarcasm—"in satire, irony is militant"[2]—but parody, burlesque, exaggeration, juxtaposition, comparison, analogy, and double entendre are all frequently used in satirical speech and writing. This "militant" irony or sarcasm often professes to approve (or at least accept as natural) the very things the satirist wishes to attack.
-
You had your typical timid tards back then. But not like you did when I left the game. I can only imagine its even worse now. Another reason I wont be back. I dont like paying to chase cartoon cowards.
You left a few months ago IIRC, .... not much has changed except we don't have as many folks raging tantrums on vent/vox to numb our minds. In that respect the game has changed.
I do miss a good implosion.
-
Its satire This article is about the genre. Satire is primarily a literary genre or form, although in practice it can also be found in the graphic and performing arts. In satire, vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, and society itself, into improvement.[1] Although satire is usually meant to be funny, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit as a weapon.
A common feature of satire is strong irony or sarcasm—"in satire, irony is militant"[2]—but parody, burlesque, exaggeration, juxtaposition, comparison, analogy, and double entendre are all frequently used in satirical speech and writing. This "militant" irony or sarcasm often professes to approve (or at least accept as natural) the very things the satirist wishes to attack.
You don't frighten us, English pig dogs. Go and boil your bottoms, you sons of a silly person. I blow my nose at you, you and all your silly English Kin-nig-ets.
I don't want to talk to you no more, you empty headed animal food trough wiper. I fart in your general direction. Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries.
Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time.
-
(http://spectrumculture.com/assets/holygrail1.jpg)
-
"The Game" has only changed once in all the years I've played. Even when "The Game" changed from AirWarrior to Warbirds and finally Aces High, it has pretty much been played the same. The only change I have ever seen is when "The Game" went from an hourly subscription, (I had a $300.00 phone bill once, and many above $150.00), to an unlimited playtime monthly subscription. If you were paying by the hour, (I think it was 2 bucks), you didn't "spend" alot of time doing anything BUT fighting. Old players changed too when the monthly subscriptions became available and new players never had the "hurry up and fight" attitude because there was no longer a rush to have fun.
I certainly changed too.
The fun changed too, but it is still fun. I think it's more fun. I cannot for the life of me see where people have a hard time finding a fight. There are fights everywhere, my biggest problem is getting out of the fight, then landing a couple kills, not getting in. Finding a one on one gentlemen's duel in the main ? Sorry, the main is not the dueling arena.
You want more fights? Get out of your GV's and up a plane, any plane, any mission, please.
-
(http://spectrumculture.com/assets/holygrail1.jpg)
lol too bad we cant embed videos I went and watched thsis on youtube
(http://modernvespa.com/pix/uploads/monty_python_taunting_617.jpg)
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OzIMHowtL8&feature=fvst (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OzIMHowtL8&feature=fvst)
Run Away Run Away :x
-
"no offense ..
None taken. I prefer not to be subjected to it. Nothing wrong with me at all.
I simply have a higher standard of behavior than you do.
-
(http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/9365/gamel.png)
-
Spoken like a true gamer! :neener: You play the one thing you really like about the game, flying fighters. You have become one of the best sticks in the game. You started a game (learn to fly fighters) you practiced and played, and now your at the top as one of the top sticks, end game. You don't really have any intrest in the rest of the stuff that the game offers, and spend very little time playing with them. Which there is nothing wrong with, but expecting HTC to come up with some new challenge for a top notch fighter to bring the "thrill" back is un reasonable, after all the game isn't all about JUST fighters.
The strategy is mind numbingly dull and arguably broken in aces high. That's part of the reason I don't generally participate, not because I have something against teamwork and working towards more country oriented goals.
-
"no offense ..
None taken. I prefer not to be subjected to it. Nothing wrong with me at all.
I simply have a higher standard of behavior than you do.
i beg to differ sir, i simply view the outbursts and childish rants as typical behavior found all over the retardnet. it's nothing more than a childish lack of self control which i find somewhat humorous as it illustrates just how hypocritically immature some adults can be. i'm willing to bet that unless you're bordering on sainthood, not only have you heard much worse but you have also had moments in real life when you have spoken the same or worse words loudly enough for someone besides yourself to hear.
and let's be honest here, how high can any of our standards be when we spend any amount of time playing a video game and sometimes whining about what we don't like about that game on the internet?
(http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/9365/gamel.png)
:rofl :lol :rofl :lol that is just too truthful :rofl :lol :rofl :lol
-
The strategy is mind numbingly dull and arguably broken in aces high. That's part of the reason I don't generally participate, not because I have something against teamwork and working towards more country oriented goals.
And who creates the strategies? If we go by Webster's...
Strat´e`gy
n. 1. The science of military command, or the science of projecting campaigns and directing great military movements; generalship.
2. The use of stratagem or artifice.
So its up to the players to create the strategy. The problem with the players today is that a vast majority don't want to "play" the game they only want to win it as quickly as they can. Even if a player spent the time to organize a strategy, made plans using vehicles and planes, over laying missions and forcing battles along a wide front that would run for 4 hours it wouldn't be nearly as must fun or immersive as you would think because of how the "defending" players would react.
Most likely once they saw that a flight was over flying a base they would land/bail and look for another fight, or ignore the flights all together to launch their next NOE/horde mission. How much fun would a big battle plan be if no one showed up to defend against it? Forward running fighter sweepers would bail and go look for something more fun, The attacks would roll over base after base with minimum defense. and so on like we have now.
Until the players want to "play" the game all your going to get is the hordes we have and the unskilled/skilled runners protecting their scores.
-
Largely no changes since AW 1996.
I think this is largely true, there are not many changes since the very beginning of air warrior. Back in the days when we paid by the hour, most of us looked around and said" Great Game, Lets play War". Furballers never like it, because, war gets in the way of the furball. But furballers are few in number,no one cared.
In 2011 we're still trying to play war.... And the furballer still don't like it. And I still don't care.
Cav
-
And who creates the strategies? If we go by Webster's...
Strat´e`gy
n. 1. The science of military command, or the science of projecting campaigns and directing great military movements; generalship.
2. The use of stratagem or artifice.
So its up to the players to create the strategy. The problem with the players today is that a vast majority don't want to "play" the game they only want to win it as quickly as they can. Even if a player spent the time to organize a strategy, made plans using vehicles and planes, over laying missions and forcing battles along a wide front that would run for 4 hours it wouldn't be nearly as must fun or immersive as you would think because of how the "defending" players would react.
Most likely once they saw that a flight was over flying a base they would land/bail and look for another fight, or ignore the flights all together to launch their next NOE/horde mission. How much fun would a big battle plan be if no one showed up to defend against it? Forward running fighter sweepers would bail and go look for something more fun, The attacks would roll over base after base with minimum defense. and so on like we have now.
Until the players want to "play" the game all your going to get is the hordes we have and the unskilled/skilled runners protecting their scores.
As I said before, it is as much the game's responsibility as it is the players. There should be checks and balances that promote sound strategy that is also fun for all involved. Here, I will give an example since we aren't being specific enough. When you capture a base, the entire ack defense magically is up, allowing the attacking force to tower out and go somewhere else, despite there being some defensive resistance. There is simply no CHECK to keep the initial attacking force defending their new territory. This is on HTC for allowing this poor game play to occur.
Here's another example: The strats are so far away and require so much to be destroyed for such little gain, that the investment/reward ratio is ludicrous and not worth the effort to attack them. How long now has this been an inherent problem in the game?
So there are a couple examples to prove my point that I am making, and I'm sure you will agree that it is both the player's and HTCs responsibility to create an environment that promotes quality game play.
-
As I said before, it is as much the game's responsibility as it is the players. There should be checks and balances that promote sound strategy that is also fun for all involved. Here, I will give an example since we aren't being specific enough. When you capture a base, the entire ack defense magically is up, allowing the attacking force to tower out and go somewhere else, despite there being some defensive resistance. There is simply no CHECK to keep the initial attacking force defending their new territory. This is on HTC for allowing this poor game play to occur.
I would love to see a squad follow the horde around and do nothing but steal bases back. 3 guys diving on ack can clear it in 2 to 3 passes each, drop troops and they have the base back. In most cases the horde ...like the locast they are destroyed everything on the field and they won't be able to defend it it any way.
The players can fix this with out any intervention from HTC. grab a few bases back like described above and you'll see some defense appear...... if they care about hold it that is.
Here's another example: The strats are so far away and require so much to be destroyed for such little gain, that the investment/reward ratio is ludicrous and not worth the effort to attack them. How long now has this been an inherent problem in the game?
So there are a couple examples to prove my point that I am making, and I'm sure you will agree that it is both the player's and HTCs responsibility to create an environment that promotes quality game play.
Agreed, but taking away the ability to play the game the way you want for that $15 isn't good customer relations either. Can yiou imagine what the game would be like if you could knock the fuel to a team down to 25% by keeping the fuel depot down? 6 guys making continuous runs could keep it down, and there wouldn't be anything you could do to stop them. 25% won't even get you TO them let alone stop them. The next few hours are the horde rolling base after base even faster.
Just out of curiosity Grizz whats stopping you and say 4 or 5 other guys from following the horde around stealing bases back until they start defending? My guess is it is because you, and those friends, don't want to be bothered with doing the stuff that isn't fun. Killing ack wastes ammo that could be better used in shooting down other guys. Getting your plane damaged killing ack really makes fighting later a lot tougher and so spoils the fun of your fights. Which one of you wants to crawl along at 250 MPH in a goon to drop troops?
I KNOW its the players that have brought the game play down. I also know that if HTC coaded in the right carrots you could get these same players to change how they play. They shouldn't have to. If a few squads got it into there heads that they were going to bring strategy back into this game it would turn around eventually. But it's a lot of work, and everyone is really here just to have fun.
-
I think this is largely true, there are not many changes since the very beginning of air warrior. Back in the days when we paid by the hour, most of us looked around and said" Great Game, Lets play War". Furballers never like it, because, war gets in the way of the furball. But furballers are few in number,no one cared.
In 2011 we're still trying to play war.... And the furballer still don't like it. And I still don't care.
Cav
Come on Cav, if you were there in 96 there was no war win. It was limited capture. It made sense to participate more in that part of things as the brawl was over those bases that could be captured and there was a steady stream of defenders coming from the nearest uncapturable base so the vulch could never be sustained too long. The fights extended from up high to the deck then.
'furballers' as described would be inclined to fly fighter sweeps to try and intercept the crowd coming from the rear uncapturable base. There was no way to capture bases and avoid fighting like there is now.
I remember well when it changed, and was in the arena the first time folks figured out they could take every base. It was sad cause it was like hamsters to the feeder bar.
Has the game changed since it went total capture? Not much. But there was a time when it took more work to take and hold a base. The irony is you wanted the base because it moved you closer to the fight because you got a base on the other guys turf to get to the fight faster. It was never a race to capture bases as fast and as combat free as possible as it is now.
-
Changed, flight models are more accurate I'm told (I'll defer to HTC and crew as I havent a fracken clue but he's always cared about his product from that standpoint beyond any doubt).
Cost: Subscription price changed and this brought in an influx of "younger" players w/out the "old school" mentality (I'll let you gents decide what that means to you)
Other than that.... I'd say from my coming and going is that the "sample" population has grown larger and thus we have a larger group of that specific group that annoys the crap out of us.... whatever it might be, haha.
I DO remember cruising around at 15k in my 38 looking for 1 on 1's or if I had some E maybe a 2 on 1 and typically finding several every evening. I dont think you have that anymore... simply to many toons in the air and people want to get that kill so they move in.
I'm back for abit, I always come back to this place so that MUST say SOMETHING?
-
You don't frighten us, English pig dogs. Go and boil your bottoms, you sons of a silly person. I blow my nose at you, you and all your silly English Kin-nig-ets.
I don't want to talk to you no more, you empty headed animal food trough wiper. I fart in your general direction. Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries.
Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time.
WOOT Monty Python
-
Even though I haven't logged in to play for almost a year now, I can tell what finally had me move on to a different game....
And this is just my opinion.....so don't get defensive....
Besides periodic graphic upgrades the game never really got better....no new strategy/fighting was ever introduced...at some point one wants to do something different or at least not so repetitive....
I stayed as long as i did because i honestly did not know how amazing other online games had become...the graphics are stunning, the fighting is awesome but there are also "stuff" to accomplish (better gear/better abilities). A reason to log on if you will....by the end i logged on to AH only out of commitment to my ingame friends/squad.
I understand what shuffler is saying but dude its been >12 years now....how much longer are you going to play a "flight sim" that never changes???? You may not like "the win the war" aspect but it is honestly the only goal oriented accomplishment there is.
-
someone found wow and guild wars... :lol
-
Last night I logged on and there was a great fight going on in late war, there was a fur ball going on at the same time that they were upping fighters to defend theirs, I flew a coupla sorties, and had a blast got a few assists, and a few kills. There were more check sixs and more people helping get the bogy of my tail which happened often. Channel 200 was not that bad, and there was not much complaining, or smack talking. I enjoyed it until the 17 pound wife ack got to me and gave me a pilot wound. The game may have changed, and it has, my old squad used to up vehicles, and fighters along with 110s and we could take a base in no time, but it is not that easy anymore. Don't get me wrong it is still fun, I still enjoy getting into the fights, and it is still a challenge. Taking the bases is harder than it used to be, but we used to be able to do it with 3 or 4 people, now it just takes a little extra effort.
I love the iPad but the auto spell and spell correct really sucks.
-
Even though I haven't logged in to play for almost a year now, I can tell what finally had me move on to a different game....
the graphics are stunning, the fighting is awesome but there are also "stuff" to accomplish (better gear/better abilities). A reason to log on if you will.
Yes but after you have gotten all the epic Lewts from the end game content and have fought the same exact fight by hitting the same 1-0 buttons you will be bored until the expansion comes out , after 4 months you will once again have all the epic lewts and be bored. The "stuff" to accomplish is just the carrot on the stick. Get your gear and you sit for months with nothing to do until the new set of gear comes out.
-
I knew this thread would roll when I started it. I'll give my own opinions shortly. I just want to read what the older, and classier, players are saying and think about it some more.
Personally, like myself, I think a lot of the older players simply done "game" as much as we used to. Thats part of the answer.
-
I knew this thread would roll when I started it. I'll give my own opinions shortly. I just want to read what the older, and classier, players are saying and think about it some more.
Personally, like myself, I think a lot of the older players simply done "game" as much as we used to. Thats part of the answer.
have you tried any of the other areas of the game other than MA or DA? The FSO, Snapshots, Racing leagues, AVA Heavy metal sundays all offer up different things to do. If you live in the MA fighting the same figths all the time this game can and will get boring. thats why there are so many different special events there are even new special events being set up through the create-a-server like the new SSO.
-
And who creates the strategies? If we go by Webster's...
Strat´e`gy
n. 1. The science of military command, or the science of projecting campaigns and directing great military movements; generalship.
2. The use of stratagem or artifice.
So its up to the players to create the strategy. The problem with the players today is that a vast majority don't want to "play" the game they only want to win it as quickly as they can. Even if a player spent the time to organize a strategy, made plans using vehicles and planes, over laying missions and forcing battles along a wide front that would run for 4 hours it wouldn't be nearly as must fun or immersive as you would think because of how the "defending" players would react.
Just playing Devils Advocate here... but isn't part of being a General winning a victory as quickly as possible?
From the Art of War: "There has never been a protracted war from which a country has benefited."
-
Just playing Devils Advocate here... but isn't part of being a General winning a victory as quickly as possible?
From the Art of War: "There has never been a protracted war from which a country has benefited."
What war? What victory? The 'war' never ends. All that happens is the map resets. But taking bases has become like watching hamsters hit the feeder bar. It becomes the only thing for some folks and any resistance to them getting to the feeder bar is met by looking for an easier to get to feeder bar.
-
I understand what shuffler is saying but dude its been >12 years now....how much longer are you going to play a "flight sim" that never changes???? You may not like "the win the war" aspect but it is honestly the only goal oriented accomplishment there is.
Different people have different goals. I'm not sure that in five years of AW and nearly 10 in AH that I've ever had two fights that were precisely the same. I get at least one good air-to-air fight almost every time I log on. So long as that keeps happening, I'm achieving my goal in this game.
- oldman
-
What war? What victory? The 'war' never ends. All that happens is the map resets. But taking bases has become like watching hamsters hit the feeder bar. It becomes the only thing for some folks and any resistance to them getting to the feeder bar is met by looking for an easier to get to feeder bar.
The victory is when the map is reset and the few perk points are won. As for the war never ending what would one expect to happen in this virtual world, win the war and the losers computers blows up? Game sure wouldn't last long.
As for the base taking, maybe that what they like to do. Maybe they like the path of least resistance. Maybe they like watching buildings blow up. Who know, the point is, maybe they are having fun and I seem to never see them on the BBS complaining about game play.
Fred
-
The victory is when the map is reset and the few perk points are won. As for the war never ending what would one expect to happen in this virtual world, win the war and the losers computers blows up? Game sure wouldn't last long.
As for the base taking, maybe that what they like to do. Maybe they like the path of least resistance. Maybe they like watching buildings blow up. Who know, the point is, maybe they are having fun and I seem to never see them on the BBS complaining about game play.
Fred
You said the key word Fred. 'game sure wouldn't last long". "Game" it is.
You win a free blown up building. Thanks for playing :)
-
Who know, the point is, maybe they are having fun and I seem to never see them on the BBS complaining about game play.
oh yeah they do.. new towns too hard. how do you think we got the white flag?. one of the old knight generals even complained about the frickin _layout_ of the new bases when they came out because he'd have to re-learn them.
-
Even though I haven't logged in to play for almost a year now, I can tell what finally had me move on to a different game....
And this is just my opinion.....so don't get defensive....
Besides periodic graphic upgrades the game never really got better....no new strategy/fighting was ever introduced...at some point one wants to do something different or at least not so repetitive....
I stayed as long as i did because i honestly did not know how amazing other online games had become...the graphics are stunning, the fighting is awesome but there are also "stuff" to accomplish (better gear/better abilities). A reason to log on if you will....by the end i logged on to AH only out of commitment to my ingame friends/squad.
I understand what shuffler is saying but dude its been >12 years now....how much longer are you going to play a "flight sim" that never changes???? You may not like "the win the war" aspect but it is honestly the only goal oriented accomplishment there is.
FalconWing, I use to hate you guys. You were one of the firsts "horde" type missions I ran into. Sure now and then country wide little general would get everyone pointed in the same direction now and then and create a horde, but you guys were an organized horde and you knew when it was squad night and you were in for a long night. But I'd take you guys back in a heartbeat at this point.
You guys fought! Sure your groups were large most of the time but you didn't make that one run at a base and then disappeared. If a decent number of guys upped to defend the fights would last until you guy took the base and moved onto the next strategic base in line. You guys didn't run willy-nilly all over the map looking for undefended bases. You took bases with a purpose. This V base because it spawns to that airfield and so on.
Your mega missions also helped to create the issues. Let face it, fighting against the horde is tough and a thankless "job". More often that not your out numbered, heavily, and "they" have the alt and speed (E) which more often than not is the deciding factor in a fight. So less and less people up to defend, because it just isn't fun. Next thing you know Your missions are rolling over base after base with ease. There is no challenge, it's easy and repetitious, and becomes boring. Your doing the same old thing mission after mission. By the time you called it quits I'll bet you weren't even assigning targets or directing the missions any more because they all knew what they were to do and just did it.
The "win the war" crowd is what is suppose to generate most of the combat in the game. Even back in Falconwings time this worked because they fought, so defenders defended. Todays players don't even bother to fight. If they run into opposition they just disappear and pop up at some other undefended area of the map looking for that quick grab again.
Again, most players don't "play" the game, they just run through as quick as they can guns blazing yelling LEROY JENKINS at the top of their lungs.
-
oh yeah they do.. new towns too hard. how do you think we got the white flag?. one of the old knight generals even complained about the frickin _layout_ of the new bases when they came out because he'd have to re-learn them.
Well maybe I stand corrected. Then let me put it another way. From my experience, reading this BBS, they complain a whole lot less than the other fraction.
:D
Fred
-
someone found wow and guild wars... :lol
Aion actually...but same difference...I guess having a huge subscriber base doesn't count for you...how many 100's of thousands peep play those games?? AW was one of the first true virtual online games with PvP (player vs Player)...but you wouldn't know it from its subscriber base etc.
Look I loved my time with AH....i hope it lasts forever....but where is the develpoment that would keep it interesting??? Why not have "instances" that squadrons could run (ie. intercept missions/strategic missions etc) that would award points/score/custom graphics on planes...etc.
I respect you Oldman and your Point of view but honestly i don't drive to work the exact same way everyday so i find your analogy not very convincing. What IS convincing is that you are still having fun....that is all that counts..
all
-
FalconWing, I use to hate you guys. You were one of the firsts "horde" type missions I ran into. Sure now and then country wide little general would get everyone pointed in the same direction now and then and create a horde, but you guys were an organized horde and you knew when it was squad night and you were in for a long night. But I'd take you guys back in a heartbeat at this point.
You guys fought! Sure your groups were large most of the time but you didn't make that one run at a base and then disappeared. If a decent number of guys upped to defend the fights would last until you guy took the base and moved onto the next strategic base in line. You guys didn't run willy-nilly all over the map looking for undefended bases. You took bases with a purpose. This V base because it spawns to that airfield and so on.
Your mega missions also helped to create the issues. Let face it, fighting against the horde is tough and a thankless "job". More often that not your out numbered, heavily, and "they" have the alt and speed (E) which more often than not is the deciding factor in a fight. So less and less people up to defend, because it just isn't fun. Next thing you know Your missions are rolling over base after base with ease. There is no challenge, it's easy and repetitious, and becomes boring. Your doing the same old thing mission after mission. By the time you called it quits I'll bet you weren't even assigning targets or directing the missions any more because they all knew what they were to do and just did it.
The "win the war" crowd is what is suppose to generate most of the combat in the game. Even back in Falconwings time this worked because they fought, so defenders defended. Todays players don't even bother to fight. If they run into opposition they just disappear and pop up at some other undefended area of the map looking for that quick grab again.
Again, most players don't "play" the game, they just run through as quick as they can guns blazing yelling LEROY JENKINS at the top of their lungs.
Shuffler the reason we ran those missions was because there was a protracted period of time when the bish were rolled all the time....rather then qq on forums (which never worked) we took matters into our own hands and organized like-minded individuals to recapture territory and improve overall morale....so if you feel that our mission were partly to blame for current gameplay then i guess you have to blame the unrestricted ability of players to grief each other without direct intervention by staff.
How many times have ideas like restricting the number of aircraft in a "zone" been proposed to avoid gangbanging? AW had such a restriction....
I would have a hard time blaming players solely for bad gameplay. Bad game mechanics cannot be ignored.
For example..and I haven't played in about 10 months....you say that folks quit attacking when opposed and instead hit an undefended base....my interpretation of this is:
1. bases are difficult/impossible to capture with reasonable opposition or not totally porking a base with overwhelming numbers
2. folks like the accomplishment of capturing bases....not getting slaughtered as they dive in heavy to get picked off by light "furballers"
3. the only option they see therefore is to quickly hit another base to try and have success
a possible fix would be to make towns more easily capturable and stay down longer so they could come back in light fighters and get goons/m3s in.....game mechanics see?
>
-
Now dogfighters (or even those who like PVP combat) are the minority in an arcade,
fantasy "World of Landgrab" An environment that has no resemblance to anything
WW2-ish. Beyond the skin of the ride one.
What would you do to make the game more like WW2?
It seems to me most of the whining by the self-proclaimed "simmers" here is (like always) from folks who just want a different but equally cartoonish and unrealistic fantasy game.
What would make the game realistic are things that would cut the subscriber base by 95%, and not because most players are immature console gamers. The most important by far would be non-replaceable pilots and planes - you get shot down, you can't re-up for a few days or a week (at which point you're assumed to be a newly reporting replacement); your side gets a set number of planes, and when they're wrecked, they're gone (with, again, a trickle of replacement aircraft every few days. Without that, any hope of anything remotely resembling a simulation of WW2 aerial combat is completely hopeless. But is that the sim you want to play? Do you think many people would pony up $14.95 for the privilege of being shot down once every few days or weeks and being banned from the game the rest of the time? (And if it were that way, do you think the average player would become more or less risk-averse?)
Guys who want the game to become and endless series of courtly 1-1 duels with the only price for the loser being a short trip to the tower are NOT looking for a sim.
(Not to mention, any concept of teams with even the roughest parity in numbers and experience would have to go straight out the window if you really want to simulate WW2. Side balancing in any manner is inherently "gamey" and unrealistic.)
I agree with grizz that the strategy side of the game is simplistic and in some ways silly and has a lot of room for improvement, and that the rules of the game drive a lot of gameplay. But we're all talking about ways to make it a better or slightly more realistic game. No one really wants a simulation.
-
Look I loved my time with AH....i hope it lasts forever....but where is the develpoment that would keep it interesting??? Why not have "instances" that squadrons could run (ie. intercept missions/strategic missions etc) that would award points/score/custom graphics on planes...etc.
Falconwing, AH is a different type of game completely from an MMORPG. It is one of the few bastions of gaming left in the world where your success in game is mostly determined by skill as opposed to the amount of time and patience you have to keep doing a repetitive task in order to grow your character.
Reread the quoted paragraph. I see intercept missions and strategic missions (such as they are) every night in the MA. You didn't suggest any different gameplay from what's available, all you suggested was a "reward" that gives you something to pose with, or show off to other players.
If the gameplay in and of itself is not compelling, why will it suddenly become fun if you get a different skin if you shoot down 50 planes?
I don't mean this as a personal slam against you, Falconwing but IMO the fact that 'do repetitive task to get gear/levels/a different look for your character' has somehow been conditioned into people to be considered 'gameplay' saddens me horribly. If you don't know what a Skinner Box is, google it, and then take a look at Aion. It is 'hit the button, get a cookie' with pretty graphics, that is all.
MMORPGs make money. It's what they're designed to do, and they do it by addicting people.
IMO a game like AH unfortunately has a shelf life with every single person who plays it. Getting bored with it is inevitable because eventually your capabilities will plateau for long enough that you get bored. For some it's 2 months, others 15 years. Instanced grinding will do nothing to alleviate that.
Wiley.
-
I was getting a bit bored with it, then I tried flying a 38..........
-
Shuffler the reason we ran those missions was because there was a protracted period of time when the bish were rolled all the time....rather then qq on forums (which never worked) we took matters into our own hands and organized like-minded individuals to recapture territory and improve overall morale....so if you feel that our mission were partly to blame for current gameplay then i guess you have to blame the unrestricted ability of players to grief each other without direct intervention by staff.
How many times have ideas like restricting the number of aircraft in a "zone" been proposed to avoid gangbanging? AW had such a restriction....
That restriction in AW was due to technology. The servers couldn't keep up with more than the limit number without major warping issues.
I would have a hard time blaming players solely for bad gameplay. Bad game mechanics cannot be ignored.
For example..and I haven't played in about 10 months....you say that folks quit attacking when opposed and instead hit an undefended base....my interpretation of this is:
I'm STILL playing and average around 15 hours a month and this is what my interpretation is...
1. bases are difficult/impossible to capture with reasonable opposition or not totally porking a base with overwhelming numbers
towns can be brought to "white flag" with 2 sets of buffs making 2 passes over the town. The only troble with capturing a town these days are most of the players in these mission are not trained, nor do they wish to learn how to play better. So lack of skill breeds numbers to do the same job a few people can do.
2. folks like the accomplishment of capturing bases....not getting slaughtered as they dive in heavy to get picked off by light "furballers"
That is what lead/sweep fighters are for, clearing the cap. Unfortunately players with limited skill have a hard time clearing a cap if anyone ever thinks to send a group in before the main mission gets there.
3. the only option they see therefore is to quickly hit another base to try and have success
They CAN'T fight for a base due to there limited skill set, so they go after easier game.
a possible fix would be to make towns more easily capturable and stay down longer so they could come back in light fighters and get goons/m3s in.....game mechanics see?
>
Towns are down far long enough for a well planned and marginally executed plan. In todays game this isn't an issue because rarely is there much of a defense put up at any base. Now and then you'll get a good battle going and even the furballers show up and have some fun, but for the most part the horde arrives and levels everything and while the defenders up at the next base over the goon finally catches up with the mission and they capture the base..... then disappear.
What would you do to make the game more like WW2?
<snip> to save space
No Crash, a Simmer isn't looking to simulate the whole war. When I log in my simmers experience is this....
Fugi, that crazy WWII pilot strolls out on the field. Todays mission is an attack on the enemies front line base. They have just gotten it setup so defense while heavy could be confused and so provide a few openings to maybe drive them back. Fugi will be going in heavy today with a couple of thousand pounders along with the rest of his wing. Their assignment is to knock down as much ammo supplies as they can and then provide cover for the heavys that are to rendezvous 15 minutes after we get there.
Thats it, just a "day in the life" type thing. With the war never finishing and continuing day after day I can pretend to be a fighter pilot one day, a tanker the next, or a general the next. I'm not one guy in this sim, I can be anybody.
OK, lets look at this, and give me an honest answer....
Your CO rolls a mission. He sends out sweep riders in a number of directions to get a feel for what out ahead. Your main target is a base 2 sectors south. 4 sets of buffs lumber into the air with 3 heavy fighters a goon and 6 light fighters for cover. Your heading is 150 until you get to the grid line then a turn to 090 keeping your dar bar in the same sector. As you climb out the light fighters get high over the buffs, 2 ranging a mile or so ahead while the other circle tight over the group. 5 miles from the eastern edge of the grid you change heading to 135 and cut the corner or the southern grid and just after you cross into the next eastern one you turn 180 giving the impression that your group is running 135 toward an eastern enemy base. Just as your about to make the turn to 225 and cross the 2 grid lines and head strait in toward the target The sweep fighters that had been assigned the eastern side of the grids spots a number of cons at 12k heading for home base that you launched from. Orders are giving to engage and try to drag north toward those sweep riders.
The forward fighter escorts cut the dar circle of the target base with the rest of the mission following. As the forward escort get over the target they spot uppers. Orders are given, those two fighters are to drop to 7k to be joined by two other escorts to harry the defenders. Hard deck is 4k mission is to keep them busy and or chase them away from the goons approach path. Heavy fighters are given orders to take out the VH and any GVs that got out, hanger first THEN GVs. Buffs make a single pass and carpet bomb the town going to white flag in one pass. Mean while, sweep riders are down enemy turned away/shot down/ or killed all sweep riders :eek: All sweep riders up together (waiting in tower for enough to make a 3 ship wing) and head strait to target field at 5k for cap duty.
Defenders arte upping a bit faster as the town is flattened, but vehicles are down. Remaining bombs are released either at a base object if your clear, at the nearest tree if your not. All fighters help push the defenders either away from the flight path of the goon, or tight above the field. Kill orders are issued to anything stepping out of the ack. Slow planes are buzzed, fast planes are killed (slow planes are easy to kill while goon is in site, fast planes not so much). While the fighters keep the defenders busy buffs return and drop anything they have left on the field.
From here anything can happen, the goon could make it in and drop the troops for the capture, or a fighter of two might have slipped out from under the cap and get the goon, or a couple of troops and saves the base. Either way you have 40 people (20 per side)who have just had a good time fighting it out for a base maybe an hour or so of fun. Fighters looking for missions, fighter intercepting missions, buffs having a major roll in taking the base with out dive bombing, everyone having a roll and being counted on to "get'er done!"
Honestly, would that be an interesting and fun game to play? because thats the one we have!
-
What would you do to make the game more like WW2?
It seems to me most of the whining by the self-proclaimed "simmers" here is (like always) from folks who just want a different but equally cartoonish and unrealistic fantasy game.
What would make the game realistic are things that would cut the subscriber base by 95%, and not because most players are immature console gamers. The most important by far would be non-replaceable pilots and planes - you get shot down, you can't re-up for a few days or a week (at which point you're assumed to be a newly reporting replacement); your side gets a set number of planes, and when they're wrecked, they're gone (with, again, a trickle of replacement aircraft every few days. Without that, any hope of anything remotely resembling a simulation of WW2 aerial combat is completely hopeless. But is that the sim you want to play? Do you think many people would pony up $14.95 for the privilege of being shot down once every few days or weeks and being banned from the game the rest of the time? (And if it were that way, do you think the average player would become more or less risk-averse?)
Guys who want the game to become and endless series of courtly 1-1 duels with the only price for the loser being a short trip to the tower are NOT looking for a sim.
(Not to mention, any concept of teams with even the roughest parity in numbers and experience would have to go straight out the window if you really want to simulate WW2. Side balancing in any manner is inherently "gamey" and unrealistic.)
I agree with grizz that the strategy side of the game is simplistic and in some ways silly and has a lot of room for improvement, and that the rules of the game drive a lot of gameplay. But we're all talking about ways to make it a better or slightly more realistic game. No one really wants a simulation.
Here's where you lose audience quickly. The second you make it about folk wanting nothing but 1 v 1. That's total BS. Using your crowd as an example. Last night I flew for a bit and your mob was taking Vbase after Vbase. I was flying Bish as they were low numbers and there was no way to get enough bodies to those spots before the mob took the base. It got downright silly. I finally said on 200 'At some point you gents are going to have to attack an airfield". Didn't ever see it happen though.
That's why it's hamsters to the feeder bar for me right now. You didn't want to fight, you, meaning your squad, wanted bases fast and with as little effort as possible. To what end? Reset the map and start over? So what if it took a little longer and you actually fought it out a bit?
And its a BS excuse to blame the rules of the game for driving game play. Unless you are a sheep, you do have a choice. Why would you not want to bring your crowd and attack a place where you had to actually fight? Since no one is really dying, what do you have to lose?
-
Here's where you lose audience quickly. The second you make it about folk wanting nothing but 1 v 1. That's total BS. Using your crowd as an example. Last night I flew for a bit and your mob was taking Vbase after Vbase. I was flying Bish as they were low numbers and there was no way to get enough bodies to those spots before the mob took the base. It got downright silly. I finally said on 200 'At some point you gents are going to have to attack an airfield". Didn't ever see it happen though.
That's why it's hamsters to the feeder bar for me right now. You didn't want to fight, you, meaning your squad, wanted bases fast and with as little effort as possible. To what end? Reset the map and start over? So what if it took a little longer and you actually fought it out a bit?
And its a BS excuse to blame the rules of the game for driving game play. Unless you are a sheep, you do have a choice. Why would you not want to bring your crowd and attack a place where you had to actually fight? Since no one is really dying, what do you have to lose?
+ 1 :aok
-
Here's where you lose audience quickly. The second you make it about folk wanting nothing but 1 v 1. That's total BS. Using your crowd as an example. Last night I flew for a bit and your mob was taking Vbase after Vbase. I was flying Bish as they were low numbers and there was no way to get enough bodies to those spots before the mob took the base. It got downright silly. I finally said on 200 'At some point you gents are going to have to attack an airfield". Didn't ever see it happen though.
That's why it's hamsters to the feeder bar for me right now. You didn't want to fight, you, meaning your squad, wanted bases fast and with as little effort as possible. To what end? Reset the map and start over? So what if it took a little longer and you actually fought it out a bit?
And its a BS excuse to blame the rules of the game for driving game play. Unless you are a sheep, you do have a choice. Why would you not want to bring your crowd and attack a place where you had to actually fight? Since no one is really dying, what do you have to lose?
+1 :aok
and a pic to validate his experience from that very same night, 38 vs 66
(http://img252.imageshack.us/img252/5728/exampleh.jpg)
-
You didn't want to fight, you, meaning your squad, wanted bases fast and with as little effort as possible. To what end? Reset the map and start over? So what if it took a little longer and you actually fought it out a bit?
The same drivel, the same bullspit personal attacks, and yet, somehow, miraculously, we seem to rack up thousands of air-to-air kills every month without fighting or coming anywhere near the enemy. The last night I was on before tonight (Tuesday or Wednesday) we managed to rack up a good 20 or 30 kills between about ten of us defending against one NOE attack alone - a pretty impressive feat given that, as I read here, none of us ever get within 30 miles of the enemy by choice. I guess it's a good thing we have that standoff missile haxx!
All these rants, whines, and blubbering hissy fits, and it all leaves me with the same amusing image: a spoiled little sissy defensive captain throwing his helmet on the ground and jumping up and down and bawling, "Reffff! Coooooach! It's not fair! They keep throwing the ball to open receivers instead of throwing it where our guys are standing! Then they keep running faster than us and never giving us a chance to tackle them! Make them stop! It isn't faaaaaaairrr!!!!!" :cry :cry :cry :cry :cry :cry
Didn't any of you spoiled little brats have daddies to tell you when you were eight years old to quit crying and act like a man when you got whupped by an opponent's smarter game play? I guess not.
And its a BS excuse to blame the rules of the game for driving game play.
It's no BS, it's simple fact. The rules and setup of the game determine what tactics are effective. The rules of football favor the forward pass, if dropped passes were treated as fumbles, or if defenders were allowed to tackle receivers before the catch, teams would stop passing. They aren't, so teams go on passing. It's no use whining that good sports would just run straight up the middle and straight into the maximum number of defenders every time; that's plainly not the way the game was meant to be played.
Likewise, in AH, the game setup has you attacking objectives right next to enemy airfields at which the defenders can instantly and endlessly reup no matter how many times they get killed (which is, of course, stupendously unrealistic in tactical/simulation terms even if you completely ignore the personal desire of RL pilots to live), so effective tactics are those that prevent the defenders from doing so. Fighting or not has nothing to do with it - if the defenders want to fight, there'll be one, if they don't, there won't. It's about changing the parameters of the fight so the defenders no longer have that "gamey" advantage. That will never change until that aspect of the game setup changes.
And as for the numbers whines, I thought we wanted a less gamey simulation? There was no "side balancing" in the war. Missions and fights where attackers and defenders were evenly matched in numbers, quality of planes, and situation were the exception. Missions where they even knew what odds to expect were the exception. If you want to fly like a real WW2 pilot did, if you want your experience to be more like the real thing (minus the part about people actually dying, of course) and less artificially gamey, learn to quit whining on the BBS and 200 and play the hand you're dealt like they had to do. At least in AH the numbers imbalance shifts all the time and almost never favors any one side for more than an evening. (For myself, I'd be happy with more effective side balancing, but I don't claim I want anything but a good, engaging game based on a flight sim.)
-
The same drivel, the same bullspit personal attacks, and yet, somehow, miraculously, we seem to rack up thousands of air-to-air kills every month without fighting or coming anywhere near the enemy. The last night I was on before tonight (Tuesday or Wednesday) we managed to rack up a good 20 or 30 kills between about ten of us defending against one NOE attack alone - a pretty impressive feat given that, as I read here, none of us ever get within 30 miles of the enemy by choice. I guess it's a good thing we have that standoff missile haxx!
All these rants, whines, and blubbering hissy fits, and it all leaves me with the same amusing image: a spoiled little sissy defensive captain throwing his helmet on the ground and jumping up and down and bawling, "Reffff! Coooooach! It's not fair! They keep throwing the ball to open receivers instead of throwing it where our guys are standing! Then they keep running faster than us and never giving us a chance to tackle them! Make them stop! It isn't faaaaaaairrr!!!!!" :cry :cry :cry :cry :cry :cry
Didn't any of you spoiled little brats have daddies to tell you when you were eight years old to quit crying and act like a man when you got whupped by an opponent's smarter game play? I guess not.
It's no BS, it's simple fact. The rules and setup of the game determine what tactics are effective. The rules of football favor the forward pass, if dropped passes were treated as fumbles, or if defenders were allowed to tackle receivers before the catch, teams would stop passing. They aren't, so teams go on passing. It's no use whining that good sports would just run straight up the middle and straight into the maximum number of defenders every time; that's plainly not the way the game was meant to be played.
Likewise, in AH, the game setup has you attacking objectives right next to enemy airfields at which the defenders can instantly and endlessly reup no matter how many times they get killed (which is, of course, stupendously unrealistic in tactical/simulation terms even if you completely ignore the personal desire of RL pilots to live), so effective tactics are those that prevent the defenders from doing so. Fighting or not has nothing to do with it - if the defenders want to fight, there'll be one, if they don't, there won't. It's about changing the parameters of the fight so the defenders no longer have that "gamey" advantage. That will never change until that aspect of the game setup changes.
And as for the numbers whines, I thought we wanted a less gamey simulation? There was no "side balancing" in the war. Missions and fights where attackers and defenders were evenly matched in numbers, quality of planes, and situation were the exception. Missions where they even knew what odds to expect were the exception. If you want to fly like a real WW2 pilot did, if you want your experience to be more like the real thing (minus the part about people actually dying, of course) and less artificially gamey, learn to quit whining on the BBS and 200 and play the hand you're dealt like they had to do. At least in AH the numbers imbalance shifts all the time and almost never favors any one side for more than an evening. (For myself, I'd be happy with more effective side balancing, but I don't claim I want anything but a good, engaging game based on a flight sim.)
I know it's worthless to answer to you, because like a horse with a set of blinders on all you see is is what is in front of you and either don't care or ignore everything else around you, but here goes....
To you and many.....far to many.... this game has become "GRAB THE BASES!!!" and that is it, period, end game. Like most gamers you guys do the same things over and over again until you hit the "big boss" (the base) and over whelm him with your numbers/super powers.
To Guppy and many of us the actual fight is all we want. We don't care who owns the base or who is attacking it, all we see is a fight and that is what we go for. That is what this game was all about. A chance to pretend for a few hours a night to be a WWII fighter pilot, of Buff pilot in a mission, or a Tank commander leading an assault. All the thrill of the battle with none of that crappy stuff like fear, death, blood, loosing body parts, loosing friends, waiting for some supply group to replace the plane you just got shot out of. Just the "glory" of the fight.
If all you want to do is grab land why not try HERE (http://www.game-remakes.com/play.php?id=476). Its free and you can run the board day and night.
-
Maybe one day you guys can have this endless debate about who is more mature without insulting each other. :neener:
-
How would you compare play quality compared to a couple, 3, 4 years ago? Maybe even longer? I dont mean the game itself, which has improved, or even individual players. Im asking about how the player base now plays the game compared to years ago?
The playerbase on average is the same, you however are 3-4 years older, that's the difference.
-
FalconWing, I use to hate you guys. You were one of the firsts "horde" type missions I ran into. Sure now and then country wide little general would get everyone pointed in the same direction now and then and create a horde, but you guys were an organized horde and you knew when it was squad night and you were in for a long night. But I'd take you guys back in a heartbeat at this point.
You guys fought! Sure your groups were large most of the time but you didn't make that one run at a base and then disappeared. If a decent number of guys upped to defend the fights would last until you guy took the base and moved onto the next strategic base in line. You guys didn't run willy-nilly all over the map looking for undefended bases. You took bases with a purpose. This V base because it spawns to that airfield and so on.
Your mega missions also helped to create the issues. Let face it, fighting against the horde is tough and a thankless "job". More often that not your out numbered, heavily, and "they" have the alt and speed (E) which more often than not is the deciding factor in a fight. So less and less people up to defend, because it just isn't fun. Next thing you know Your missions are rolling over base after base with ease. There is no challenge, it's easy and repetitious, and becomes boring. Your doing the same old thing mission after mission. By the time you called it quits I'll bet you weren't even assigning targets or directing the missions any more because they all knew what they were to do and just did it.
The "win the war" crowd is what is suppose to generate most of the combat in the game. Even back in Falconwings time this worked because they fought, so defenders defended. Todays players don't even bother to fight. If they run into opposition they just disappear and pop up at some other undefended area of the map looking for that quick grab again.
Again, most players don't "play" the game, they just run through as quick as they can guns blazing yelling LEROY JENKINS at the top of their lungs.
Actually the best missions to defend against were ROCSTAR3's. He didn't put them up for the sake of playing "Whack-A-Mole" on the map, for the land grab like today's crap. He posted them for the sake of having a tremendous fight for an hour or two, because he used fighters, not bombers. His goal wasn't to flatten the base, but just to get as many kills as possible. But you still had a good time being on the receiving end of them. If anyone got shot down, you reupped and still had fun, even his participants. They didn't "auger, bail, quit working the area" after they got shot down, they came back.
I mean when the 29 was released, you had the V-Devils rolling them in at 5k or less. :rofl That is considered "Awesome Mission Planning".
-
Just hit Strats with B29s, made 20K ish.... I can make 50K hitting town centers with lancs, what would I fly all the way to the strats again? Grizz is right. There has to be something deeper than a town capture. Having the ability to make a county defend it's strats because, fields stay down longer, cant get 100 fuel, etc.... would be interesting.
-
I thought this is how the old zone bases used to work with zone strats. If you took down Ammo to 0% at a strat, it took 3 hours for ord to repop instead of 45 minutes... I may be incorrect on this.
-
I KNOW its the players that have brought the game play down. I also know that if HTC coaded in the right carrots you could get these same players to change how they play. They shouldn't have to. If a few squads got it into there heads that they were going to bring strategy back into this game it would turn around eventually. But it's a lot of work, and everyone is really here just to have fun.
I feel like you agreed with me that it is on HTC and disagreed with me that it is on HTC all in the same paragraph. :headscratch:
I could go on and on about things, post another five good ideas to improve strategy in this game to be ignored, and post till my fingers bleed, but I don't see the point anymore. If it takes HTC a year or longer to get the strats to actually have strategic value, then I have little faith in this game's ability to evolve. The game's weak link is certainly the strategy aspect of things, yet I don't see any effort being invested towards it.
-
I feel like you agreed with me that it is on HTC and disagreed with me that it is on HTC all in the same paragraph. :headscratch:
I could go on and on about things, post another five good ideas to improve strategy in this game to be ignored, and post till my fingers bleed, but I don't see the point anymore. If it takes HTC a year or longer to get the strats to actually have strategic value, then I have little faith in this game's ability to evolve. The game's weak link is certainly the strategy aspect of things, yet I don't see any effort being invested towards it.
From a cynical point of view... if you want Strategy, fly FSO. It seems the MA is just a DA with rotating maps.
-
From a myopic point of view... if you want Strategy, fly FSO. It seems the MA is just a DA with rotating maps.
Fixed
-
I thought this is how the old zone bases used to work with zone strats. If you took down Ammo to 0% at a strat, it took 3 hours for ord to repop instead of 45 minutes... I may be incorrect on this.
That may be the case wilbur, but if one little shed is up, it is still 45 min. Should sit at 50% like the town, or whatever the heck they are set for these days.
-
The same drivel, the same bullspit personal attacks, and yet, somehow, miraculously, we seem to rack up thousands of air-to-air kills every month without fighting or coming anywhere near the enemy. The last night I was on before tonight (Tuesday or Wednesday) we managed to rack up a good 20 or 30 kills between about ten of us defending against one NOE attack alone - a pretty impressive feat given that, as I read here, none of us ever get within 30 miles of the enemy by choice. I guess it's a good thing we have that standoff missile haxx!
All these rants, whines, and blubbering hissy fits, and it all leaves me with the same amusing image: a spoiled little sissy defensive captain throwing his helmet on the ground and jumping up and down and bawling, "Reffff! Coooooach! It's not fair! They keep throwing the ball to open receivers instead of throwing it where our guys are standing! Then they keep running faster than us and never giving us a chance to tackle them! Make them stop! It isn't faaaaaaairrr!!!!!" :cry :cry :cry :cry :cry :cry
Didn't any of you spoiled little brats have daddies to tell you when you were eight years old to quit crying and act like a man when you got whupped by an opponent's smarter game play? I guess not.
It's no BS, it's simple fact. The rules and setup of the game determine what tactics are effective. The rules of football favor the forward pass, if dropped passes were treated as fumbles, or if defenders were allowed to tackle receivers before the catch, teams would stop passing. They aren't, so teams go on passing. It's no use whining that good sports would just run straight up the middle and straight into the maximum number of defenders every time; that's plainly not the way the game was meant to be played.
Likewise, in AH, the game setup has you attacking objectives right next to enemy airfields at which the defenders can instantly and endlessly reup no matter how many times they get killed (which is, of course, stupendously unrealistic in tactical/simulation terms even if you completely ignore the personal desire of RL pilots to live), so effective tactics are those that prevent the defenders from doing so. Fighting or not has nothing to do with it - if the defenders want to fight, there'll be one, if they don't, there won't. It's about changing the parameters of the fight so the defenders no longer have that "gamey" advantage. That will never change until that aspect of the game setup changes.
And as for the numbers whines, I thought we wanted a less gamey simulation? There was no "side balancing" in the war. Missions and fights where attackers and defenders were evenly matched in numbers, quality of planes, and situation were the exception. Missions where they even knew what odds to expect were the exception. If you want to fly like a real WW2 pilot did, if you want your experience to be more like the real thing (minus the part about people actually dying, of course) and less artificially gamey, learn to quit whining on the BBS and 200 and play the hand you're dealt like they had to do. At least in AH the numbers imbalance shifts all the time and almost never favors any one side for more than an evening. (For myself, I'd be happy with more effective side balancing, but I don't claim I want anything but a good, engaging game based on a flight sim.)
Touch a nerve did I? The only stomping and whining I've seen is your reply :)
I never said you guys don't get kills. Some of your guys got kills on me. It was a tough spot with one of me and many of them. The odds were good that one of them would get the kill.
So basically what you are saying, is that until HTC changes the way the game is played, you will continue to 'win the war' as quickly and painlessly as possible. I never claimed this was WW2. If I did, then I'd have no problem with the way folks use the horde as it was a reality. As this is a game, and as there is no risk to actually dying, I'd have thought playing against other people would be the challenge.
But as long as you are having fun, you go for it.
LOL smarter game play. I like that one :aok
-
I feel like you agreed with me that it is on HTC and disagreed with me that it is on HTC all in the same paragraph. :headscratch:
I agree with you that HTC COULD fix it, but for them to fix it they would have to change the way players play. If you could get 5-6 squads to dedicate themselves to nothing but defending. Spending their time doing nothing but crushing any mission that pops up for a couple weeks you would see more strategic play. You would see more mission plans that were actual plans. You'd see more defense at bases as more people would join in to stop the horde.
The problem is nobody wants to do that kind of game. Everyone just wants to be the first in to the town so they can get the big hit on the town (once the town center is gone who cares what gets hit). Or they want to be the ones to drop troops (how many times have you heard people yell "I got troops here, start taking the town down!")
HTC COULD fix it by making changes in scoring, perks and such seeing as that seems to be one of the motivators in what the game has become. Cut the point value for the buildings in the center of the town by two thirds and in crease the outer edge build by 3 times. Guys are now going to try hitting the outer buildings. Will HTC make changes? Who knows. You seem to think if they don't there won't be any one left. Maybe they haven't hit the bottom yet, only time will tell.
-
I feel like you agreed with me that it is on HTC and disagreed with me that it is on HTC all in the same paragraph. :headscratch:
I could go on and on about things, post another five good ideas to improve strategy in this game to be ignored, and post till my fingers bleed, but I don't see the point anymore. If it takes HTC a year or longer to get the strats to actually have strategic value, then I have little faith in this game's ability to evolve. The game's weak link is certainly the strategy aspect of things, yet I don't see any effort being invested towards it.
I must admit, I think Grizz is right about this. There doesn't seem to be much effort being put into improving the strategic gameplay. Heck, HTC won't even make maps for the game. For whatever reason, it is expected that the community do that work. Even more baffling is that the community doesn't seem to see that as a problem.
-
And who creates the strategies? If we go by Webster's...
Strat´e`gy
n. 1. The science of military command, or the science of projecting campaigns and directing great military movements; generalship.
2. The use of stratagem or artifice.
So its up to the players to create the strategy. The problem with the players today is that a vast majority don't want to "play" the game they only want to win it as quickly as they can. Even if a player spent the time to organize a strategy, made plans using vehicles and planes, over laying missions and forcing battles along a wide front that would run for 4 hours it wouldn't be nearly as must fun or immersive as you would think because of how the "defending" players would react.
Most likely once they saw that a flight was over flying a base they would land/bail and look for another fight, or ignore the flights all together to launch their next NOE/horde mission. How much fun would a big battle plan be if no one showed up to defend against it? Forward running fighter sweepers would bail and go look for something more fun, The attacks would roll over base after base with minimum defense. and so on like we have now.
Until the players want to "play" the game all your going to get is the hordes we have and the unskilled/skilled runners protecting their scores.
Strategy should include blowing up bridges thereby stopping gv attacks or making them take a longer route. :)
Should include bombing factories and supply lines, trains and trucks, weakening enemy and forcing them to use less optimal resources (planes / gvs) until repaired. :aok
Sinking merchant ships weakening the resolve of citizens in towns to fight and make towns easier to take. :ahand
We also have great looking hq and strats, but don't really fight in them. :frown:
Zone strat with gv spawns might add more fun as well. Especially if planes could blow up and block routes within them. :)
But then this is aces high and the dogfights are what it is mostly about still, right? :headscratch:
:old: :airplane: :joystick:
:bolt:
-
Came back. MA is even more like DA lake. Reconsidering account renewal.
-
Play Quality is the same as when I started, a few years back. I have never noticed a drop in game play. I played AW on AOL and when that was shut down I had quite the break. (I was stationed overseas) I was very happy when I found out Aces High had started up. I think this game is great. I love flight simulators and most of all flying against human rather than AI targets. Fly for fun, fly for fun and don't forget fly for fun. If you are flying and it is not fun, time to quit because this is a hobby, a passtime that is supposed to be fun. <S>
-
Some guys are still making the exact same tactical and strategic mistakes they did 17 years ago in air warrior.
-
I must admit, I think Grizz is right about this. There doesn't seem to be much effort being put into improving the strategic gameplay. Heck, HTC won't even make maps for the game. For whatever reason, it is expected that the community do that work. Even more baffling is that the community doesn't seem to see that as a problem.
I think it comes down to whether it would help the cause or hurt. I'm afraid that anything that would demand some effort and not provide fairly immediate gratification would drive the largest part of the player base away.
Those of us addicted stick around anyway.
-
Falconwing, AH is a different type of game completely from an MMORPG. It is one of the few bastions of gaming left in the world where your success in game is mostly determined by skill as opposed to the amount of time and patience you have to keep doing a repetitive task in order to grow your character.
Reread the quoted paragraph. I see intercept missions and strategic missions (such as they are) every night in the MA. You didn't suggest any different gameplay from what's available, all you suggested was a "reward" that gives you something to pose with, or show off to other players.
If the gameplay in and of itself is not compelling, why will it suddenly become fun if you get a different skin if you shoot down 50 planes?
I don't mean this as a personal slam against you, Falconwing but IMO the fact that 'do repetitive task to get gear/levels/a different look for your character' has somehow been conditioned into people to be considered 'gameplay' saddens me horribly. If you don't know what a Skinner Box is, google it, and then take a look at Aion. It is 'hit the button, get a cookie' with pretty graphics, that is all.
MMORPGs make money. It's what they're designed to do, and they do it by addicting people.
IMO a game like AH unfortunately has a shelf life with every single person who plays it. Getting bored with it is inevitable because eventually your capabilities will plateau for long enough that you get bored. For some it's 2 months, others 15 years. Instanced grinding will do nothing to alleviate that.
Wiley.
while i overall agree with you wiley...i think you are wrong to not expect/demand more then essentially the same game 15 years later. If you choose to view your gaming experience to be akin to chess/checkers and you only care about the gameplay then so be it. BUT there are countless ww2 genre games on all mediums (pc/ps3/wii/x-box) that you have to be hiding your head in the sand to not understand what ideas/options could have been brought into play to keep the game fresh.
-
Strategy should include blowing up bridges thereby stopping gv attacks or making them take a longer route. :)
Should include bombing factories and supply lines, trains and trucks, weakening enemy and forcing them to use less optimal resources (planes / gvs) until repaired. :aok
Sinking merchant ships weakening the resolve of citizens in towns to fight and make towns easier to take. :ahand
We also have great looking hq and strats, but don't really fight in them. :frown:
Zone strat with gv spawns might add more fun as well. Especially if planes could blow up and block routes within them. :)
But then this is aces high and the dogfights are what it is mostly about still, right? :headscratch:
:old: :airplane: :joystick:
:bolt:
some very simple ideas that could be interesting to further gameplay.....this is what im talking about wiley...let alone the graphics...
-
I must admit, I think Grizz is right about this. There doesn't seem to be much effort being put into improving the strategic gameplay. Heck, HTC won't even make maps for the game. For whatever reason, it is expected that the community do that work. Even more baffling is that the community doesn't seem to see that as a problem.
+10...... we can point fingers at each other for not doing better with what we have but I was always shocked that there weren't frequent map changes/improvements to keep things fresh....i thought usrangers desert map should have been incorporated into the MA upon arrival....but I also always thought "Why did all the maps seem to originate with players using a map editor???"
-
How would you compare play quality compared to a couple, 3, 4 years ago? Maybe even longer? I dont mean the game itself, which has improved, or even individual players. Im asking about how the player base now plays the game compared to years ago?
Trust me, it's the SAME. Your perception has changed, you notice things you never noticed before
-
I know it's worthless to answer to you, because like a horse with a set of blinders on all you see is is what is in front of you and either don't care or ignore everything else around you, but here goes....
To you and many.....far to many.... this game has become "GRAB THE BASES!!!" and that is it, period, end game. Like most gamers you guys do the same things over and over again until you hit the "big boss" (the base) and over whelm him with your numbers/super powers.
To Guppy and many of us the actual fight is all we want. We don't care who owns the base or who is attacking it, all we see is a fight and that is what we go for. That is what this game was all about. A chance to pretend for a few hours a night to be a WWII fighter pilot, of Buff pilot in a mission, or a Tank commander leading an assault. All the thrill of the battle with none of that crappy stuff like fear, death, blood, loosing body parts, loosing friends, waiting for some supply group to replace the plane you just got shot out of. Just the "glory" of the fight.
If all you want to do is grab land why not try HERE (http://www.game-remakes.com/play.php?id=476). Its free and you can run the board day and night.
I like guys like fugi/guppy/shuff and numerous other folks who are "all about the air combat". They mean well but are unable to see the onesidedness of their thinking. I will explain:
Their basic interpretation of base capture is to make air combat happen.....ok lets roll with this.
1. The "furballers" want to be there to stop the base grab...They up light fiters and pick off hevy fiters/110's/goons/buffs who are not there primarily to fight back...but to capture the base. In this case they get to be the "wolves" and the base capture guys are "sheep" Overall fun for them...not so fun for the sheep UNLESS they capture the base...
2. The wolves then get upset with the sheep for not running right back at them but trying to accomplish their fun by hitting a different base....
3. Now the only way for the sheep to become wolves is if they basically abandon base attack at that point and up light fiters to evenly fight the wolves. But they have to abandon the original objective to do so...not exactly a fair trade.
4. Oh wait a minute..another way to prevent the win the war would be to retake the bases that were captured...but wait a minute that would mean these "furballers/air combat" guys would have to run missions.....ewwwww.
Now where i call BS is that the furballlers....who want to use base capture to encourage air combat never run true base capture missions and let themselves be the sheep. When I played the game I NEVER heard "Here comes a shuffler mission....get up fast" or "Here comes a Guppy mission roll out" or "watch out here comes another fugi mission oh noes!!" I know guppy ran "stupid lets make fun of base capture" missions but hell they were rare and don't count. ANOTHER EXAMPLE of the "Its up to us players to "do the right thing for the game" where it really means "YOU do the right thing for ME to have fun with the game."
I think this will go way over their heads....but maybe...just maybe....for once...a so-called furballer will understand how easy it would be for them to affect gameplay.
So stop being hypocrites boys!!! If you believe that base capture encourages air combat....why aren't YOU running these missions and forcing the others to defend...AND don't forget to keep coming back hevy with goons and 110s to finish the base over and over again btw.....maybe they will like being wolves while they get to slaughter YOU???? But maybe you wont find being the sheep so much fun...
/facepalm
-
I like guys like fugi/guppy/shuff and numerous other folks who are "all about the air combat". They mean well but are unable to see the onesidedness of their thinking. I will explain:
Their basic interpretation of base capture is to make air combat happen.....ok lets roll with this.
1. The "furballers" want to be there to stop the base grab...They up light fiters and pick off hevy fiters/110's/goons/buffs who are not there primarily to fight back...but to capture the base. In this case they get to be the "wolves" and the base capture guys are "sheep" Overall fun for them...not so fun for the sheep UNLESS they capture the base...
2. The wolves then get upset with the sheep for not running right back at them but trying to accomplish their fun by hitting a different base....
3. Now the only way for the sheep to become wolves is if they basically abandon base attack at that point and up light fiters to evenly fight the wolves. But they have to abandon the original objective to do so...not exactly a fair trade.
4. Oh wait a minute..another way to prevent the win the war would be to retake the bases that were captured...but wait a minute that would mean these "furballers/air combat" guys would have to run missions.....ewwwww.
Now where i call BS is that the furballlers....who want to use base capture to encourage air combat never run true base capture missions and let themselves be the sheep. When I played the game I NEVER heard "Here comes a shuffler mission....get up fast" or "Here comes a Guppy mission roll out" or "watch out here comes another fugi mission oh noes!!" I know guppy ran "stupid lets make fun of base capture" missions but hell they were rare and don't count. ANOTHER EXAMPLE of the "Its up to us players to "do the right thing for the game" where it really means "YOU do the right thing for ME to have fun with the game."
I think this will go way over their heads....but maybe...just maybe....for once...a so-called furballer will understand how easy it would be for them to affect gameplay.
So stop being hypocrites boys!!! If you believe that base capture encourages air combat....why aren't YOU running these missions and forcing the others to defend...AND don't forget to keep coming back hevy with goons and 110s to finish the base over and over again btw.....maybe they will like being wolves while they get to slaughter YOU???? But maybe you wont find being the sheep so much fun...
/facepalm
Never has such a high-pitched and complex whine been perpetrated on these boards...
Of course furballers don't want to be sheep, being a sheep is only fun for simpletons. What the sheep need to do is figure out how to take a base with something more than hordes of bombers and heavy fighters and persevere in the fight until they get the base rather than running off to the other side of the map. But alas, they can't do this because they are simpletons and therein lies the intrinsic problem with the game- it's full of simpletons who are entertained by doing the same thing over and over again with the least amount of resistance possible.
It will never be fixed. Ever. That's why HTC doesn't bother with making changes. They are aware of this. The vast majority of the players will be happy playing on the same maps over and over again. Changing things to cater to a few people is a bad business decision. Also, it's just silly and irresponsible to buy a 2 year old an erector set. They won't have fun with it because it is too hard for them and they will probably end up choking on the parts and hurting themselves. If HTC makes the game more complex, the simpletons will either whine, get bored and leave or hurt their brain cell trying to figure it out.
Any other questions?
Long live the furball...
-
(http://5img.com/img204/7623/71ahgameplay.jpg)
This is AH gameplay in a nutshell hoarde or be hoarded and its gotten worse since the 12 hour switch rubbish, we need 1 hour switch times back.
-
Never has such a high-pitched and complex whine been perpetrated on these boards...I do think you find it complex...but your response is awkward at best. I guess your part of the PC crowd who can't stick with words but has to label anything a "whine" or call people "simpletons". Its sad to even have to respond to you
Of course furballers don't want to be sheep, being a sheep is only fun for simpletons. What the sheep need to do is figure out how to take a base with something more than hordes of bombers and heavy fighters and persevere in the fight until they get the base rather than running off to the other side of the map. But alas, they can't do this because they are simpletons and therein lies the intrinsic problem with the game- it's full of simpletons who are entertained by doing the same thing over and over again with the least amount of resistance possible. Oh you mean like expecting other people to be sheep for you...lol pot meet kettle who thinks he is not a pot...wow just wow
It will never be fixed. Ever. That's why HTC doesn't bother with making changes. The saddest part of this post..this is made by a HTC fan as a SUPPORTIVE comment????They are aware of this. The vast majority of the players will be happy playing on the same maps over and over again. O'rly????Changing things to cater to a few people is a bad business decision. Yep keeping something fresh in an everchanging marketplace is just silly...tell ya what...go ahead and try an ipad/microwave/car....they ARE better and people like better. Also, it's just silly and irresponsible to buy a 2 year old an erector set. They won't have fun with it because it is too hard for them and they will probably end up choking on the parts and hurting themselves. If HTC makes the game more complex, the simpletons will either whine, get bored and leave or hurt their brain cell trying to figure it out. The sad thing is I actually believe that you think this game is hard....wow....you also seem to think erector sets are complex?? they are another example of a product that never kept up with the times and are now obsoleteAny other questions? Hate to point out the obvious but you were never asked one...soooo no?
Long live the furball...
Perfect case in point....
I can't argue with a person who needs people to be "targets" for himself and insults cartoon pilots....
fail is fail...i can't fix you bro... :rolleyes:
:bhead
-
I like guys like fugi/guppy/shuff and numerous other folks who are "all about the air combat". They mean well but are unable to see the onesidedness of their thinking. I will explain:
First I think this "furballer" tag has to go. Personally I don't like furballs as I hate getting picked by 3 guys while I'm trying to pick someone else. I think you'd find most of the people that are concidered "furballers" would much rather fly sweeps for and/or against missions than furball.
Their basic interpretation of base capture is to make air combat happen.....ok lets roll with this.
1. The "furballers" want to be there to stop the base grab...They up light fiters and pick off hevy fiters/110's/goons/buffs who are not there primarily to fight back...but to capture the base. In this case they get to be the "wolves" and the base capture guys are "sheep" Overall fun for them...not so fun for the sheep UNLESS they capture the base...
a smart mission planner would launch light fighters, 6 or so for a base capture, 5 minutes BEFORE the main attack force. There sole perpose would be to draw the defenders away from the target using tactics made for them to survive. BnZ with a wingman and such. 6 guys could keep 10-12 guys busy for 15- 20 minutes either they are effective, and have a few skills. (unfortunately most players count on the horde to win the day, not skill)
2. The wolves then get upset with the sheep for not running right back at them but trying to accomplish their fun by hitting a different base....
3. Now the only way for the sheep to become wolves is if they basically abandon base attack at that point and up light fiters to evenly fight the wolves. But they have to abandon the original objective to do so...not exactly a fair trade.
Had they sent fighter cover in the first place they might not have had to abandoned their mission. Missions are made up of many different elements and the players filling those "rolls" should be counted on to fill them. Sometimes your one of the goon pilots, sometimes fighter cover. Either way you should want to give 100% to help in the mission, other wise WHY ARE YOU IN A MISSION?
Todays players aren't skilled enough to be depended on. I'd bet more than half the guys dive bombing targets will miss, or auger in ANY mission run these days. I'd bet that the other 50% will zoom strait up making a great target for any wolf who wants to pick. I'd bet that more than 75% don't know how to "porpoise" when de-acking and why it might be important. Why, because todays players are gamers and all of the massive on-line games these days are nothing buthaving everyone run into the same wall over and over again. The more running into the wall the faster it goes down. It doesn't take any skill to run into a wall.
4. Oh wait a minute..another way to prevent the win the war would be to retake the bases that were captured...but wait a minute that would mean these "furballers/air combat" guys would have to run missions.....ewwwww.
I would love to see this, but it is hard to generate some help. The reason is everyone is too busy running in the horde to split off and try something like that. Yesterday the Bish horde was attacking 27, while the rook horde was attacking 28, 30 miles away from each other. :rolleyes:
Now where i call BS is that the furballlers....who want to use base capture to encourage air combat never run true base capture missions and let themselves be the sheep. When I played the game I NEVER heard "Here comes a shuffler mission....get up fast" or "Here comes a Guppy mission roll out" or "watch out here comes another fugi mission oh noes!!" I know guppy ran "stupid lets make fun of base capture" missions but hell they were rare and don't count. ANOTHER EXAMPLE of the "Its up to us players to "do the right thing for the game" where it really means "YOU do the right thing for ME to have fun with the game."
I think this will go way over their heads....but maybe...just maybe....for once...a so-called furballer will understand how easy it would be for them to affect gameplay.
I have run hundreds of missions. I spent hours on end circling fields in a bomber guiding every bit of the attack with my birds eye seat. I got burnt out running missions. Too much time planning, not enough time "playing". I ran missions for 5 years (2 in AW, and 3 here) I didn't want the responsibility of running them any more. I am more than happy to join any mission today except NOEs, or missions where the briefing goes like this..
"110's hit the town, P47's hit the hangers, everyone else clean up. Flatten any thing left up!"
Which means I'm not in too many missions these days.
So stop being hypocrites boys!!! If you believe that base capture encourages air combat....why aren't YOU running these missions and forcing the others to defend...AND don't forget to keep coming back hevy with goons and 110s to finish the base over and over again btw.....maybe they will like being wolves while they get to slaughter YOU???? But maybe you wont find being the sheep so much fun...
/facepalm
Todays players don't want missions, they want to roll over a base with out having to fight for it. Guppy's mission don't work because as soon as anyone on the defenders side knows it's them they run away because they know Guppy's not really after the base, and that most of the guys flying with him a decent sticks so they being the skilless players they are know they don't stand a chance at shooting them down so they a re gone.
Todays players are very good at avoiding a fight, and go to great lengths to do so.
-
First I think this "furballer" tag has to go. Personally I don't like furballs as I hate getting picked by 3 guys while I'm trying to pick someone else. I think you'd find most of the people that are concidered "furballers" would much rather fly sweeps for and/or against missions than furball.
a smart mission planner would launch light fighters, 6 or so for a base capture, 5 minutes BEFORE the main attack force. There sole perpose would be to draw the defenders away from the target using tactics made for them to survive. BnZ with a wingman and such. 6 guys could keep 10-12 guys busy for 15- 20 minutes either they are effective, and have a few skills. (unfortunately most players count on the horde to win the day, not skill)
Had they sent fighter cover in the first place they might not have had to abandoned their mission. Missions are made up of many different elements and the players filling those "rolls" should be counted on to fill them. Sometimes your one of the goon pilots, sometimes fighter cover. Either way you should want to give 100% to help in the mission, other wise WHY ARE YOU IN A MISSION?
Todays players aren't skilled enough to be depended on. I'd bet more than half the guys dive bombing targets will miss, or auger in ANY mission run these days. I'd bet that the other 50% will zoom strait up making a great target for any wolf who wants to pick. I'd bet that more than 75% don't know how to "porpoise" when de-acking and why it might be important. Why, because todays players are gamers and all of the massive on-line games these days are nothing buthaving everyone run into the same wall over and over again. The more running into the wall the faster it goes down. It doesn't take any skill to run into a wall.
I would love to see this, but it is hard to generate some help. The reason is everyone is too busy running in the horde to split off and try something like that. Yesterday the Bish horde was attacking 27, while the rook horde was attacking 28, 30 miles away from each other. :rolleyes:
I have run hundreds of missions. I spent hours on end circling fields in a bomber guiding every bit of the attack with my birds eye seat. I got burnt out running missions. Too much time planning, not enough time "playing". I ran missions for 5 years (2 in AW, and 3 here) I didn't want the responsibility of running them any more. I am more than happy to join any mission today except NOEs, or missions where the briefing goes like this..
"110's hit the town, P47's hit the hangers, everyone else clean up. Flatten any thing left up!"
Which means I'm not in too many missions these days.
Todays players don't want missions, they want to roll over a base with out having to fight for it. Guppy's mission don't work because as soon as anyone on the defenders side knows it's them they run away because they know Guppy's not really after the base, and that most of the guys flying with him a decent sticks so they being the skilless players they are know they don't stand a chance at shooting them down so they a re gone.
Todays players are very good at avoiding a fight, and go to great lengths to do so.
Thank you for a non-vitriolic well reasoned post! :salute
My only observation is that you expect the "horde" mission planners to be able to generate a coordination level that (you admit later in your post) is hard even for a veteran respected pilot to obtain. Hence the overwhelming numbers and quick abandonment of a successfully defended target. I don't see how you can have it both ways....you choose to put it on their skill level...ithink that simplistic and a bit elitist...as i mentioned in my other post...this is NOT a hard game...seriously....have you seen a ps3 controller nowadays??? let alone most on-line games that involve PvP...all you need for AH is a joystick and rudder/throttle capability...
i agree that many folks never quite get the hang of it but look at the age range of this game....im guessing most are 35+ at this point....i may bet older....i know it seems hard compared to an atari/pong controller but it is really very simple
My snarky response would be that most of the "veteran anti-horde" crew don't want or aren't willing to take on the responsibility for organizing sensible resistance. I don't blame you.....i burned out on that myself....having to always be on organizing/recruiting/map watching to try to balance against bad game mechanics DOES suck....
But if you think in the heyday of BoPs the reason I could put together mega-missions with outstanding success even when we were opposed was just pure coincidence...then you are mistaken....it took months to years of flying EVERYDAY....posting missions EVERYDAY.....of course initially the missions were poorly attended...it was hard work and time to create that level of countrywide trust that would make peeps "give a crap" and drop what they were doing to help out...
I see a lot of finger pointing as always but I have YET to see the person soooo concerned about gameplay that they are willing to make that commitment themselves....
-
Thank you for a non-vitriolic well reasoned post! :salute
My only observation is that you expect the "horde" mission planners to be able to generate a coordination level that (you admit later in your post) is hard even for a veteran respected pilot to obtain. Hence the overwhelming numbers and quick abandonment of a successfully defended target. I don't see how you can have it both ways....you choose to put it on their skill level...ithink that simplistic and a bit elitist...as i mentioned in my other post...this is NOT a hard game...seriously....have you seen a ps3 controller nowadays??? let alone most on-line games that involve PvP...all you need for AH is a joystick and rudder/throttle capability...
i agree that many folks never quite get the hang of it but look at the age range of this game....im guessing most are 35+ at this point....i may bet older....i know it seems hard compared to an atari/pong controller but it is really very simple
My snarky response would be that most of the "veteran anti-horde" crew don't want or aren't willing to take on the responsibility for organizing sensible resistance. I don't blame you.....i burned out on that myself....having to always be on organizing/recruiting/map watching to try to balance against bad game mechanics DOES suck....
But if you think in the heyday of BoPs the reason I could put together mega-missions with outstanding success even when we were opposed was just pure coincidence...then you are mistaken....it took months to years of flying EVERYDAY....posting missions EVERYDAY.....of course initially the missions were poorly attended...it was hard work and time to create that level of countrywide trust that would make peeps "give a crap" and drop what they were doing to help out...
I see a lot of finger pointing as always but I have YET to see the person soooo concerned about gameplay that they are willing to make that commitment themselves....
....and I believe that is the differance between a simmer and a gamer.
A simmer wants to play the hero of his/her dreams. To do this they must become good at what they are doing. You can't win dogfights, or dive bomb, or level bomb, or capture bases with out practice to increase YOUR skill, not your "skill points" as in other games. Simmers seek out instruction and learn to get better at "how" they play.
A gamer on the other hand looks for the quickest easiest way to get to the end game, and for most its a base capture. Fighting doesn't even factor in any more, as a matter of fact it's a hindrance to there play. It slows down the number of captures per hour (thank god that isn't a stat kept and displayed by HTC!)
Confusing the simplicity of the game controls with skill in the game is another mistake. Sure its easy to learn what button does what, and gamers learn so many more, but I don't care how many button combinations they know, it is not going to shoot down my plane. How many button presses does it take to dive bomb with a P38? Not many but you still see 3 out of 4 crash while doing it.
Todays players are not interested in pretending to be WWII pilots and tankers. They are only here to capture the next base. Running in with a horde against minimal defense and rolling base after base is boring, that is why they are looking for new maps....which they will just run over as fast as they can anyway, new vehicles (which they won't use unless it can take out a TigerII in one shot), and new planes 9which they won't use unless they have bigger, or more cannons). They have done away with strategy, training, and anything that has to do with "skill" in playing the game, while the rest of us still look for a good fight.
-
Fuji, while I agree with you for the most part, it is somewhat unreasonable to expect others to do what we ourselves are unwilling to do. You complain that players these days don't want to do anything but horde. I would suggest that in the case of newer players, they have never been shown and/or taught how effective (and fun) the highly organized (non horde) missions you describe can be.
Who is going to teach/show them? Are you willing to put in the effort? I don't think I am.
So, why should we expect anything more then what we are already getting in game?
Maybe there needs to be a cadre of long term players who volunteer to step up and put together missions for a few months. And not just for one country, but for all three. If there were such Veteran Mission Planners putting together base captures, GV raids, HQ bomber raids, fighter sweeps, and other such things consistently for a few months on all sides, you might start to see a change in the way newer players approach the game. You can't really expect newer players to adopt a play style that they have never seen or experienced, now can you?
But who is going to step up and do the heavy lifting required? Anyone?
Probably not. It's simply much easier to say that we've done our time. Or that the current xboxers will never follow. Or whatever excuse we have so we can continue to blame everyone else instead of ourselves.
This isn't an attack on any particular person, just an attack on the idea that new players should play how we would like them to, but without anyone teaching it to them.
-
Todays players are not interested in pretending to be WWII pilots and tankers. They are only here to capture the next base. Running in with a horde against minimal defense and rolling base after base is boring, that is why they are looking for new maps....which they will just run over as fast as they can anyway, new vehicles (which they won't use unless it can take out a TigerII in one shot), and new planes which they won't use unless they have bigger, or more cannons). They have done away with strategy, training, and anything that has to do with "skill" in playing the game, while the rest of us still look for a good fight.
sorry falconwing, i don't know how long it's been since you played ah, nor why you chose to occupy your time with an mmorpg but, fugitive has it right in this instance. the quick fix, console gaming mentality has slowly but surely taken over the ww2 flight sim world. not that the old timers looking through the rose colored air warrior glasses have it completely right either, but if anyone actually took the time to look at the underlying differences between player expectations just 5 years ago with what they are now, they would see why things are the way they are in ah. it has little to do with what htc adds to the game since few want to do anything more than what fugitive described.
as for new maps, htc has done the same thing retail game developers have done for a long time, given the players the tools needed to add their own content. you don't see people whining about the lack of new maps for games like the call of duty or battlefield series, because the developers released tools for the players to use in creating their own. why the expectation that htc be solely responsible for the introduction of new maps is a mystery since not one of those who cry for new maps here has the same expectations of the developers for other games they play.
-
Perfect case in point....
I can't argue with a person who needs people to be "targets" for himself and insults cartoon pilots....
fail is fail...i can't fix you bro... :rolleyes:
:bhead
Wow. Incredibly, you missed the point of everything I said. I guess I shouldn’t be too surprised.
First, let’s address this assertion you are making that you think furballers want others to be targets for them. This tells me a lot about you. I have learned in life that people often project their own thoughts and motives on others to explain the behavior or actions of that other person. For example, there are people who do not trust others and think they have a mixed motive even when those others are doing truly pure and selfless acts of kindness. Invariably, an untrusting person like this is a person that cannot be trusted himself. Another example is the fact that pure and innocent people are usually the victims of deceitful schemes simply because they do not believe that others can truly be bad enough to scam them. Taking this same universal principle and applying it to this situation tells me that you are a person that likes things easy. Because you think furballers want others to be targets for them, you are explaining what you think is the furballer’s motivation from the point of view of your own motivation. You are wrong, if the furballer just wanted airplanes to fly around in circles while trying to shoot them down, then the furballer would stay in offline mode. What the furballer enjoys in this game is the challenge of resolving a multiple contact situation and emerge victorious using aerial combat maneuvers and situational awareness. This is something you obviously don’t understand. You being the land-grabber, simpleton-type, think everyone wants things simple and therefore you project that on others. Some of us like things hard. I hate to say it, but you provided me with a pinhole into your being. You are one who likes it easy. Here, hopefully this will inspire you…
I wish you war-winners would be more like this guy:
(http://soundofscience.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/jfk.jpg)
"But why, some say, the moon? Why choose this as our goal? And they may well ask why climb the highest mountain? Why, 35 years ago, fly the Atlantic? Why does Rice play Texas?
We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept…"
Now, related to my statement that changing things is a poor business decision. You missed the point. Yes, obviously it would be a good idea to keep the game fresh in an ever-changing marketplace. But the point is, HTC knows they do not have to waste their resources on doing that. They know that people will continue to play even though it is the same. How do they know that? Because people always have, and they always will. Why waste time and money doing anything else when the simpletons are happy crashing themselves into radar towers over and over again on the same map? You get my point? (That is what is called a rhetorical question. It is one that doesn’t really need to be answered, just like the one I ended my post with last time…the point of which, you missed.)
You missed my point again with the erector set analogy. (Note to the gentle reader: I know, isn‘t it shocking he missed the point again?) The war-winning aspect of the game is not hard at all. Especially the way it is executed now with 20 times more people than necessary. If HTC were to make it more difficult then it would be like giving a two-year-old an erector set. Erector sets are not meant for two-year-olds, they don’t like erector sets and it is not good for them to play with them because it is dangerous for them. If they made this game any more complicated the simpletons would not like it. Just look at how they respond when one simple thing is changed like the NOE elevation. No, it needs to be easy so they will stay around. They want things easy. They need things easy. HTC knows better than any of us what the players want; they say so all the time. The fact that it has been unchanged for years when they are the very gods of the game that have the power to change that proves my point.
So easy it will stay. And those that like it hard will go…
Best Regards,
SunBat, the BBS answer man
P.S. I ain't your bro.
-
I like guys like fugi/guppy/shuff and numerous other folks who are "all about the air combat". They mean well but are unable to see the onesidedness of their thinking. I will explain:
Their basic interpretation of base capture is to make air combat happen.....ok lets roll with this.
1. The "furballers" want to be there to stop the base grab...They up light fiters and pick off hevy fiters/110's/goons/buffs who are not there primarily to fight back...but to capture the base. In this case they get to be the "wolves" and the base capture guys are "sheep" Overall fun for them...not so fun for the sheep UNLESS they capture the base...
2. The wolves then get upset with the sheep for not running right back at them but trying to accomplish their fun by hitting a different base....
3. Now the only way for the sheep to become wolves is if they basically abandon base attack at that point and up light fiters to evenly fight the wolves. But they have to abandon the original objective to do so...not exactly a fair trade.
4. Oh wait a minute..another way to prevent the win the war would be to retake the bases that were captured...but wait a minute that would mean these "furballers/air combat" guys would have to run missions.....ewwwww.
Now where i call BS is that the furballlers....who want to use base capture to encourage air combat never run true base capture missions and let themselves be the sheep. When I played the game I NEVER heard "Here comes a shuffler mission....get up fast" or "Here comes a Guppy mission roll out" or "watch out here comes another fugi mission oh noes!!" I know guppy ran "stupid lets make fun of base capture" missions but hell they were rare and don't count. ANOTHER EXAMPLE of the "Its up to us players to "do the right thing for the game" where it really means "YOU do the right thing for ME to have fun with the game."
I think this will go way over their heads....but maybe...just maybe....for once...a so-called furballer will understand how easy it would be for them to affect gameplay.
So stop being hypocrites boys!!! If you believe that base capture encourages air combat....why aren't YOU running these missions and forcing the others to defend...AND don't forget to keep coming back hevy with goons and 110s to finish the base over and over again btw.....maybe they will like being wolves while they get to slaughter YOU???? But maybe you wont find being the sheep so much fun...
/facepalm
falcn...i respect u and u know that, but...this is confusing for me. so are you saying that "furballers" should stay out of a fight is there are bases to be defended? are you saying that "base takers" need to be able to take bases WITHOUT resistance? resistance is what makes capturing a field fun! i remember many missions that i, myself had posted and we took many bases. there was little to no resistance and it was a yawn. for many in the mission they were happy that we got the base but for me, i wanted some resistance. i am a "furballer" i am here for the air combat. not everyone plays the same way as i choose to. but you know what...ITS OK! we all pay to play our game the way we want to play it. this debate has been on the boards for many years that i can remember. bomber guys want to bomb, gv'ers wanna gv, base takers wanna take bases and furballers wanna furball. if it wasn't for the gv'ers having a gv fight, there wouldnt be anything for the bomber guys to do, most of them up some buffs just to go bomb gv's. if it wasn't for the bombers doin that, the furballers wouldnt have anyone to shoot at because you know bomber guys come with escorts and we LOVE to shoot down bombers...they are the other white meat after all. all im sayin is there is a chain of effect goin on in this game. we all just need to suck it up, play our game and not let the way others play THEIR game affect our fun! thats only my 2 cents....you are dismissed now :)
:salute
-
I like guys like fugi/guppy/shuff and numerous other folks who are "all about the air combat". They mean well but are unable to see the onesidedness of their thinking. I will explain:
Their basic interpretation of base capture is to make air combat happen.....ok lets roll with this.
1. The "furballers" want to be there to stop the base grab...They up light fiters and pick off hevy fiters/110's/goons/buffs who are not there primarily to fight back...but to capture the base. In this case they get to be the "wolves" and the base capture guys are "sheep" Overall fun for them...not so fun for the sheep UNLESS they capture the base...
2. The wolves then get upset with the sheep for not running right back at them but trying to accomplish their fun by hitting a different base....
3. Now the only way for the sheep to become wolves is if they basically abandon base attack at that point and up light fiters to evenly fight the wolves. But they have to abandon the original objective to do so...not exactly a fair trade.
4. Oh wait a minute..another way to prevent the win the war would be to retake the bases that were captured...but wait a minute that would mean these "furballers/air combat" guys would have to run missions.....ewwwww.
Now where i call BS is that the furballlers....who want to use base capture to encourage air combat never run true base capture missions and let themselves be the sheep. When I played the game I NEVER heard "Here comes a shuffler mission....get up fast" or "Here comes a Guppy mission roll out" or "watch out here comes another fugi mission oh noes!!" I know guppy ran "stupid lets make fun of base capture" missions but hell they were rare and don't count. ANOTHER EXAMPLE of the "Its up to us players to "do the right thing for the game" where it really means "YOU do the right thing for ME to have fun with the game."
I think this will go way over their heads....but maybe...just maybe....for once...a so-called furballer will understand how easy it would be for them to affect gameplay.
So stop being hypocrites boys!!! If you believe that base capture encourages air combat....why aren't YOU running these missions and forcing the others to defend...AND don't forget to keep coming back hevy with goons and 110s to finish the base over and over again btw.....maybe they will like being wolves while they get to slaughter YOU???? But maybe you wont find being the sheep so much fun...
/facepalm
Can't even begin to tell ya how many times I or one of my squaddies has come on 200 and said we're headed this way, at this alt if anyone is looking for a fight. Once in a while folks respond. More often then not, no one ups, which seems silly to me. :)
I understand what you are trying to get at Falc. But what I'm trying to say is if you are going to run missions, why not run them against people, instead of buildings? If you are bringing a horde anyway, why would you not want defenders there? That way I'm participating in your part of the game and you are participating in mine. How is that a bad thing? The base takers get better at fighting while taking bases, and I get to spread that many more 38G parts about the AH landscape.
Why does one type of game play have to be separated from another? And it's not the 'furballers' who are trying to keep it apart.
-
Each persona feeds off each other, it's like the food chain. you take away the fighting to capture a Base then your removing part of the chain, causing the game play to change and evolve into something else. and IMO it has changed the Game. The way a majority of the Players take a base now is with shear numbers,find the base with the least resistance, overwhelm them capture the base and move onto another low resistance target. Reason why i guess is because they know if any kind of defense was ready for them they wouldn't have a snowballs chance in hell of making it to target.
Game play a few years ago you would see 5 to 7 smaller fighters going on all over the Map, not the 1 or 2 Horde verses Horde fights we have now. honestly if i had 30 or more guys wanting to capture a base i would be sending them to 3 or 4 bases at once not just to one base. But thats just me i like to play the game and dying is no big deal to me, i die grab another plane there free.
-
Trust me, it's the SAME. Your perception has changed, you notice things you never noticed before
Actually I havnt even written what, or if, anything has changed. But lets say this much. Maybe in order to notice change you have to leave for a year or more in the first place. All change is gradual and the steady player will probably not even notice it cause it doesnt all happen at once.
OK whats changed ? Whats gotten better? And worse?
I think the game itself has gotten better. No there have been no major changes in mechanics but the hangar is more full and many of the old rides have been redone.
As far as gameplay goes I think there is more hoarding and less quality 1 on 1s. I think the higher eny rides are used less. I think the overall population skill level has gone down. I see an awful lot of old names gone. Old squads gone or with far fewer members. Im surprised at the condition of Bish nation. Im surprised WW1 hasnt been a bigger hit. Even tho I said at the beginning it was a mistake the arena itself is to good to NOT be flown more. I just knew at the time that players Log to fly LAs, Nikis, 51s, 190s, 38s, and K4s. I didnt think the base would support a WW1 arena despite all the guys crowing for it.
The older crowd has always been the heart of AH. Maybe some have moved on, maybe they just dont have the time, or for health reasons cant play as much. I can remember when we had 30+ guys joining in missions with every planeset in the game used at various times. Now? That just doesnt happen.
I honestly dont know if I'll be staying after BF3 comes out. The game has nothing to do with it, this is still a fine game. But Im older now and life only gives me an hour or two a day to play a game and Im not sure its going to be AH I spend it in.
But even if I Leave I hope the game grows and gets stronger. I dont want to see the genre die. And Hitech kept his word. He made a great game that actually works without 1/10th the problems of other games/sims. Its easy to learn and you start having fun the first time you log in. And he has kept improving it. Compare that to whats happened with the IL2 community with the Cliffs of Dover disaster.
This was the first computer game I ever l played. I learned about it from a puter techie I had called for a computer problem. I remember the thrill of flying my bombers those first months and I wish I could feel that again. So maybe the only thing thats changed is the player themself. Anyway thanks for a mostly respectful thread. :salute
-
Falcon, let's take a look at these suggestions. It cuts to the heart of what we're discussing.
Strategy should include blowing up bridges thereby stopping gv attacks or making them take a longer route. :)
...so they'll take longer to get there, likely get more strung out, thus making them easier to defeat.
Should include bombing factories and supply lines, trains and trucks, weakening enemy and forcing them to use less optimal resources (planes / gvs) until repaired. :aok
...so they will be less able to fight back.
Sinking merchant ships weakening the resolve of citizens in towns to fight and make towns easier to take. :ahand
...so they will have less opportunity to fight back.
Zone strat with gv spawns might add more fun as well. Especially if planes could blow up and block routes within them. :)
I wasn't here for it, but ye olde forums tell me zone strats were tried once upon a time and failed in spectacular fashion. Why would that be different now?
Except for the zone strats, are you sensing the theme? People want the ability to make the enemy less able to defend themselves so they'll have an easier time rolling their bases.
Seriously, of you guys that are championing strats having an effect on gameplay, how many of you would think it was fun if you logged in and through no fault of your own, your side was outnumbered, could only take 25% fuel, and the best dogfighting plane you could up was the I16? Would you really stick it out? The vast majority of people in the game wouldn't, and that's why strats don't have those kinds of effects on the other side.
Wiley.
-
....and I believe that is the differance between a simmer and a gamer.
A simmer wants to play the hero of his/her dreams. To do this they must become good at what they are doing. You can't win dogfights, or dive bomb, or level bomb, or capture bases with out practice to increase YOUR skill, not your "skill points" as in other games. Simmers seek out instruction and learn to get better at "how" they play.
A gamer on the other hand looks for the quickest easiest way to get to the end game, and for most its a base capture. Fighting doesn't even factor in any more, as a matter of fact it's a hindrance to there play. It slows down the number of captures per hour (thank god that isn't a stat kept and displayed by HTC!)
Confusing the simplicity of the game controls with skill in the game is another mistake. Sure its easy to learn what button does what, and gamers learn so many more, but I don't care how many button combinations they know, it is not going to shoot down my plane. How many button presses does it take to dive bomb with a P38? Not many but you still see 3 out of 4 crash while doing it.
Todays players are not interested in pretending to be WWII pilots and tankers. They are only here to capture the next base. Running in with a horde against minimal defense and rolling base after base is boring, that is why they are looking for new maps....which they will just run over as fast as they can anyway, new vehicles (which they won't use unless it can take out a TigerII in one shot), and new planes 9which they won't use unless they have bigger, or more cannons). They have done away with strategy, training, and anything that has to do with "skill" in playing the game, while the rest of us still look for a good fight.
My answer is that there should be room for both without their "idea of fun" being disrupted or division in the community as an ultimate result. I would take slight exception with this concept that a "hardcore simmer" > gamer. In any game the "gamer" is a simmer as well...just not one who takes it to the next level. For example, the kid who plays Call of Duty is purposefully choosing a ww2 era environment to play in versus say Assassins Creed or Star Wars etc.
I play an mmo right now for multiple reasons....obviously as someone who stayed with AW ---> AH2 (what 15 years?) as my major online game it wasn't because I wasn't into ww2 era aerial combat...so you can't logically lump me into "he is just a gamer" mode. Yes I prefered goal oriented activity and took bases and organized a squadron during my time. And i didn't leave AH2 because i hated it...i just moved on.
Now why do i play AION....because in the 80's i was a Dungeon's And Dragon's fan...I loved Tolkien/LoTR and the first computer video game i remember playing was Ultima on the Apple 2c....I AM a simmer as are most of the people choosing this genre of mmo over others (eve on line etc). Now there are folks who are even more hard core simmers...they are called role players...in their legions they speak and act in Old English tongue and speech patterns. They know all the tiniest details about armor and knights and castles etc and can bore you to death with it.....heck i just like killing other people (player vs Player PvP) with my traps and arrows. But even though i find their dedication to the genre to be hilarious and unnecessary, I have never seen conflict between the different level of commitment to the genre.
And obviously if I am killing other peeps then it is because we have different factions (i.e. az/bz/cz) and when there are imbalances there is quick and immediate intervention by the staff to offer real incentives to balance and keep the playing field level. There are weekly events/tournaments or other competitions that encourage the factions to fight...
I can't explain to yuo what you have not experienced...i had not known that things could be so interactive...i don't know how to not make you defensive of what you have unless you have experienced it yourself. I want AH@ to thrive ...to be double in size...to not have the same threads one year later when i look back and i'm naive enough to think it could happen.
-
P.S. I ain't your bro.
No you are obviously a rude little forum troll...
Thanks for wasting 2 minutes of my life.
you are dismissed
:rolleyes:
-
hey love!
you know we are still fb friends right? i see your updates from time to time when i log in...i dont much though...
and no i'm sorry if you thought furballers should not do anything...EVERYONE should do as they like without acting elitist over what others do...thats all
AND if you want things to get better you have to invest the time and effort to change it
I guess thats the gist of it
see ya gurl,
falc
-
Long time dan,
good to see ya as always.
My quick answer is the one that always eludes you....because it is fun. We like to accuse other folks of "choosing the path of least resistance" but lets be honest...this isn't cleaning up your room...this is doing what is fun...
I get that its not your idea of fun...but if you scroll up and understand my post about why i play aion etc...you will understand that in their eyes...you are the roleplaying dude...wanting this to be as close to ww2 flight combat as possible and maybe that just isn't their idea of fun or immersion in this game...
peace,
falc
-
I know sillyhead! Now back to Top Gun on AMC :)
hey love!
you know we are still fb friends right? i see your updates from time to time when i log in...i dont much though...
and no i'm sorry if you thought furballers should not do anything...EVERYONE should do as they like without acting elitist over what others do...thats all
AND if you want things to get better you have to invest the time and effort to change it
I guess thats the gist of it
see ya gurl,
falc
-
No you are obviously a rude little forum troll...
Thanks for wasting 2 minutes of my life.
you are dismissed
:rolleyes:
Hit a little too close to home, eh?
-
Hit a little too close to home, eh?
erm using your paranoid "life philosophy", I am now a rude forum troll because i have properly accused you of being one. :rolleyes:
Shhh and let the grownups talk...back to the kids table...
Once again you are dismissed :noid
-
What I see in aces high is that nobody is learning from thier own experiences in game.
They commit the exact same errors over and over.
Some guys have been committing the same errors for a decade or more and they still haven't learned.
Basic tactics like flanking leaves most here completely befuddled and a feint or diversion somehow causes your teammates to be fooled rather than the enemy even after you announced the diversion a few times on country channel.
The reason is that everybody is out for self-enrichment at the expense of everything else (much like the bankers and financiers).......then they bemoan the situation that they caused themselves.
This is why you see 7 friendly fighters tasked to provide cover for c47s or LTV troop carriers suddenly decide that they all need to chase one b26 while ignoring the single enemy c202 takes out 2x c47 and 3x ltv2.
-
Fuji, while I agree with you for the most part, it is somewhat unreasonable to expect others to do what we ourselves are unwilling to do. You complain that players these days don't want to do anything but horde. I would suggest that in the case of newer players, they have never been shown and/or taught how effective (and fun) the highly organized (non horde) missions you describe can be.
Who is going to teach/show them? Are you willing to put in the effort? I don't think I am.
So, why should we expect anything more then what we are already getting in game?
Maybe there needs to be a cadre of long term players who volunteer to step up and put together missions for a few months. And not just for one country, but for all three. If there were such Veteran Mission Planners putting together base captures, GV raids, HQ bomber raids, fighter sweeps, and other such things consistently for a few months on all sides, you might start to see a change in the way newer players approach the game. You can't really expect newer players to adopt a play style that they have never seen or experienced, now can you?
But who is going to step up and do the heavy lifting required? Anyone?
Probably not. It's simply much easier to say that we've done our time. Or that the current xboxers will never follow. Or whatever excuse we have so we can continue to blame everyone else instead of ourselves.
This isn't an attack on any particular person, just an attack on the idea that new players should play how we would like them to, but without anyone teaching it to them.
I think that is where it fell apart. I trained a number of people to run missions, use tactics and so on. I learned from my CO "Mule" in AW. The "training aspect of this game is almost gone. Was a time that squads taught the new player how to play, not so much any more. Like you said the new players only see how they do it now and run with it. Like I said before, half a dozen squads dedicated to defense and I think you'd see some changes.
My answer is that there should be room for both without their "idea of fun" being disrupted or division in the community as an ultimate result. I would take slight exception with this concept that a "hardcore simmer" > gamer. In any game the "gamer" is a simmer as well...just not one who takes it to the next level. For example, the kid who plays Call of Duty is purposefully choosing a ww2 era environment to play in versus say Assassins Creed or Star Wars etc.
I play an mmo right now for multiple reasons....obviously as someone who stayed with AW ---> AH2 (what 15 years?) as my major online game it wasn't because I wasn't into ww2 era aerial combat...so you can't logically lump me into "he is just a gamer" mode. Yes I prefered goal oriented activity and took bases and organized a squadron during my time. And i didn't leave AH2 because i hated it...i just moved on.
Now why do i play AION....because in the 80's i was a Dungeon's And Dragon's fan...I loved Tolkien/LoTR and the first computer video game i remember playing was Ultima on the Apple 2c....I AM a simmer as are most of the people choosing this genre of mmo over others (eve on line etc). Now there are folks who are even more hard core simmers...they are called role players...in their legions they speak and act in Old English tongue and speech patterns. They know all the tiniest details about armor and knights and castles etc and can bore you to death with it.....heck i just like killing other people (player vs Player PvP) with my traps and arrows. But even though i find their dedication to the genre to be hilarious and unnecessary, I have never seen conflict between the different level of commitment to the genre.
And obviously if I am killing other peeps then it is because we have different factions (i.e. az/bz/cz) and when there are imbalances there is quick and immediate intervention by the staff to offer real incentives to balance and keep the playing field level. There are weekly events/tournaments or other competitions that encourage the factions to fight...
I can't explain to yuo what you have not experienced...i had not known that things could be so interactive...i don't know how to not make you defensive of what you have unless you have experienced it yourself. I want AH@ to thrive ...to be double in size...to not have the same threads one year later when i look back and i'm naive enough to think it could happen.
I don't see how there could be both. Our main thing is combat, and most players today look to avoid any kind of combat. Assasins Creed is totally different than CoD, as well as WoW. Cod was designed and set in WWII because the market was flooded with shoot'em ups that had mega guns and lazers. So they tried something new. In CoD everyone spawns in and runs for either a sniper spot, or a spot to get other running toward one of the flags. You gauge yourself by hoping you killed more before they captured the flag than you died!
Assasins is more about the maneuvers and jumps than anything else, and achieving a goal to end a stage. And WoW, well we have all seen the "Leroy Jenkins" video. Sure there are some teams that work well together healers healing the stronger attacking teammates as they gang bang the big boss of the area.
The only thing they have in common is they have a set goal, the journey is total unimportant. To those of us who like to fight, the journey is the only thing. Yes we like to take bases too, but we would like to use a co-ordinated attack timing the bomb drop with the fighter suppression and clearing the air space just as the goon rounds the nearby mountain. Todays player just throw everything they have at a base and then move on to the next one. And much like you Falc, they will get bored and move on.
-
Long time dan,
good to see ya as always.
My quick answer is the one that always eludes you....because it is fun. We like to accuse other folks of "choosing the path of least resistance" but lets be honest...this isn't cleaning up your room...this is doing what is fun...
I get that its not your idea of fun...but if you scroll up and understand my post about why i play aion etc...you will understand that in their eyes...you are the roleplaying dude...wanting this to be as close to ww2 flight combat as possible and maybe that just isn't their idea of fun or immersion in this game...
peace,
falc
Definitely not a role playing guy. I'd be flying to live, taking 100 fuel an DTs and never entering a fight I couldn't win :)
I just haven't ever gotten over the fact that I'm able to 'fly' against other people and don't get why anyone would play online and avoid those same people :)
Glad you are enjoying the new game :aok
-
Definitely not a role playing guy. I'd be flying to live, taking 100 fuel an DTs and never entering a fight I couldn't win :)
I just haven't ever gotten over the fact that I'm able to 'fly' against other people and don't get why anyone would play online and avoid those same people :)
Glad you are enjoying the new game :aok
You're thinking in terms of the enemy only, they fly with people just on their team. What you would do and what other people would do is different and if that is how they want to play then so be it.
-
You're thinking in terms of the enemy only, they fly with people just on their team. What you would do and what other people would do is different and if that is how they want to play then so be it.
But Kilo I have no enemy in the game. Just other folks flying cartoon airplanes. When I first got a computer and was able to play flight sims, there were all kinds of missions to fly. Whether it be SWOTL, AoE, AoP or European Airwar, you could get really caught up in flying your 'role' in the missions. And the dogfights could be fun. But after a while you got to know what the AI was going to do, so you could 'win' every time.
Airwarrior appears and the online flying starts and it's the unpredictability of those 'fighting' you that became the addiction. You didn't know what the next move is going to be. The win is the fun from that, not finishing the mission or the game.
I'm not telling anyone how to play. It's their dime. The discussion was play quality.
-
the other day, i posted a reply on this thread, but being old and dotty I must have hit delete rather than post. when i joined aces high, base captures and race to reset was the order of the day. porking bases, and taking them with hangars up, ack down, and a fun cap was common.
there. that's the real short version.
-
And The only thing they have in common is they have a set goal, the journey is total unimportant. To those of us who like to fight, the journey is the only thing. Yes we like to take bases too, but we would like to use a co-ordinated attack timing the bomb drop with the fighter suppression and clearing the air space just as the goon rounds the nearby mountain. Todays player just throw everything they have at a base and then move on to the next one. And much like you Falc, they will get bored and move on.
If 15 years of doing exactly what you are saying isn't along enough journey then i don't know what is :)
And if you think that most of the original "mission leaders" hadn't done exactly what you said in terms of coordinated base taking then I'm sorry you only ever noticed the mega-missions or squad night activities. TBH the game was more fun when the field was an easier capture...5-6 men could get together and run a flakpanzer/m3 misson or 3 buff/goon sneak....and if a few guys rose to meet you then it was a fight.
I don't think it is because I am a "gamer" that I want to try new things, enjoy the latest graphic/fight engines, set new goals and try to accomplish them. Constantly explore new worlds...
Be honest....how long did it take you to be good at this game??? I assume you were a student like I was and read shaw's and bugged the best to teach you and at some point became pretty durn good. Of course in the 80's this game was a dream come true for us who loved ww2 aviation. That was over two decades ago for me...now do i just repeat the same journey over and over and over again and dominate the newbies??? TBH that quit being fun or challenging a long time ago. I stuck around for the friendships.
So i get it...this game is like backgammon or chess or checkers to you and you don't want it any different. You love it and you have fun :aok...just don't look down on folks because they realize there are much more exciting ways to use technology nowadays then a basic joystick and a handful of mapped buttons. You are running the risk of being our grandparents and locking their mindset into a "brand loyalty" and never trying new things.
-
I forgot to mention that I don't mind the enemy pilots making the same mistakes over and over.
-
With one notable exception no change sonce AW4W 1996 as far as I can see.
That exception is that when the "genre" was more expensive to play then the player mix differed slightly.
Even this debate has not changed since AW2/3 introduced "land grab"..............
As I see it the land grab model centred only on taking bases is just toooooo simple a focal point that in the end divides game play ambitions as we see above...........
-
Strategy should include blowing up bridges thereby stopping gv attacks or making them take a longer route. Should include bombing factories and supply lines, trains and trucks, weakening enemy and forcing them to use less optimal resources (planes / gvs) until repaired. :aok
Sinking merchant ships weakening the resolve of citizens in towns to fight and make towns easier to take. :ahand
We also have great looking hq and strats, but don't really fight in them.
Zone strat with gv spawns might add more fun as well. Especially if planes could blow up and block routes within them.
But then this is aces high and the dogfights are what it is mostly about still, right? :
This would be nice more targets for Attack guys that want to use attack planes for more than deacking. Maybe insteasd of massive strats have smaller strats more spread out and as you lose feilds you lose resources.
-
Even though I haven't logged in to play for almost a year now, I can tell what finally had me move on to a different game....
And this is just my opinion.....so don't get defensive....
Besides periodic graphic upgrades the game never really got better....no new strategy/fighting was ever introduced...at some point one wants to do something different or at least not so repetitive....
I stayed as long as i did because i honestly did not know how amazing other online games had become...the graphics are stunning, the fighting is awesome but there are also "stuff" to accomplish (better gear/better abilities). A reason to log on if you will....by the end i logged on to AH only out of commitment to my ingame friends/squad.
I understand what shuffler is saying but dude its been >12 years now....how much longer are you going to play a "flight sim" that never changes???? You may not like "the win the war" aspect but it is honestly the only goal oriented accomplishment there is.
When your fighting live opponents every time you log on something is different. Nothing else out there competes for those looking for planes that fly differently.
-
Falc, I have seen maybe not all mission that you could run, but I've seen most. Not only have I run the small 5-6 man missions with success, but I have also run the huge horde missions, and this was before the Bops even had a full squad, never mind 3.
. It was then that I saw how boring it was to be the 3rd guy in on a FH. I split my forces and attacked 2 and 3 bases at the same time just to make it more fun for everyone.
Today's players won't try a mission with anything under 20 people. They have only ever seem big missions succeed because the skill level has gone down so much. I have never played Aion, bit what if evertime you got close to your goal some one snatched it away? Would it still be fun? In all the years I have played this game it has always been billed as a combat game. Now we have players who do nothing but avoid combat, or if they do clash it is nothing more than a horde wiping out the dew defenders that get there.
Yes game play has suffered tremendously. Where once we had fights everywhere we now have bodes trying to grab bases before anyone notices. HTC added new towns for those games who want more, what did they do, cried because the town was too spread out and it was too easy to get lost on the streets. All these players want is fast grabs on the towns. They cant fight for them so they horde them. Might as well give them the nukes so they can do it quicker.
-
Racing for a reset because some don't like the current map is pretty ridiculous.
All of the maps have features that can be enjoyed greatly if you know enough to adapt your game to them and try to have some fun.
When I see a map with crazy sheer mountains, I don't complain that you have to fly 2 sectors instead of 1 to bomb a field.
Instead, I fly longer missions or up a tank and enjoy showing up where nobody expects or even thought possible because of the challenging terrain.
The biggest change is that one had to invest a sizeable amount of time and effort to even connect to an arena in the early days that I doubt many playing now would be willing to do.
Some of the guys who invested huge amounts in the past are still flying today and their missions are far more interesting to join than the typical single sector fighter gang bang/vulch that pays off in personal score but results in nothing more.
This is indicated by the fact that only about .5% of the current population who drive tanks actually drive further than the stupifying short distance from a spawn that puts them only a couple of miles from the enemy field.
The same people also seem to prefer feeding a vulching horde by taking off right under them to taking off from and adjacent field and actually having a chance at affecting the fight by arriving at a competitive altitude.
I would rather capture a remote field or kill a ar234 I stalked for 5 sectors while slowly gaining an altitude advantage that will allow me to catch him than hover over a base and vulch noobs in 26 one-way missions in a day of flying.
-
Play Quality is what you put into it and how others react, last night we did a Spit 1 fighter Sweep at 6,000 ft lol The Bad guys dove on us like fat chicks on Twinkies and between the radio chatter, engines cutting in and out( gravity feed carbs lol ) endless laughing we managed to kill the first wave and drove them back almost to their field, we wasn't expecting to live long flying Spit1's that's not why we took them, we took them for the fun factor and giggles the enemy was going to have seeing a Pack of Spit 1's, needless to say it was a blast and I'm sure the bad guys had fun to cause they kept coming back till we were gone. Point of the story i guess is having fun and try to include the enemy into it.
-
Falc, I have seen maybe not all mission that you could run, but I've seen most. Not only have I run the small 5-6 man missions with success, but I have also run the huge horde missions, and this was before the Bops even had a full squad, never mind 3.
. It was then that I saw how boring it was to be the 3rd guy in on a FH. I split my forces and attacked 2 and 3 bases at the same time just to make it more fun for everyone.
Today's players won't try a mission with anything under 20 people. They have only ever seem big missions succeed because the skill level has gone down so much. I have never played Aion, bit what if evertime you got close to your goal some one snatched it away? Would it still be fun? In all the years I have played this game it has always been billed as a combat game. Now we have players who do nothing but avoid combat, or if they do clash it is nothing more than a horde wiping out the dew defenders that get there.
Yes game play has suffered tremendously. Where once we had fights everywhere we now have bodes trying to grab bases before anyone notices. HTC added new towns for those games who want more, what did they do, cried because the town was too spread out and it was too easy to get lost on the streets. All these players want is fast grabs on the towns. They cant fight for them so they horde them. Might as well give them the nukes so they can do it quicker.
Where do you get the information noone will run a mission with under 20 people? I see them run all the time. I also see GV missions run all the time. Some are organized in the mission planner, and some are impromptu missions.
You speak that all the players want is a fast grab. There are a certain percentage of players that like that blast and grab, but I don't see it as the majority of players. As for avoiding fights, some of the bigger runners in this game are some of the so called named players. If they loose just a little bit of an advantage, they drop their nose and the race is on. There are some exceptions, but really not that many.
Concerning players avoiding combat, I see fights all the time. Heck I'm getting killed all the time. Every base I go to I see combat, I don't even need to go to an enemy base, I can just hang out over a friendly base and it won't be long before someone shows up and the fight is on. I don't know where the heck you are flying, but when the hordeing is going on and you don't want to fight it, there are other fights all over the map.
I have never had a problem finding a fight at any time during the day or night in this game. The fight may not be on my terms, but the fight is there if I want it.
Fred
-
Where do you get the information noone will run a mission with under 20 people? I see them run all the time. I also see GV missions run all the time. Some are organized in the mission planner, and some are impromptu missions.
You speak that all the players want is a fast grab. There are a certain percentage of players that like that blast and grab, but I don't see it as the majority of players. As for avoiding fights, some of the bigger runners in this game are some of the so called named players. If they loose
Stopped reading at loose.
-
Stopped reading at loose.
And your point is?
Fred
-
And your point is?
Fred
You spelled "lose" wrong.
-
Where do you get the information no one will run a mission with under 20 people? I see them run all the time. I also see GV missions run all the time. Some are organized in the mission planner, and some are impromptu missions.
You speak that all the players want is a fast grab. There are a certain percentage of players that like that blast and grab, but I don't see it as the majority of players. As for avoiding fights, some of the bigger runners in this game are some of the so called named players. If they lose just a little bit of an advantage, they drop their nose and the race is on. There are some exceptions, but really not that many.
Concerning players avoiding combat, I see fights all the time. Heck I'm getting killed all the time. Every base I go to I see combat, I don't even need to go to an enemy base, I can just hang out over a friendly base and it won't be long before someone shows up and the fight is on. I don't know where the heck you are flying, but when the hordeing is going on and you don't want to fight it, there are other fights all over the map.
I have never had a problem finding a fight at any time during the day or night in this game. The fight may not be on my terms, but the fight is there if I want it.
Fred
Corrected.
To late to modify the original post, so I did it in a quote. Would hate to have you not to be able to read the entire post due to a spelling mistake. Come to think about it, I imagine you have a lot of problems reading entire posts on this BBS if you stop at every incorrectly spelled word.
:D
Fred
-
Corrected.
To late to modify the original post, so I did it in a quote. Would hate to have you not to be able to read the entire post due to a spelling mistake. Come to think about it, I imagine you have a lot of problems reading entire posts on this BBS if you stop at every incorrectly spelled word.
:D
Fred
Just "lose". :angel:
-
Of course in the 80's this game was a dream come true for us who loved ww2 aviation. That was over two decades ago for me...
Hey! That was over two decades ago for me too! Wow! That's cool! :banana:
EDIT:
(http://l-userpic.livejournal.com/101661040/18105090)
-
How did you guys play a game released in 2000 on that old 80s hardware?
-
How did you guys play a game released in 2000 on that old 80s hardware?
"Air Warrior was an early multiplayer on-line air-combat simulator. A player is able to fly a simulated World War II aircraft, fighting with and against other players, each flying his own simulated aircraft. It was introduced in 1986 by Kelton Flinn is an American computer game designer who is a major pioneer in online games. He is a co-founder of the seminal online game company Kesmai, which they began in 1982...and his company Kesmai was a pioneering game developer and online game publisher, founded in 1981 by Kelton Flinn and John Taylor. The company was best known for the combat flight sim Air Warrior on the GEnie online service, one of the first graphical MMOGs, launched in 1987.... At this time the internet was not generally available outside the worlds of government and academia. Kesmai therefore used the online service GEnie was an online service created by a General Electric business - GEIS that ran from 1985 through the end of 1999. In 1994, GEnie claimed around 350,000 users. Peak simultaneous usage was around 10,000 users...for the game's networked communication."
For many of us this was where we started....we then followed the game through its different progressions until AH2....
-
I was there on Genie for a short before some of us misused company assets that allowed us to secure connections......even from home.
I flew as Quisp.
-
I have always been Zoney even back then, well, except for the month I flew as "Cindy" on Warbirds. Never knew so many guys could be so helpful :O. Some even offered to come over to my house to help me set up my views and such. Still makes me giggle.
-
Found good fights over the hole decade...
Hasn't changed. Nothing else matters.
:airplane: :salute
-
No difference at all, we still inflate our ego's and bully newer, less experienced players.